Time for a yearly review of your local Congressman. My congressman, Lamar Smith, voted for the bailout package and I plan to vote to fire him when he is up for re-election. I figure if he didn't have enough common sense to vote down that package then he doesn't have enough common sense to represent in Congress. It's time to fire these jokers. I challenge you to review the record of your Congressman and strongly consider whether they should continue to represent you. Why do we, Americans, continue to vote the Barney Franks, Christopher Dodds and the likes in office? We complain but we continue to vote these fools into office. Take a stand and challenge your conventional wisdom to leave things the same.
On another note, a future posting will highlight the benefits of term limits for these clowns.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
It's a Bailout
For some reason this failed bailout plan or the next one they propose doesn't feel right. I get bothered by the news and business shows that tell us the impact of this "rescue" plan points to you. You are the one that will be impacted which means you won't be able to secure a mortgage, buy that car or get that credit card. See a theme here. There's no change. If the markets work, things will get real tight and put a squeeze on everything. There will be a shake up and lots of pain but in the end, the fools that gave credit to everyone will go away. The fools that took credit from everyone will be bankrupt and new credit requirements dictated by the market will require them to have income and the ability to payback credit. The credit markets are tight because no one knows who is good for the money, so let the market figure it out. Let the market purge the weak players. The strong will lend to the strong.
Everyone calling for the bailout says if this works we should see a flourishing economy because bad debt will be gone. But it won't, it will still be there rotting. Once again, we are leveraging the future to pay for sins of the past. I really believe we need a purge, like the interest rate hikes of the late seventies to purge the inflation.
As a nation, we can decide to bailout this financial crisis but how are we going to change the habits?
Everyone calling for the bailout says if this works we should see a flourishing economy because bad debt will be gone. But it won't, it will still be there rotting. Once again, we are leveraging the future to pay for sins of the past. I really believe we need a purge, like the interest rate hikes of the late seventies to purge the inflation.
As a nation, we can decide to bailout this financial crisis but how are we going to change the habits?
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Where's Obama
McCain heads to Washington to at least try to do something to assist in fixing this economic mess.
Where's Obama? Well, you can find him in Florida hanging out in a hotel room memorizing a world map and the leaders of the world so he can speak to it at Friday's pending debate.
Palin gets no foreign policy cred at all. What is Obama's? What is his foreign policy experience? Does anyone have any concern that this guy would rather be brushing up on where Venezuela is located rather than helping to address a purported economic disaster?
Is this who you want for a President, we are in crisis mode and Obama hides in a hotel room? Bush has to call him to come to Washington. He is a senator, right? He is drawing a paycheck for that job isn't he? Granted, he really only has 2 years of real Senatorial experience. He might have forgotten. Geez, that is scary.
Where's Obama? Well, you can find him in Florida hanging out in a hotel room memorizing a world map and the leaders of the world so he can speak to it at Friday's pending debate.
Palin gets no foreign policy cred at all. What is Obama's? What is his foreign policy experience? Does anyone have any concern that this guy would rather be brushing up on where Venezuela is located rather than helping to address a purported economic disaster?
Is this who you want for a President, we are in crisis mode and Obama hides in a hotel room? Bush has to call him to come to Washington. He is a senator, right? He is drawing a paycheck for that job isn't he? Granted, he really only has 2 years of real Senatorial experience. He might have forgotten. Geez, that is scary.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Elitist
On Bill O'Reilly tonight on Foxnews, Bill interviewed two women about Sarah Palin and Sarah's avoidance of journalistic questions after her meetings with heads of state today. One of the women, an Occidental College Professor of Politics, Caroline Heldman, stated that she didn't mean to be elitist but Sarah isn't qualified because she didn't go to an elite school.
Well, that is elitist and let me remind those that buy that argument that Abraham Lincoln and Harry Truman did not have college degrees, Ronald Reagan graduated from Eureka College, Lyndon Johnson graduated from Southwest Texas State (Now Texas State University) and Gerald Ford graduated from U.of Michigan (good, but not elite). Didn't realize that Ivy League was the Lithmus test.
Well, that is elitist and let me remind those that buy that argument that Abraham Lincoln and Harry Truman did not have college degrees, Ronald Reagan graduated from Eureka College, Lyndon Johnson graduated from Southwest Texas State (Now Texas State University) and Gerald Ford graduated from U.of Michigan (good, but not elite). Didn't realize that Ivy League was the Lithmus test.
Monday, September 22, 2008
National Barrack Campaigners
NBC's (National Barrack Campaigners) Saturday Night Live has crossed the line. I have watched it for years but there is nothing funny about the following skit. Note: This is the only video I can find of the skit on the internet. Apperently, SNL pulled it pretty quickly off of their site.
You can make your own judgement about NBC. They could make fun of the Times in many different ways, why they went that route may be their jump the shark.
You can make your own judgement about NBC. They could make fun of the Times in many different ways, why they went that route may be their jump the shark.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
The Fallacy of Illegal Drugs
Let me open by stating that by no means am I suggesting that drugs are moral but I believe our current policy is immoral. As a nation, we are breaking up families, we are putting people in prisons, we have violence in the streets all in the name of the war on drugs. This is a war and we have spent more money on the drug war than we have on the Iraq war; however, at some point we will walk away from the Iraq war, when do we walk away from the War on Drugs?
I have the answer to that, we won't. Drugs have been around since before Christ and they will be around until Christ returns. Think about the money that is being spent on prisons, police departments, military, border patrol, rehabs, foreign aid, technology for fighting drugs; the problem, drug use remains high, violence remains high and our prisons are overcrowded.
Do you know who wants drugs to remain illegal, drug dealers, weapons companies and private prison companies. That is who.
We haven't made a dent in the curbing drug use. The problem with our current policy is it tries to disrupt a market and like any market you can get rid of a dealer but another dealer will step in, you can seize goods but the price will rise but the desire will remain. It's a flawed policy.
The problem we have as a nation, until we realize this and have a paradigm shift in how we view the problem we will continue to fight violence with violence, break-up families by sending users or dealers to prison, spending ungodly amount of money and providing a market for violent people to make a living.
If we legalize drugs and I mean all drugs, the street dealer goes away, the need for drug raids goes away and we can keep the violent people in prison. We can direct money to education and other programs to curb drug use. See, the fallacy in resisting legalizing drugs is the thought that you are condoning the use of drugs. We can still look down on it, like we do with smoking cigarettes. People are really looking down on smoking, yet it remains a legal thing to do, people's acceptance of it has diminished.
Though drugs would be legal, that doesn't mean we would allow someone to show up to work high on coke or heroin. Private business could still test and fire people for having drugs in their system. It's a fallacy in thinking to believe that just because drugs are legal, society would be saying that they are acceptable.
Remember, our current policies are hypocritical. Cigarettes, alcohol, spray paint, muscle relaxants, diet pills, coffee, solvents and prescription and non-prescription medicines are all abused by people to get high or alter mood and they are all legal. People abuse them just like they do the illegal stuff, and in some cases, they are just as addicting.
If drugs were legal, the wars at our borders would diminish. Mexico has become a territorial bloodbath between cartels for the right to feed the market. Imagine if drugs were legal and we regulated the entrance into the U.S., just like we do with coffee, it would basically be a business between farmers and distributors. All in the open. Who kills and tortures over the right to deliver tomatoes to the U.S.? The Taliban and Al Queda finance activities with Opium. Anyone financing their terrorist activities with oranges?
I'm not suggesting that through legalization all of our problems will go away but I believe we will have control of them.
I have the answer to that, we won't. Drugs have been around since before Christ and they will be around until Christ returns. Think about the money that is being spent on prisons, police departments, military, border patrol, rehabs, foreign aid, technology for fighting drugs; the problem, drug use remains high, violence remains high and our prisons are overcrowded.
Do you know who wants drugs to remain illegal, drug dealers, weapons companies and private prison companies. That is who.
We haven't made a dent in the curbing drug use. The problem with our current policy is it tries to disrupt a market and like any market you can get rid of a dealer but another dealer will step in, you can seize goods but the price will rise but the desire will remain. It's a flawed policy.
The problem we have as a nation, until we realize this and have a paradigm shift in how we view the problem we will continue to fight violence with violence, break-up families by sending users or dealers to prison, spending ungodly amount of money and providing a market for violent people to make a living.
If we legalize drugs and I mean all drugs, the street dealer goes away, the need for drug raids goes away and we can keep the violent people in prison. We can direct money to education and other programs to curb drug use. See, the fallacy in resisting legalizing drugs is the thought that you are condoning the use of drugs. We can still look down on it, like we do with smoking cigarettes. People are really looking down on smoking, yet it remains a legal thing to do, people's acceptance of it has diminished.
Though drugs would be legal, that doesn't mean we would allow someone to show up to work high on coke or heroin. Private business could still test and fire people for having drugs in their system. It's a fallacy in thinking to believe that just because drugs are legal, society would be saying that they are acceptable.
Remember, our current policies are hypocritical. Cigarettes, alcohol, spray paint, muscle relaxants, diet pills, coffee, solvents and prescription and non-prescription medicines are all abused by people to get high or alter mood and they are all legal. People abuse them just like they do the illegal stuff, and in some cases, they are just as addicting.
If drugs were legal, the wars at our borders would diminish. Mexico has become a territorial bloodbath between cartels for the right to feed the market. Imagine if drugs were legal and we regulated the entrance into the U.S., just like we do with coffee, it would basically be a business between farmers and distributors. All in the open. Who kills and tortures over the right to deliver tomatoes to the U.S.? The Taliban and Al Queda finance activities with Opium. Anyone financing their terrorist activities with oranges?
I'm not suggesting that through legalization all of our problems will go away but I believe we will have control of them.
AFP Purposely Misquotes Palin
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080921014654.oudqyxrc&show_article=1
Can you not give an innocent prayer without the world taking the prayer out of context. This AFP article takes one sentence out of Palin's prayer and misconstrues it.
Once again, here is the full context of her prayer.
Once again, she is praying the leaders of our country, through their wisdom, are sending our troops out on a task that is from God and that God has a plan.
What is wrong with that? Would they prefer that the troops are being sent on task that is not in God's plan? I am sick of quotes taken out of context by the media and by both political parties.
Can you not give an innocent prayer without the world taking the prayer out of context. This AFP article takes one sentence out of Palin's prayer and misconstrues it.
She has previously remarked that US soldiers in Iraq were being sent on a task from God
Once again, here is the full context of her prayer.
"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's will."
Once again, she is praying the leaders of our country, through their wisdom, are sending our troops out on a task that is from God and that God has a plan.
What is wrong with that? Would they prefer that the troops are being sent on task that is not in God's plan? I am sick of quotes taken out of context by the media and by both political parties.
Friday, September 19, 2008
End the Rangel Wrangle
I previously said Rangel should lose his position as chairman of the Ways and Means committee because he couldn't get his own taxes right for the past 20 years, how can he get the tax code right.
Now I am calling for him to resign from his congressional seat. Not just because I believe he benefited from a State Department contract but his latest insensitive gaffe that I think shows his mental faculties have decayed.
Here is the article where he calls Palin "disabled".
http://wcbstv.com/campaign08/congressman.charles.rangel.2.821541.html
Of course the national media has swept this under the rug. Maybe he should chair the Mean side of the committee and let someone else run the Ways. Actually, maybe he should retire to a chair on the beach.
Joy Behar is a complete idiot and let's the world see it on The View. For some reason she keeps getting more face time on shows like Larry King. Look at these clips to see some of her brilliance:
I watched her on Larry King a couple of weeks ago, if she can get on there and spew her views, how do I get on there?
Did you see the protests at Obama's speech? It's young blacks and I don't know the issue but there have been protests at several of Obama's rallies in Florida.
Now I am calling for him to resign from his congressional seat. Not just because I believe he benefited from a State Department contract but his latest insensitive gaffe that I think shows his mental faculties have decayed.
Here is the article where he calls Palin "disabled".
http://wcbstv.com/campaign08/congressman.charles.rangel.2.821541.html
Of course the national media has swept this under the rug. Maybe he should chair the Mean side of the committee and let someone else run the Ways. Actually, maybe he should retire to a chair on the beach.
Joy Behar is a complete idiot and let's the world see it on The View. For some reason she keeps getting more face time on shows like Larry King. Look at these clips to see some of her brilliance:
I watched her on Larry King a couple of weeks ago, if she can get on there and spew her views, how do I get on there?
Did you see the protests at Obama's speech? It's young blacks and I don't know the issue but there have been protests at several of Obama's rallies in Florida.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Mad Maddow
Don't waste your time watching Rachel Maddow on MSNBC. As much as I can't stand Keith Olbermann, he can be witty at times. Take Chris Matthews wit, Keith Olbermann's snarkiness and both's bias and you have Rachel Maddow. She is about as dry as a sauna. She will appeal to a certain audience but her audience is slowly dwindling and she does nothing to help MSNBC's last place ratings. I am still waiting on the market to eat up MSNBCs pathetic lineup. I know this much, MSNBC keeps their current lineup of Olbermann, Matthews and Maddow and their only advertisers will be Daily KOS and Fannie Mae because no one is watching.
Speaking of Matthews, if I need to prepare myself for a tough day at work, I turn on Matthews and let him scream at me. It softens me up and dulls my nerves. I can take anything.
Speaking of Matthews, if I need to prepare myself for a tough day at work, I turn on Matthews and let him scream at me. It softens me up and dulls my nerves. I can take anything.
Allow the Markets to Purge
I am not going to pretend I have any knowledge on AIG's importance to the U.S. economy, but I do believe in markets and how markets will shed those that make bad decisions and properly valuate a poorly managed company. I have serious concerns that the government is providing aid to some of the Wall Street companies. I say let the markets purge these companies. The markets will purge the weak, stronger companies or new companies will fill the void. Remember, nature abhors a vacuum, their loss will be filled.
New companies will be formed that either learn from predecessors mistakes' or, they too, will be weak and purged from the market place. New companies often not only learn but identify better ways of doing things. If old companies were worth saving, we would still have shopping at empty Montgomery Wards.
I believe the purge might be painful, it might be very painful; but I think the economy will stronger in the long run and our dollar stronger.
New companies will be formed that either learn from predecessors mistakes' or, they too, will be weak and purged from the market place. New companies often not only learn but identify better ways of doing things. If old companies were worth saving, we would still have shopping at empty Montgomery Wards.
I believe the purge might be painful, it might be very painful; but I think the economy will stronger in the long run and our dollar stronger.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Random Thoughts
I was watching CNN tonight and there was a panel of 2 Republican Spokespeople and 2 Democratic Spokespeople. What I find interesting is that when the Democrats attacked Sarah Palin it was always in comparison to Obama. Does anyone even care that Biden exists in this race?
Speaking of race. Apparently if you don't vote for Obama, you are a racist.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/cafferty-obama-race-a-factor/
Houston Astros got the wind sucked out of them by not only Hurricane Ike but Major league baseball. No way the two games should have been played in Milwaukee. It's a joke. Astros had to sit through the hurricane on Friday night into Saturday afternoon. On Sunday morning they get on a plane, fly to Milwaukee and play a game on Sunday night. They are no hit by Zambrano. Rather than having class about the Astros situation, they mob Zambrano and pour beer all over each other in the club house. Let's not forget that nearly all 25,000 fans at the game were Cub fans. It's actually quicker to get to Milwaukee from Wrigley than it is to get to the White Sox stadium through traffic. I am cursing the Cubs, may they lose to the wild card team.
Speaking of race. Apparently if you don't vote for Obama, you are a racist.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/cafferty-obama-race-a-factor/
Houston Astros got the wind sucked out of them by not only Hurricane Ike but Major league baseball. No way the two games should have been played in Milwaukee. It's a joke. Astros had to sit through the hurricane on Friday night into Saturday afternoon. On Sunday morning they get on a plane, fly to Milwaukee and play a game on Sunday night. They are no hit by Zambrano. Rather than having class about the Astros situation, they mob Zambrano and pour beer all over each other in the club house. Let's not forget that nearly all 25,000 fans at the game were Cub fans. It's actually quicker to get to Milwaukee from Wrigley than it is to get to the White Sox stadium through traffic. I am cursing the Cubs, may they lose to the wild card team.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Another One Bites The Dust
Collapse on Wall Street is getting scary. There are alot of people who will lose alot of money due to this financial crisis but there is one person who made $22 million this year and that person is the CEO of Lehman Brothers, Richard Fuld http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN1341059120080914
This is getting old. These Wall Street firms collapsing and the management of these companies getting ungodly bonuses. I am all for capitalism but something is wrong here. Look at the bonuses for some of these underperforming companies in 2007:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/21/business/main3638560.shtml
This is getting old. These Wall Street firms collapsing and the management of these companies getting ungodly bonuses. I am all for capitalism but something is wrong here. Look at the bonuses for some of these underperforming companies in 2007:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/21/business/main3638560.shtml
Last Week in Review
Remembering 9/11. Don't forget there hasn't been a single terrorist attack on U.S. soil since. Give Bush some credit for national security.
Hurricane Ike - Devestated the Eastern Texas Coast and Western Louisiana Coast. Parts of Houston are getting their electricity back. Power Updates. People on the coast that stayed are crazy. Why? Even if you survive the winds and surge, you are left with no electricity, no food, bad water, snakes, insects and dirt. As miserable as a shelter sounds, at least you are in an area that is dry, stores are open, electricity is working and food is available. In the areas that got hit hard, there are no retail stores open. The people that stayed in hard hit areas and required rescuing should have to reimburse the local goverenments for the cost of rescuing them. I am serious. These people are putting other peoples lives at risk when they had sufficient warnings to leave. I am well aware that the people that ignored the warnings are not your brightest people and probably don't have the income to pay the reimbursement but it's at least it's something on paper to penalize their stupidity.
Rangel - See my Tuesday blog input. I am still convinced that Rangel benefited from two contracts from the State Department to the Punta Cana Resort and Club. Rangel's owns property at that resort. He didn't report rental income in 2006 and 2007, the same years contracts were written by the State Department. I am sniffing around. Researching on the Internet, I am the only one making this accusation, so maybe I am crazy.
Hollywood has freaked out and we now have Anti-Palin remarks from Lindsey Lohan and Matt Damon. Click on link to see Damon state she is like a really bad Disney movie. I think the movie is called The Little Engine that Could. Note:you can hear the interviewer laugh which causes Damon to go off even more. Interesting that they are so afraid of a Vice-Presidential candidate and concerned about Palin's experience when Obama has none (see Wednesday's post).
See Friday's post on Whoopi's idiotic comments to McCain.
MSNBC did another nice piece on Obama. When are they going to challenge him as to whether he is qualified and what his policies really are. Do you feel safer with him in office? No wonder Russia wants him as President.
Hurricane Ike - Devestated the Eastern Texas Coast and Western Louisiana Coast. Parts of Houston are getting their electricity back. Power Updates. People on the coast that stayed are crazy. Why? Even if you survive the winds and surge, you are left with no electricity, no food, bad water, snakes, insects and dirt. As miserable as a shelter sounds, at least you are in an area that is dry, stores are open, electricity is working and food is available. In the areas that got hit hard, there are no retail stores open. The people that stayed in hard hit areas and required rescuing should have to reimburse the local goverenments for the cost of rescuing them. I am serious. These people are putting other peoples lives at risk when they had sufficient warnings to leave. I am well aware that the people that ignored the warnings are not your brightest people and probably don't have the income to pay the reimbursement but it's at least it's something on paper to penalize their stupidity.
Rangel - See my Tuesday blog input. I am still convinced that Rangel benefited from two contracts from the State Department to the Punta Cana Resort and Club. Rangel's owns property at that resort. He didn't report rental income in 2006 and 2007, the same years contracts were written by the State Department. I am sniffing around. Researching on the Internet, I am the only one making this accusation, so maybe I am crazy.Hollywood has freaked out and we now have Anti-Palin remarks from Lindsey Lohan and Matt Damon. Click on link to see Damon state she is like a really bad Disney movie. I think the movie is called The Little Engine that Could. Note:you can hear the interviewer laugh which causes Damon to go off even more. Interesting that they are so afraid of a Vice-Presidential candidate and concerned about Palin's experience when Obama has none (see Wednesday's post).
See Friday's post on Whoopi's idiotic comments to McCain.
MSNBC did another nice piece on Obama. When are they going to challenge him as to whether he is qualified and what his policies really are. Do you feel safer with him in office? No wonder Russia wants him as President.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
I have to give myself some credit
One of my blog inputs on Wednesday, I wrote Obama is showing signs of losing his energy because he is taking a beating. Bill Clinton has some of the same points:
Clinton's Advice to Obama
Clinton's Advice to Obama
Tricky Charlie
Sarah Palin
This is scary for couple of reasons, she used God's name in a prayer, she prayed to God, she suggests God has a plan and she suggest that the leaders of this nation may have previously prayed to God to get the wisdom to make a decision to send them on their task. Oh my gosh, how can she do this? I mean, really someone in government using God. Suggesting that there is a plan and hopefully it's God's plan, wow, what a backwards step for this country, we have moved so far forward up to this point without relying on God at all. What a nut job.
Well fortunately we have Charlie Gibson to butcher her prayer and make her look like a religious freak. Let's queu Charlie:
I like how Charlie takes one sentence from her prayer and uses it against her. That was tricky. Taking things out of context is a good way to make point. Unfortunately, she countered him well. I am just glad Charlie did this interview and not someone that is biased.
Of course, I am being facetious for those that don't understand being tongue-in-cheek, there are people out there that don't. I think this country has done pretty well asking for God's help and great presidents of the past have referenced God's will and blessings many times. For some reason people on the left act as if she is nuts for referencing God's will, well, if that is a requirement for being nuts than she joins a fine list of nutty ex-Presidents who referenced God's will. I think this country may just be OK with her in office.
Abraham Lincoln
"The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong."-- September 1862
"If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North as well as you of the South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God."-- April 4, 1864
John F Kennedy
Our goal is not the victory of might, but the vindication of right-not peace at the expense of freedom, but both peace and freedom, here in this hemisphere, and, we hope, around the world. God willing, that goal will be achieved.July 4, 1962
The world is a very different now...and yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God. 1-20-1961
Franklin D Roosevelt
“As Americans, we go forward, in the service of our country, by the will of God.” -Franklin D. Roosevelt
"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's will."
This is scary for couple of reasons, she used God's name in a prayer, she prayed to God, she suggests God has a plan and she suggest that the leaders of this nation may have previously prayed to God to get the wisdom to make a decision to send them on their task. Oh my gosh, how can she do this? I mean, really someone in government using God. Suggesting that there is a plan and hopefully it's God's plan, wow, what a backwards step for this country, we have moved so far forward up to this point without relying on God at all. What a nut job.
Well fortunately we have Charlie Gibson to butcher her prayer and make her look like a religious freak. Let's queu Charlie:
I like how Charlie takes one sentence from her prayer and uses it against her. That was tricky. Taking things out of context is a good way to make point. Unfortunately, she countered him well. I am just glad Charlie did this interview and not someone that is biased.
Of course, I am being facetious for those that don't understand being tongue-in-cheek, there are people out there that don't. I think this country has done pretty well asking for God's help and great presidents of the past have referenced God's will and blessings many times. For some reason people on the left act as if she is nuts for referencing God's will, well, if that is a requirement for being nuts than she joins a fine list of nutty ex-Presidents who referenced God's will. I think this country may just be OK with her in office.
Abraham Lincoln
"The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong."-- September 1862
"If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North as well as you of the South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God."-- April 4, 1864
John F Kennedy
Our goal is not the victory of might, but the vindication of right-not peace at the expense of freedom, but both peace and freedom, here in this hemisphere, and, we hope, around the world. God willing, that goal will be achieved.July 4, 1962
The world is a very different now...and yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God. 1-20-1961
Franklin D Roosevelt
“As Americans, we go forward, in the service of our country, by the will of God.” -Franklin D. Roosevelt
Friday, September 12, 2008
Whoops,Fortunately McCain Didn't go Hanoi on Her
Today, McCain handled one of the dumbest questions and comments, I think that I have ever seen, as good as anyone in that position could handle it. Whoopi Goldberg continues to prove the left in Hollywood are some of the most clueless people on the face of this earth.
See Whoopi's brilliant question to McCain:
I feel sorry for McCain, he had to hang with 4 idiots and one that is intelligent and attractive, she is a Republican by the way.
Let's break this one down. In order for her to return to slavery, she had to have been a slave. Though her eyebrows are gone, I am guessing she is not 143 years old, so I am not sure what she means by returning.
Second, she completely missed McCain's point. He is stating that the legislative branch should pass laws that the executive branch signs the amendment or resolution into law and the Judicial system ensures that the laws are constitutional through strict judicial rulings rather than creating their own legislation through judiciary interpretation (which is what I believe the whole separation of church and state came about, which isn't in the constitution anywhere).
Barbara, of course, lost any credibility since leaving 20/20 so she just let it go. If she had an ounce of integrity she would have stuck up for McCain on that stupid question.
I am guessing that Whoopi's point was the constitution has changed over time to abolish slavery, women's right to vote, etc. Which really validates what McCain is stating that he wants. Congress to pass the laws and the judicial system to strictly interpret them and the Supreme Court to correctly vet them. If Whoopi is worried about "returning" to slavery than she should be more concerned about a rogue judge that can make their own interpretation of the constitution and disallow or allow anything they want, even if an elected body of representatives had other intentions. Fortunately, we have the Appeals and Supreme Courts to ensure any misinterpretation of the law is recognized, and therefore, is why McCain wants strict constitutionalists as his Supreme Court nominations. With her example, she actually agrees with him, but is too clueless to realize it. By the way, Amendment XIII , Abolition of Slavery, was passed by Congress through a 2/3 vote, not by the Supreme Court.
Now if McCain was the angry guy that he is unfairly portrayed as, he might have gone Hanoi on her and she might have understood some of the pain John felt over those five years. But he took the Presidential high road and commended her on her stupid comment and moved on. I on the other hand would have had to at least dropped an idiot or Forrest Gump reference in there somewhere. Fortunately, anyone on "The View" who has left "The View" turns out to be completely irrelevant, see Rosie O'Donnell and Star Jones; though I think Elizabeth Hasselback has a real future, so maybe Whoopi's days are coming to an end.
No disrespect to McCain in the Hanoi comment, actually, quite opposite. I have a tremendous amount of respect for McCain and his survival in a POW prison. Which is why I am offended that Whoopi would ask that question to someone who gave what he gave serving our country. It was very disrespectful question.
See Whoopi's brilliant question to McCain:
I feel sorry for McCain, he had to hang with 4 idiots and one that is intelligent and attractive, she is a Republican by the way.
Let's break this one down. In order for her to return to slavery, she had to have been a slave. Though her eyebrows are gone, I am guessing she is not 143 years old, so I am not sure what she means by returning.
Second, she completely missed McCain's point. He is stating that the legislative branch should pass laws that the executive branch signs the amendment or resolution into law and the Judicial system ensures that the laws are constitutional through strict judicial rulings rather than creating their own legislation through judiciary interpretation (which is what I believe the whole separation of church and state came about, which isn't in the constitution anywhere).
Barbara, of course, lost any credibility since leaving 20/20 so she just let it go. If she had an ounce of integrity she would have stuck up for McCain on that stupid question.
I am guessing that Whoopi's point was the constitution has changed over time to abolish slavery, women's right to vote, etc. Which really validates what McCain is stating that he wants. Congress to pass the laws and the judicial system to strictly interpret them and the Supreme Court to correctly vet them. If Whoopi is worried about "returning" to slavery than she should be more concerned about a rogue judge that can make their own interpretation of the constitution and disallow or allow anything they want, even if an elected body of representatives had other intentions. Fortunately, we have the Appeals and Supreme Courts to ensure any misinterpretation of the law is recognized, and therefore, is why McCain wants strict constitutionalists as his Supreme Court nominations. With her example, she actually agrees with him, but is too clueless to realize it. By the way, Amendment XIII , Abolition of Slavery, was passed by Congress through a 2/3 vote, not by the Supreme Court.
Now if McCain was the angry guy that he is unfairly portrayed as, he might have gone Hanoi on her and she might have understood some of the pain John felt over those five years. But he took the Presidential high road and commended her on her stupid comment and moved on. I on the other hand would have had to at least dropped an idiot or Forrest Gump reference in there somewhere. Fortunately, anyone on "The View" who has left "The View" turns out to be completely irrelevant, see Rosie O'Donnell and Star Jones; though I think Elizabeth Hasselback has a real future, so maybe Whoopi's days are coming to an end.
No disrespect to McCain in the Hanoi comment, actually, quite opposite. I have a tremendous amount of respect for McCain and his survival in a POW prison. Which is why I am offended that Whoopi would ask that question to someone who gave what he gave serving our country. It was very disrespectful question.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Just In!
Animals Weigh In!
Pigs ecstatic about metaphoric linkage to Sarah Palin.
On a separate note, Jackasses upset about literal comparison to Keith Olbermann.
Joke of the Day
Tonight on Countdown, Olbermann calls himself a journalist.
Pigs ecstatic about metaphoric linkage to Sarah Palin.
On a separate note, Jackasses upset about literal comparison to Keith Olbermann.
Joke of the Day
Tonight on Countdown, Olbermann calls himself a journalist.
Gaffes Starting to Pile up on Obama
Obama love has been going on for 4 years. He really hasn't felt any heat. Hillary's campaign did a poor job of exposing him to scrutiny and he got a free pass from the press on most issues. Europe and the world love Obama as revealed by the latest world-wide polls. The Russians prefer Obama, The British PM loves Obama, the French prefer Obama and Kenya overwhelmingly loves Obama. With so much love, why is Obama starting to look like a beaten man?
Because the love that counts, the American voter, is starting to open their eyes and ask, is this man who accomplished so little in the U.S. Senate really about any change? He took office in the Senate in 2005, yes he was voted in 2004, but doesn't take office until January of 2005 (For some reason people want to give him a full year's credit for 2004). So he was in office two and half years before he started to focus on the Presidency in mid 2007. His only real accomplishment was the following bill S. 2125 [109th]: Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006.
That is all he has gotten done. He hasn't changed anything. He hasn't crossed the party on an issue. Never mind he hasn't really voted in 2008 on any issue. He doesn't even chair a committee http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=BS030017.
People are starting to awaken and realize he talks the same old Democratic game. He wants to raise taxes, he wants to redistribute wealth and I believe he wants to sacrifice our national security to please Europe. You have to question why Europeans love Obama so much? Why? Because they see him as a strong leader or because they see him as weak leader that they can exploit to their benefit. Are they going to pull one over on John McCain, probably not. Will they on Obama, who really knows, he has never been in the position.
Is Obama a bad guy, no, he seems like genuinely nice guy. So was Jimmy Carter. He was a disaster from both a foreign and domestic standpoint.
I think Americans are starting to look at Obama and see a weak president like Jimmy Carter. The strains of the election are starting to get to Obama and he is showing signs of weakness. No one can talk from a teleprompter like Obama, but his answers to tough questions by Rick Warren and Bill O'Reilly show he is not good under the gun and I think he is losing confidence in answering off the cuff questions. It's not a cakewalk anymore, and don't give me that he lived through the Democratic primaries, that was a cake walk compared to going up against the Republican machine. I'm glad we have the Republican machine because it will vet the Democratic candidate like no other, obviously the media doesn't vet him. He is getting strained by the attacks from the right and he wants to bring the focus on the issues. The problem is, the issues have always been issues. Every election year there is talk about jobs, taxes, foreign relations, national security, etc., all very important stuff but elections are also about character, personality, accomplishments and ideology. When you have been associated with racists (Rev. Wright), civic terrorists (Ayers) and felons (Rezko); beaten up for lack of legislative accomplishments when that is your job and exposed as weak on foreign policy, it will get to you.
Watch Obama closely, his rhetoric doesn't have the energy anymore. His eyes are looking a little tired and his body language is one that shows he is concerned. I think after his convention speech he thought he was going to get love from everywhere and coast to victory, but when the Republicans punched him with Palin, he is slow to get up. This is my view from what I have noticed in post convention interviews and at recent stump speeches. If he was poker player, you could read him like book. Watch him.
Because the love that counts, the American voter, is starting to open their eyes and ask, is this man who accomplished so little in the U.S. Senate really about any change? He took office in the Senate in 2005, yes he was voted in 2004, but doesn't take office until January of 2005 (For some reason people want to give him a full year's credit for 2004). So he was in office two and half years before he started to focus on the Presidency in mid 2007. His only real accomplishment was the following bill S. 2125 [109th]: Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006.
That is all he has gotten done. He hasn't changed anything. He hasn't crossed the party on an issue. Never mind he hasn't really voted in 2008 on any issue. He doesn't even chair a committee http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=BS030017.
People are starting to awaken and realize he talks the same old Democratic game. He wants to raise taxes, he wants to redistribute wealth and I believe he wants to sacrifice our national security to please Europe. You have to question why Europeans love Obama so much? Why? Because they see him as a strong leader or because they see him as weak leader that they can exploit to their benefit. Are they going to pull one over on John McCain, probably not. Will they on Obama, who really knows, he has never been in the position.
Is Obama a bad guy, no, he seems like genuinely nice guy. So was Jimmy Carter. He was a disaster from both a foreign and domestic standpoint.
I think Americans are starting to look at Obama and see a weak president like Jimmy Carter. The strains of the election are starting to get to Obama and he is showing signs of weakness. No one can talk from a teleprompter like Obama, but his answers to tough questions by Rick Warren and Bill O'Reilly show he is not good under the gun and I think he is losing confidence in answering off the cuff questions. It's not a cakewalk anymore, and don't give me that he lived through the Democratic primaries, that was a cake walk compared to going up against the Republican machine. I'm glad we have the Republican machine because it will vet the Democratic candidate like no other, obviously the media doesn't vet him. He is getting strained by the attacks from the right and he wants to bring the focus on the issues. The problem is, the issues have always been issues. Every election year there is talk about jobs, taxes, foreign relations, national security, etc., all very important stuff but elections are also about character, personality, accomplishments and ideology. When you have been associated with racists (Rev. Wright), civic terrorists (Ayers) and felons (Rezko); beaten up for lack of legislative accomplishments when that is your job and exposed as weak on foreign policy, it will get to you.
Watch Obama closely, his rhetoric doesn't have the energy anymore. His eyes are looking a little tired and his body language is one that shows he is concerned. I think after his convention speech he thought he was going to get love from everywhere and coast to victory, but when the Republicans punched him with Palin, he is slow to get up. This is my view from what I have noticed in post convention interviews and at recent stump speeches. If he was poker player, you could read him like book. Watch him.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Something else interesting about Rangel's Property
I don't want to be a conspiracy theorist or anything, but this is an interesting "coincidence" that I dug up on my own and will start sending out to others.
Interesting that the Resort that Rangel has property ownership, had federal contracts written to them by the State department in FY2006 and FY2007.
http://www.fedspending.org/fpds/fpds.php?&parent_id=256535&sortby=u&datype=T&reptype=r&database=fpds&detail=2
It's easy to find on the Internet via fed spending database. I can't find the initial Request for Proposal. Maybe someone out there can find it, it was supposedly "competitively bid" but no one else bid. Sure. I wonder what Ways and Means this contract was handed out? Of course, this could all be a coincidence. Rangel has been a powerful member of the Ways and Means Committee since 1997 and I am sure has influence over caribbean contract proposals from the State Department. I just hope when the State Dept. gave the contract, Rangel didn't benefit in some way.......Wonder what Charlie's rental income was for those years? If you can find anyone looking into this let me know. I have googled everywhere and the property receiving "large" fed contracts in FY2006 and 2007 hasn't been discussed anywhere.
Interesting that the Resort that Rangel has property ownership, had federal contracts written to them by the State department in FY2006 and FY2007.
http://www.fedspending.org/fpds/fpds.php?&parent_id=256535&sortby=u&datype=T&reptype=r&database=fpds&detail=2
It's easy to find on the Internet via fed spending database. I can't find the initial Request for Proposal. Maybe someone out there can find it, it was supposedly "competitively bid" but no one else bid. Sure. I wonder what Ways and Means this contract was handed out? Of course, this could all be a coincidence. Rangel has been a powerful member of the Ways and Means Committee since 1997 and I am sure has influence over caribbean contract proposals from the State Department. I just hope when the State Dept. gave the contract, Rangel didn't benefit in some way.......Wonder what Charlie's rental income was for those years? If you can find anyone looking into this let me know. I have googled everywhere and the property receiving "large" fed contracts in FY2006 and 2007 hasn't been discussed anywhere.
Rankled with Rangel
How embarrassing is it for the chairman of the House Ways and Means committee to admit that he has failed to report income from a Caribbean rental property. This is 20 years of rental income he failed to report. The interesting quote from his Lawyer is
So, Rangel is the chairman of the tax writing committee but didn't understand if he should pay taxes. See a problem here?
Of course here is another excuse reported
Rangel shouldn't be chairman of the Ways and Means committee. Rangel needs to do the right thing and step down from the committee. He's another example of why we have low confidence in members of Congress.
Rangel failed to report rental income from the resort property on his taxes, but didn't realize it was necessary because of the way the deal was structured.
So, Rangel is the chairman of the tax writing committee but didn't understand if he should pay taxes. See a problem here?
Of course here is another excuse reported
The resort sent twice-annual statements to Rangel that detailed the reduction in his debt on the property, Davis said. Those statements were received by Rangel's wife and not given to the accountant, the lawyer said.
Rangel shouldn't be chairman of the Ways and Means committee. Rangel needs to do the right thing and step down from the committee. He's another example of why we have low confidence in members of Congress.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Fix the Unflexible Flexible Health Care Spending Account
I think universal health care is conceptually a nice idea but fiscally unrealistic . I don't know how we pay for it but I have a suggestion that should allow each of us to save for unexpected health care bills that can break the bank.
Many people have access to flexible healthcare spending accounts. These accounts are great for supplementing co-pays, out of pocket medical expenses, medicine and other medical expenses pre-tax. The problem with these accounts, per IRS rules, is that you have to exhaust the funds by the end of the year or you lose the funds. So in reality, you really only save for estimated expenses that you know that you will spend in a year and at the end of the year you might run out and buy a bunch of aspirin or cold medicine to exhaust your funds. In addition, from a cash flow standpoint, most people can really only contribute a small amount each year.
My suggestion, why not allow these accounts to roll-over each year tax free? Since many medical expenses are a surprise, this roll-over may pay for the costs that you are responsible for paying depending on the year of the expense and the amount accumulated. This would allow for improved individual responsibility of medical expenses. Pre-tax gives you an immediate rate of return and Congress can structure these accounts so that the administrators can give investment choices for these accounts that allow them to be invested in vehicles that match inflation. We don't need big returns on these accounts, just keep up with inflation. In addition, small administrative fees could be collected by the holding company to manage the accounts.
If you invest in your 30s and don't have a major expense until you are 60, you would have 30 years of pre-tax dollars to help cover the medical expenses. In addition, just like today, if the funds are used for medical expenses, no tax consequence. Finally, I would suggest that these accounts could be passed down to the estate for future medical expenses. If someone takes money out of the account for anything other than healthcare, severe tax penalties would result and appropriately so.
The problem with our saving structure today is no one can really save for unforseen medical expenses. I haven't heard any candidate suggest this, so there could be a hole in my thinking, feel free to respond and give me your view on my suggestion. Shoot holes in it.
Many people have access to flexible healthcare spending accounts. These accounts are great for supplementing co-pays, out of pocket medical expenses, medicine and other medical expenses pre-tax. The problem with these accounts, per IRS rules, is that you have to exhaust the funds by the end of the year or you lose the funds. So in reality, you really only save for estimated expenses that you know that you will spend in a year and at the end of the year you might run out and buy a bunch of aspirin or cold medicine to exhaust your funds. In addition, from a cash flow standpoint, most people can really only contribute a small amount each year.
My suggestion, why not allow these accounts to roll-over each year tax free? Since many medical expenses are a surprise, this roll-over may pay for the costs that you are responsible for paying depending on the year of the expense and the amount accumulated. This would allow for improved individual responsibility of medical expenses. Pre-tax gives you an immediate rate of return and Congress can structure these accounts so that the administrators can give investment choices for these accounts that allow them to be invested in vehicles that match inflation. We don't need big returns on these accounts, just keep up with inflation. In addition, small administrative fees could be collected by the holding company to manage the accounts.
If you invest in your 30s and don't have a major expense until you are 60, you would have 30 years of pre-tax dollars to help cover the medical expenses. In addition, just like today, if the funds are used for medical expenses, no tax consequence. Finally, I would suggest that these accounts could be passed down to the estate for future medical expenses. If someone takes money out of the account for anything other than healthcare, severe tax penalties would result and appropriately so.
The problem with our saving structure today is no one can really save for unforseen medical expenses. I haven't heard any candidate suggest this, so there could be a hole in my thinking, feel free to respond and give me your view on my suggestion. Shoot holes in it.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
My All Fantasy Football Political Team
In honor of the start of the NFL season and the beginnings of a hopefully successful fantasy football season, I will provide my All Fantasy Football Political Team. This team has 1 Quarterback, 2 Running Backs, 2 Wide-Receivers, 1 Flex, 1 Tight End, 1 Kicker and 1 Defense/Special Teams.
QB - John McCain. I want someone that can hit the hail mary pass and McCain did it with his choice of Palin. He avoided the career ending sack in Hanoi. In addition, he showed he is in charge with his electrifying ending of his speech at the convention.
RB1 - Al Gore. He invented the internet. He flies around the world burning fuel to promote global warming to save the planet. If anyone is capable of rushing 2000 yards it's this superman and I want him on my team.
RB2 - The Republican Party. Nobody avoids the potential tackles from George Bush and Dick Cheney better than the Republican Party at their own convention. Cheney wasn't even there and Bush appeared through video. Anybody that can run around a political nightmare like that, I want on my team.
WR 1 - Sarah Palin. She caught the deep pass from McCain and took it in for a touchdown. Based on the fact that she has entered the national scene for about a week and is already more popular than Obama or Hillary, I see many more touchdowns in the future.
WR 2 - Lynn Swann. The hall of famer wide receiver has been campaigning for McCain. He has caught the deep ball by avoiding the "you should support Obama because you are African American" and stuck to his core principles. I want the HOF Wide Receiver on my team.
Flex Position - Joe Lieberman. No one is a more flexible player than Lieberman. He's a democrat, who runs as an independent, who campaigns for a Republican. How much more flex can you get than that? He also mentioned Bill Clinton's name at the Republican convention and got an applause. He's good, I have the ultimate flexible player and he is in my starting line up.
TE - Joe Biden. Anyone more tight than this guy? Looks like his head is going to explode at any moment. I saw a press video of him hugging two older women twins at the same time, one in each arm, and I thought their heads were going to pop off. I want this guy as my tight end.
K - Fred Thompson. His poor campaigning shows he can't quarterback but his speech capabilities and one liners make him a great field goal kicker. Bring him in when the offense is sputtering a bit, he will be consistent.
Def/ST - The 2008 Republican Presidential Candidates. The non-winners have shown up and played defense and have attacked the Dems. Giuliani, Romney, Thompson and Huckabee were blasting away at the Repub convention, at the Dem convention, on the talk show circuit and at press conferences, you name it and they have been there. Where were the former dem candidates over the last week?
QB - John McCain. I want someone that can hit the hail mary pass and McCain did it with his choice of Palin. He avoided the career ending sack in Hanoi. In addition, he showed he is in charge with his electrifying ending of his speech at the convention.
RB1 - Al Gore. He invented the internet. He flies around the world burning fuel to promote global warming to save the planet. If anyone is capable of rushing 2000 yards it's this superman and I want him on my team.
RB2 - The Republican Party. Nobody avoids the potential tackles from George Bush and Dick Cheney better than the Republican Party at their own convention. Cheney wasn't even there and Bush appeared through video. Anybody that can run around a political nightmare like that, I want on my team.
WR 1 - Sarah Palin. She caught the deep pass from McCain and took it in for a touchdown. Based on the fact that she has entered the national scene for about a week and is already more popular than Obama or Hillary, I see many more touchdowns in the future.
WR 2 - Lynn Swann. The hall of famer wide receiver has been campaigning for McCain. He has caught the deep ball by avoiding the "you should support Obama because you are African American" and stuck to his core principles. I want the HOF Wide Receiver on my team.
Flex Position - Joe Lieberman. No one is a more flexible player than Lieberman. He's a democrat, who runs as an independent, who campaigns for a Republican. How much more flex can you get than that? He also mentioned Bill Clinton's name at the Republican convention and got an applause. He's good, I have the ultimate flexible player and he is in my starting line up.
TE - Joe Biden. Anyone more tight than this guy? Looks like his head is going to explode at any moment. I saw a press video of him hugging two older women twins at the same time, one in each arm, and I thought their heads were going to pop off. I want this guy as my tight end.
K - Fred Thompson. His poor campaigning shows he can't quarterback but his speech capabilities and one liners make him a great field goal kicker. Bring him in when the offense is sputtering a bit, he will be consistent.
Def/ST - The 2008 Republican Presidential Candidates. The non-winners have shown up and played defense and have attacked the Dems. Giuliani, Romney, Thompson and Huckabee were blasting away at the Repub convention, at the Dem convention, on the talk show circuit and at press conferences, you name it and they have been there. Where were the former dem candidates over the last week?
Friday, September 5, 2008
Why Obama and I are a Couple of Wussies
Yesterday Obama complained about the attacks by the Republicans and told the press
I went into last night's McCain speech feeling that Obama and I have something in common, we can handle any kind of verbal attacks because of our basketball court experiences. I yawned through Tom Ridges speech feeling invincible. As I was about to snooze, the introduction video for McCain played describing the tourture he experienced, the confinement for 5.5 years in a Hanoi prison and his self determination to recover and move forward with his life. For the first time it really hit me, this man is tough as nails.
Who do I want staring at our enemies, a man who can take a verbal jab on the basketball court or a man that has looked our enemies straight in the eye, absorbed their literal body blows and continued to fight the fight.
Obama, you and I are verbally tough guys. Our sensitivity to basketball court banter has developed scars for our sensitive selves, but when it comes to being physically and mentally tough, Obama and I are a couple of wussies when you compare us to John McCain or the many others that have served this country.
In a dangerous world, who do you want leading the nation? The basketball court tough guy or the worldly tough guy?
"By the way, I've been called worse on the basketball court. It's not that big a deal," .Man, he is tough guy with thick skin. Obama has survived the verbal attacks of the basketball court and lived to run for president. I too have suffered from the verbal banter of the basketball court. I am tougher man for it too.
I went into last night's McCain speech feeling that Obama and I have something in common, we can handle any kind of verbal attacks because of our basketball court experiences. I yawned through Tom Ridges speech feeling invincible. As I was about to snooze, the introduction video for McCain played describing the tourture he experienced, the confinement for 5.5 years in a Hanoi prison and his self determination to recover and move forward with his life. For the first time it really hit me, this man is tough as nails.
Who do I want staring at our enemies, a man who can take a verbal jab on the basketball court or a man that has looked our enemies straight in the eye, absorbed their literal body blows and continued to fight the fight.
Obama, you and I are verbally tough guys. Our sensitivity to basketball court banter has developed scars for our sensitive selves, but when it comes to being physically and mentally tough, Obama and I are a couple of wussies when you compare us to John McCain or the many others that have served this country.
In a dangerous world, who do you want leading the nation? The basketball court tough guy or the worldly tough guy?
Thursday, September 4, 2008
The Hypocrisy of the One Sided Cat Fight
Watching Sarah Palin's speech last night, I couldn't help but think to myself "What a commanding woman, what a role model she will be for my daughter". As a man, I thought she would at least be an inspiration to all women; regardless, of political affiliation.
I wake up to read this insightful quote from a Gloria Steinem opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times:
Let's not forget that Gloria is ardent supporter of Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton of course was handed the democratic candidate of a New York Senate seat because she stood by her man after he cheated on her. She didn't embarrass her husband and she stood by quietly for the good of the party. She didn't live in New York but carpetbagged and was handed one of the most powerful state Senate seats for her silence. Since becoming the Senator of a powerful state, she has done exactly what for Feminism? Equal pay for equal work, what has Hillary done for this cause? Has she ever owned a business to ensure this inequity didn't occur under her watch? I give her credit for running for president and she did well. I think if it wasn't for the media love of Obama she would have won. But neither her nor Obama are qualified by resume for the job when compared to others. Her legislative resume is brief, she won her seat with her husband's name and popularity. She failed at universal health care when handed the role by Bill. She has no real global experience. Her record is riddled with scandal. Though she sees herself as a trailblazer, Hillary is no Harriet Tubman.
So I am stunned that Steinem would call Palin "unqualified". Compared to who? Hillary or Obama? Yeeahhh, right. She campaigned on her own. She won her mayoral job on her own, she won her gubernatorial job on her own. It wasn't manipulated for her. There is enough out there on her accomplishments as a mayor and governor that I won't address that here. So I have to wonder why Gloria would call her "unqualified" when her resume is actually better than Hillary's?
For argument sake, let's assume Gloria is correct and she got her job because she agrees with her boss. Isn't that how it works in the real world? What boss hires someone that completely disagrees with them or isn't aligned? Don't most men get jobs because the boss feels comfortable with the person and feels the person at least lines up with them ideologically? Isn't she making things equal for women by breaking down the trust barrier? If the man running for the most powerful position in the world can trust a woman to be his second in command, couldn't CEOs, small business owners and other bosses in this world do the same?
What is it most women want? I think women want respect. I think women want to be able to have a successful career and raise a family, whether they work while raising the family or pick up their careers after putting it on hold while raising a family. I think women want the chance to be picked for a position based upon talents, capability and potential. Isn't this Sarah Palin? Is she everything that all women want, no. But does she epitomize what many women want, yes.
Let's be honest. Gloria's belittlement of Sarah has nothing to do with fairness for women nor equal pay for equal work but Gloria's love for the right to abort a pregnancy. Bottom-line, that's what it is all about. It's really that black and white. If she cared about equal pay, she would hold Hillary (the legislator) accountable . If she cared about moving women's role further, she would celebrate Sarah. It is really that black and white and it's really hipocrisy at it's best. She is being sexist, she is assuming that a woman got the job in an affirmative action sort of way.
I have noticed that women can be their own worst enemy. Gloria is taking a big step backwards by trying to start a cat fight with someone who is moving women forward and legitimizing their capabilities as both mothers and working women by captivating a nation. The hypocrisy of the one sided cat fight.
I wake up to read this insightful quote from a Gloria Steinem opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times:
This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere.
Let's not forget that Gloria is ardent supporter of Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton of course was handed the democratic candidate of a New York Senate seat because she stood by her man after he cheated on her. She didn't embarrass her husband and she stood by quietly for the good of the party. She didn't live in New York but carpetbagged and was handed one of the most powerful state Senate seats for her silence. Since becoming the Senator of a powerful state, she has done exactly what for Feminism? Equal pay for equal work, what has Hillary done for this cause? Has she ever owned a business to ensure this inequity didn't occur under her watch? I give her credit for running for president and she did well. I think if it wasn't for the media love of Obama she would have won. But neither her nor Obama are qualified by resume for the job when compared to others. Her legislative resume is brief, she won her seat with her husband's name and popularity. She failed at universal health care when handed the role by Bill. She has no real global experience. Her record is riddled with scandal. Though she sees herself as a trailblazer, Hillary is no Harriet Tubman.
So I am stunned that Steinem would call Palin "unqualified". Compared to who? Hillary or Obama? Yeeahhh, right. She campaigned on her own. She won her mayoral job on her own, she won her gubernatorial job on her own. It wasn't manipulated for her. There is enough out there on her accomplishments as a mayor and governor that I won't address that here. So I have to wonder why Gloria would call her "unqualified" when her resume is actually better than Hillary's?
For argument sake, let's assume Gloria is correct and she got her job because she agrees with her boss. Isn't that how it works in the real world? What boss hires someone that completely disagrees with them or isn't aligned? Don't most men get jobs because the boss feels comfortable with the person and feels the person at least lines up with them ideologically? Isn't she making things equal for women by breaking down the trust barrier? If the man running for the most powerful position in the world can trust a woman to be his second in command, couldn't CEOs, small business owners and other bosses in this world do the same?
What is it most women want? I think women want respect. I think women want to be able to have a successful career and raise a family, whether they work while raising the family or pick up their careers after putting it on hold while raising a family. I think women want the chance to be picked for a position based upon talents, capability and potential. Isn't this Sarah Palin? Is she everything that all women want, no. But does she epitomize what many women want, yes.
Let's be honest. Gloria's belittlement of Sarah has nothing to do with fairness for women nor equal pay for equal work but Gloria's love for the right to abort a pregnancy. Bottom-line, that's what it is all about. It's really that black and white. If she cared about equal pay, she would hold Hillary (the legislator) accountable . If she cared about moving women's role further, she would celebrate Sarah. It is really that black and white and it's really hipocrisy at it's best. She is being sexist, she is assuming that a woman got the job in an affirmative action sort of way.
I have noticed that women can be their own worst enemy. Gloria is taking a big step backwards by trying to start a cat fight with someone who is moving women forward and legitimizing their capabilities as both mothers and working women by captivating a nation. The hypocrisy of the one sided cat fight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
