Friday, October 29, 2010

Charlie Crist Exposed by Bill Clinton Shenanigans

There are three candidates for the Senate seat in Florida that is open this year. Republican, Marco Rubio. Democrat, Kendrick Meek. Independent Charlie Crist.

Charlie Crist is currently the Governor of Florida. Marco Rubio is the former Speaker of the House in Florida and Kendrick Meek is currently a Congressman in Florida.

Earlier this year, Charlie Crist and Marco Rubio were on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. He was asked five times if he would remain a Republican or if he would be running as an Independent should he lose the primary. Christ said he was a Republican, that he was going to remain a Republican and he was going to win the primary. A few weeks later, before the primary and when it was apparent he was falling in the polls and wouldn't win, he left the Republican party and decided to run as an Independent.

Immediately, the gap between he and Rubio closed and it was again neck and neck and even for a few days, Crist had the lead. As the weeks went by, he fell further and further behind.

Enter former President, Bill Clinton. He was down in Florida campaigning for Meek a little over a week ago. However, behind the scenes, Clinton was urging Meek to drop out of the race telling him that he had no chance to win. Ok, no problem. We've come to expect these kinds of gamesmanship from the Clintons. They'll do something, lie about it, then the truth comes out later. This time though, it appears as though the Clintons made this public purposely to force Meek out of the race.

To what end? To give Charlie Crist the votes that Meek would have received and that difference could push Crist over the top to beat out Rubio. With such a short time before the election, it would be tough for Rubio to get out and counteract the shenanigans.

On Thursday, Charlie Crist was on the program "Off the Record" with Greta Van Susteran and admitted that he knew about the talks and said that Meek had decided to get out of the race, but then changed his mind at the urging of his wife. Crist was then asked if he'd been in touch with the White House. Again, he admitted he had talked to people at the White House about this but refused to give a name of whom he may have spoken with.

We can stop this story right here. We now have enough information, with one exception. Remember I said that Crist was asked if he would run as an Independent should he lose the Republican Primary and he said he was a Republican and would remain as one. Then he changed his mind.

In recent weeks, he's been asked if he wins the Senate race would he caucus with Republicans or Democrats. He's claimed to be a fiscal Conservative and a social moderate, but he didn't know who he'd caucus with. Does anyone really believe him? If he doesn't know, why isn't he being asked how he can make major decisions on legislation, if he can't decide with which party he'd caucus?

What this tells me is that his decision of which party to caucus with is based on who wins the elections and takes the majority. If it's the Democrats, he'd caucus with them. If the Republicans, he'd caucus with them. But there is one more scenario. Suppose it was a tie and he was the deciding member that would put one party in the majority over the other. Naturally, it can't be a tie with 100 seats and prior to his decision there would be 99 seats.

Ideally, it would be split like that and the decision would be left to him. The pressure would be on. Republicans would be after him as would the Democrats. He'd be the most important man in the Senate until he decided.

I believe though that he's already decided. Why would an Independent be speaking to the White House about Kendrick Meek dropping out of the race? Or turn it around. Why would the White House and Clinton (Democrats) be trying to get Meek, a Democrat, to drop out of the race so that Crist (an Independent) could win? After all, he's not admitted he's a Democrat.

If you ever wondered why the Tea Party, you have your answer above. The Tea Party is about Congress working for the American people and not for any particular party. These back room deals for legislation, and now with the forcing out of Kendrick Meek, are nothing more than everyday Washington politics about the select few maintaining power. What each and every one of those politicians doesn't understand is that the power they have is lent to them by the people. The Tea Party is about ending that loan for those making the backroom deals, as well as being more responsible with the people's money and keeping government out of the people's lives.

If you want to know about this adventure going on in Florida, just think back to the health care debate. Remember the Louisiana Purchase of Mary Landrieux' vote. Remember the Cornhusker Kickback for Ben Nelson's vote. Remember the deal with Bart Stupak of northern Michigan to keep government funding of abortion out of the health care bill, and the subsequent signing of the executive order and how it's already been violated in certain parts of the country. This Florida mess is along those same lines and this is exactly what we need to get out of Washington DC.

It does however, help out get Kendrick Meek out by costing him votes because the "major players" (of which Clinton seems to have involved himself several times now), which may be the intent of Clinton and Crist making all of this public costing Meek votes he may have otherwise had.

You're welcome to comment.


Thursday, October 28, 2010

There is Hope, There is Trouble Coming

This election could cause some great things to happen as well as some terrible infighting and yes, that I expect will come from the Republicans.

Congress left to campaign last month without deciding on the extension of the Bush Tax cuts. President Obama and his minions in the Democrat party say it's because the Republicans were holding the middle class hostage to protect the rich. The same could be said the other way. Obama is holding the middle class hostage to punish the rich.

Congress leaving without settling this important question has helped the Republicans in their campaigns alot more than their Pledge with America, which really has turned out to be a dud. Depending on who you listen to, the Republican stand to gain anywhere from 45 to 65 seats in this election in the House and between 8 and 10 in the Senate.

Democrats are now claiming in their debates and on the stump that they are "fiscal Conservatives". I don't know of one person on the planet that believes that. When was the last time you ever heard any Democrat claim to be Conservative in any fashion? The only time they utter Conservative, it's inserted just before or just after "right wing extremist". For them to now claim they are Conservative in any form just shows they are really running scared.

If how this looks holds true and the Republicans do take one or both Houses of Congress, we can expect the tax cut extension to be passed. Even if they don't take the Senate, it will still likely pass. This campaign has finally awaken the liberals in DC and they are scared for their jobs. It's entirely likely that some of the Democrats, especially the ones coming up in two years, will vote along with the Republicans to extend all of the tax cuts for everyone. Even if Obama vetoes it, the Democrats will likely vote with the Republicans to overturn that veto.

When old Democrats like John Dingell and Barney Frank are in trouble in this election, you know that most Democrats will take a long hard look at their "careers", if they survive this election. If either or both of those two lose, or even barely win, it won't affect how they vote, but it should make other Democrats think.

Then comes the trouble within the Republican party. There are already reports that the establishment Republicans are making noises about the tea party candidates to join them rather than doing what the tea party candidates ran on, which is what the American people want.

The tea party Republicans will be outnumbered, but they've been portrayed as outnumbered for the past two years and all they've done is stick to their beliefs and grown. If they can continue to do this as members of the House and Senate, we could see a civil war within the Republican party.

Sarah Palin has put out a warning about this very thing and said that the establishment Republicans ought to be careful or they could find the tea party break off into a third party. Sarah Palin is wrong in advocating this if that's what she's trying to do. If the tea party people stick to their principles the establishment Republicans could find themselves as the targets in the 2012 primaries and like Bob Bennett, Lisa Murkowski, Mike Castle and Charlie Crist, find themselves out of their "careers". The tea party should be working within the Republican party and fighting for their beliefs within the party and then replace the "old dogs" in the next election. Even if that means raising a stink during the next two years within the Republican party.

This will have the liberal media drooling for the next two years, but they have been drooling the past two years at the prospect of the tea party candidates getting spanked down for their "out of the mainstream" beliefs.

There is hope coming soon, then trouble, but even the trouble is a sign of hope. As long as the tea party can keep it's eagerness and energy flowing into the future.

You're welcome to comment.


Friday, October 22, 2010

News Organization Shows Class

Fox News has been number one in the ratings in nearly every category for ten of those fourteen years. Today the cable news organization displayed class in the wake of the firing of Juan Williams.

Williams was fired for saying that he has some trepidation when he sees muslims in their garb getting on the same plane he gets on. There is more to it than that, but that was the line that got him fired. NPR didn't care about the context. They just used those words to fire him.

Williams, a liberal who is a regular contributor to Fox News, was called into Roger Ailes office and was immediately offered a contract extension and raise along with expanded duties on Fox News.

Nearly ever news organization takes aim at Fox News and makes jokes about their motto of "fair and balanced". They call them the Republican News Organization. I've always found it funny that they complain about Fox being right leaning while they have been liberal leaning for years. Rick Sanchez made it almost a daily routine to go after Fox before he was fired for his racist remarks on a radio talk show.

Yet, Fox has always had several liberals on as well as their conservative programming. Fox has the likes of Geraldo Rivera, Mara Liasson, as well as Juan Williams. He appears as a guest on several programs on Fox, as well as having guest hosted for Bill O'Reilly on several occasions. CNN really can't say the same thing. Neither can MSNBC, CBS, ABC and so on.

Williams has a family, and one of his children in college, yet he was fired for saying something that NPR took out of context. Roger Ailes said to him that his family would be taken care of, and made the offer.

Williams has been told that he likely has a very good case for suing NPR. After listening to him in interviews, I think it unlikely he will. This is another example of class. It seems the only ones that aren't displaying any integrity is NPR.

Juan Williams is a liberal and I can't think of anytime that I've ever agreed with his positions on anything, but the way he was treated by his employer, NPR, was at best despicable. He has had liberals and conservatives alike coming to his defense the past couple of days.

The President and CEO of NPR only made matters worse by suggesting that Williams might be seeing a psychiatrist. She has since apologized.

Juan Williams has taken the high road in this fiasco and Fox News showed what a classy organization they are by offering him an extension and a raise. Fox has shown in yet another way, why they are the number one news organization and Williams has shown that Fox only has the best on their network, from both sides of the aisle.

You're welcome to comment.


Thursday, October 21, 2010

If It Walks Like a Duck...You're Fired!

This seems to be a trying month for liberals and liberal organizations. Bill O'Reilly was on the View. At some point in the interview, while talking about the controversial mosque in New York, O'Reilly said that Muslims attacked us on September 11, 2001. This simple factual statement, sent co-hosts Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg into overdrive. Apparently, what upset them was that he didn't use the term "extremists" following "muslim".

Joy Behar stood up and paused as if looking for support. She was then joined by Whoopi Goldberg and they walked off the stage together.

Now, imagine for a moment that you're sitting in your living and you have a guest over. That guest says something that you disagree with. Do you get up and walk out of your own house?

You could disagree without raising your voice. You could disagree and change the subject. You could just sit there silently. But do you really get up and walk out of your own house?

I'm not sure how what O'Reilly said is wrong. There were 18 men on those planes that were responsible for those planes going down. They were all muslims. So where did he go wrong? Because he didn't use the "politically correct" language of extremists?

Then yesterday, again, an O'Reilly connection. His guest, Juan Williams, was asked about the events on the View. Juan Williams said that he has a moment of trepidation when he sees a muslim in muslim garb, getting on the same plane he's getting on. National Public Radio then fired Williams.

National Public Radio is funded by tax dollars. Shouldn't an organization that is receiving tax dollars to keep it afloat be more inclined to support the government that supports it? Perhaps they aren't familar with first amendment and the right to free speech.

There is very little I agree on with Juan Williams. He's a liberal. He's a Fox News Contributor, which is odd enough in and of itself because according to the liberals Fox is all Conservative all the time. I can't think of a time that I've agreed with Juan Williams. But this was just flat out wrong. It was wrong even if NPR wasn't supported by the government. The fact that our tax dollars pay them, makes them even more ridiculous.

I guess the reason that I don't listen to NPR nor watch the View is pretty obvious. The question is, why does anyone else?

You're welcome to comment.


Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Obama Digging the Ditch Deeper

One of President Obama's seemingly favorite lines is that the Republicans, or President Bush, drove us into the ditch and now they want the keys back.
The truth is that if we're in a ditch, regardless of how we got there, the ditch is deeper under Obama than when he first got into the car. In Michigan we get deep snow at times. When you get stuck, you're not supposed to gun the car because all you do is dig yourself a little deeper making it harder to get out. You're spinning your wheels.

Obama has done exactly that. He's been spinning his wheels and digging us in deeper. Unfortunately, he's using our money to spin his wheels. I'm one that doesn't believe that his policies and stimulating programs caused us to avoid a depression. The only thing stimulating to his stimulus package was the money sent to Africa to teach them now to clean up after intimate relations with their partners, and that stimulation wasn't for the United States, it was for the guy getting soaped up.

In fact, I believe that the growth we've had, slow as it has been, is due to the free market system we live in. Obama's policies have only held that growth down but the free market is strong and still managed to improve the economy, albeit slowly.

In recent days, we've heard Obama say that there is no such thing as "shovel ready jobs", yet that's what he was advertising when pushing the stimulus plan a year and a half ago.

Today the National Debt Figures came out. Since Obama took office, the National Debt has increased by $3.039 Trillion Dollars. Does that seem like a lot to you? Well, I looked it up. Since Obama likes to blame the Bush administration, I thought a comparison might be in order.

On the day that George Bush was inaugurated, the National Debt was $5.727 Trillion Dollars. On the day that he left office, the National Debt was $10.626 Trillion Dollars. The debt grew by $4.899 Trillion dollars in the eight years Bush was in office. Compare this to the $3.039 Trillion Dollars in 18 months under Obama. From January 20, 2001 to October 19, 2002, the exact same time frame between Bush and Obama's time in office, the debt grew by $522 Billion dollars. Obama has raised the debt 5 times more than Bush has in the same time frame!

This made me wonder about between the time Bush took office and the Democrats took office in 2007. In those six years from the time Bush took office leading up to when the Democrats took over Congress, the debt was raised by $2.951 Trillion Dollars. Compare that to the two years that the Democrats controlled Congress. They raised the debt by $1.95 Trillion Dollars in those two years. In two years time the Democrats controlled Congress before Bush left office, they more than doubled what it took Bush to do over the previous 6 years!

Average that out and during Bush's first six years, the debt increase averaged $491 Billion dollar per year increase. In the first two years of the Democrat control of Congress, the average annual increase in the debt was $975 Billion Dollars. Average Obama's increase in the debt over the past 18 months and his average increase to the debt is $2.026 Trillion Dollars!

The Obama administration spent $787 Billion dollars on the stimulus package. This doesn't even include the "Cash for Clunkers" program. They now claim that if they extend the Bush tax cuts to the rich, it will cost us $700 Billion over the next ten years. What Obama spent in 18 months, will take ten years to spend by extending the tax cuts to the rich, if you accept their argument that tax cuts cost money. By extending those tax cuts, the economy will grow. There is no argument there. They only say we can't afford it. The $787 Billion that they spent on the stimulus didn't work. This was supposed to keep unemployment no higher than 8%. It's now hovering at 10% and it's been the longest period (14 months) of unemployment above 9% since the 1930's.

As I've said before, tax cuts don't cost money. They generate revenue for the Federal Government. The problem is that when the Feds get money, they spend it. They don't cut spending, they increase spending to higher figures and even higher than the increase they get in revenues.

It's hard to believe that they call the Tea Party extremists. The Tea Party is calling for spending to be reined in. They are calling for lower taxes not more taxes. History supports their positions. History does not support the Democrats positions.

While the debt growth under Bush and the Republicans was not something to be proud of, when it's compared to Obama and the Democrats time, it's the difference between buying a clunker and a cadillac.

This information released today on the debt shows that it's not Bush that drove us into the ditch. In fact, we plowed into that ditch and Obama not only kept us there but buried us in deeper. While the free market has tried to improve the economy, Obama and the Democrats have done everything they can to turn that ditch into a deep canal.

You're welcome to comment.


National Debt January 20, 2001 $5.727 Trillion Dollars

January 2, 2007 $8.678 Trillion Dollars +$2.951 Trillion

January 20, 2009 $10.628 Trillion Dollars +$1.95 Trillion

October 19, 2010 $ 13.665 Trillion Dollars + $ 3.037 Trillion

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Racist, Incompetent Obama on the Run

There are many advantages to long drives that I take. I get to think about different things as well as hear different stories and viewpoints and of course, remember the recent past.

Coming up on the mid term elections, it's easy to get bogged down with all of the different ideas, worries and anticipation of things to come as well as to wonder what will happen with new things coming.
In the last 18 months, Obama and the Democrats have owned the government. At first, they didn't have a filibuster proof majority, but with the likes of Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe from Maine as well as Arlen Specter from Pennsylvania, he may as well have had the filibuster proof majority. In February, with the help of the three Republicans mentioned, they passed the stimulus package that nobody read. Shortly after, Specter switched to the Democrat party and gave them their filibuster proof majority until January of 2010.

Still, even with the super majority, they couldn't get the health care bill passed. At least not matched up with the House. But then, Scott Brown won in Massachussets of all places. So the Democrats in the House had to resort to passing the Senate bill, which they didn't want, to get it passed because Brown would have voted against it, killing the health care bill. So despite the American people being against this health care bill, it passed and the President signed it.

A recurring comment about the stimulus bill is that it saved us from going into the second great depression. There is no proof of this. In fact, it's pretty well established even by many liberals that the stimulus failed. This means that the free market system, despite the hindrance of this administration worked. The free market system, or what was left of it, worked enough to move the economy forward while the Democrats claim it was them that saved us from a second depression.
Slowly, we're learning about all of the new taxes in the health care bill. Rates are going up rather than coming down as promised. Doctors are announcing that they won't stay in business once the health care bill is in full effect.

In the past two weeks another lawyer from the Justice Department has testified that this administration has made it a policy to not go after minorities that commit fraud within the election process. This administration is the one that dropped the ball with respect to the New Black Panther party members that were standing outside of the polling area with billy clubs. One was sentenced to not being at a polling place for two years. Just in time for the next Presidential election. That's sort of like saying to a kid who screws up at basketball practice on Monday and you ground him until the next Sunday...just in time for next Monday's practice.

Of course, we really don't need to be reminded that this administration has filed suit against a state (Arizona) for daring to pass a law that will give them the responsibility of reining in illegal invaders, saying that it's the feds responsibility despite the feds not doing their job.

On top of all of that, Obama is out telling "black folks" that they must come out and vote to keep his agenda going. When was the last time you heard anyone tell "white folks" to vote. What do you think would be the story line if someone did say that?

People are excited about the upcoming election because of the promise to repeal the health care bill. There were two so-called experts I heard on my drive. One said that 97 House seats were in play and 92 of them were Democrat incumbents. The other said that 86 seats were in play and 80 of them are currently held by Democrats. If either of these were off by even 10%, this will be very close to breaking the record for changeovers set back in the 30's.

So, what happens when the elections are over and many of these tea party backed candidates get into office and they don't follow the party line of doing things as they've always been done? This could be another two year battle for the next election where the tea party grows even more and the tea parties continue leading up to the 2012 election.

It's really beginning to look like the next two years are going to be even louder than the past two. The good news is that Obama won't be able to run roughshod over the Republicans like he's done this past 18 months. The biggest question to be answered in the next two weeks is will the Senate go to the Republicans.

You're welcome to comment.


Wednesday, October 6, 2010

South Fulton Tennessee: Shame and Embarrasment

In South Fulton, Tennessee a man burning trash in a burn barrel had the grass catch fire. He grabbed his garden hose and tried to put the fire out in the grass but it got the better of him and spread. An hour later, it had spread to the house and the house started burning.

When the owner couldn't get control of the fire in the yard, he called the fire department. The fire department wouldn't respond. It's not because they couldn't respond. They WOULD NOT respond. Their reason was that the owner hadn't paid his $75.00 fee for the year.

The fire spread even more beyond the man's house to a field of his neighbors caught fire. Luckily for the neighbor, they had paid the annual fee of $75.00. So the fire department responded to that call. They put out the neighbors fire, but then watched as the first house burned down. They didn't just leave. They watched!

When asked, the Mayor of South Fulton said that they had to draw the line somewhere and decided that this was where they would draw that line.

What you may not know is that this is not the first time that this has happened. It happened several years ago, in the same city..or rural area.

Why wasn't the fee paid? The husband said he'd just forgotten about it. The wife said they just hadn't paid it yet. My question is, who cares? There was a simple solution. Put the fire out and then bill for the expense of doing so. Fight it out in the courts if you must, but you don't allow someone's house to burn down for any reason.

We have a long history in this country of neighbors helping neighbors. That help came in many forms. It could be a food basket for someone that is having a tough time financially. The better known is probably the barn raising. A man needed a barn and the neighbors would come over and put a barn up. The next guy that needed a barn would get the same help and it would spread.

I've read several of the stories written about this and watched the news report on the local television station. Each of them said that the firefighters weren't to blame because they were following the orders of the Mayor and the City Manager. I disagree with this. If a firefighter is there, the right thing for him to do is to help put the fire out despite the orders from "on high". At some point, morals have to come into play. Anyone that was there and didn't help or at least try to help to put the fire out was guilty.

The reports also say that the community is upset about the entire affair. But they were also upset a few years ago when it happened before, yet nothing was changed.

I'm beginning to think that we should get used to this. The health care plan recently passed will leave us with rationed care. Money was spent to create and save jobs, but you can't count how many jobs are saved and it certainly didn't create any jobs.

This event was on the local level and involved a fire. We are in for more stories like this if we don't change things and change them soon. This is a government, albeit local, that decided that this couples house had a worth of $75.00. Due to that $75.00 not being paid, they refused to put out a house fire. Suppose someone had been trapped inside. Would the fire department still in effect say "best of luck to you" instead of responding with a human life at stake? Are they really going to put a worth of a human life at $75.00? The answer is likely to be yes. After all, they didn't show up because of the lack of a small payment. Why would a human life cause unfeeling government officials to show up? I didn't see nor hear that question being asked of the Mayor or anyone else. Even if the question was asked, could we trust their answer?

I think we couldn't. In Bay City, Michigan last year, a man died from the cold because his electricity was shut off. So why should we expect South Fulton to do any different if a human life was at risk?

I hope that the people of South Fulton remove the Mayor from office. I hope they remove the City Manager from office. I hope that they replace the fire departments firefighters. Then, if they do, they need to change that law that was put in place in 1990.

Every person that was at that fire is guilty of inaction. They might as well have brought hot dogs and had a weinie roast for all the good they did standing around watching.

I certainly hope that the American people can see that government at all levels must be held accountable for their actions and inactions. This family was wrong for not paying their bill. But that is no excuse for allowing a home to burn to the ground, leaving this couple homeless.

In the military, a soldier must follow orders. However, if an order is illegal, the soldier is obligated to not follow those orders. The fire department, the fire fighters, all are obligated to not follow the orders that they were given.

I'd much rather defend myself against insubordination if I were a firefighter knowing that I helped save someone's home, than have to face this couple after my having not even lifted a finger when I could have. Even if these firefighters had not succeeded in saving the couples home, every attempt should have been made. It is not just their job, it's their responsibility. There is no excuse for what happened here.
You're welcome to comment.


Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Two Years of Trash

In August, a rally was held in Washington DC. Nearly 500,000 people were in attendance. This rally was led by Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin was a featured speaker.

Last week, another rally was held and this one was led by Steven Colbert and Jon Daily. There were nearly 100,000 people in attendance.

Two rallies. Two different perspectives. Two sides of the aisle. One liberal, one conservative, and it could be argued that the rally with Beck and Palin was not political, but nobody can really take politics out of it when Beck and Palin are the leaders or lead speakers.

Yes, there were less at the liberal rally last weekend. By a large amount. However, the liberals did leave a longer lasting impression. Not by their words, but by their trash. Fast food wrappers, water bottles, SEIU signs, pamphlets, food remnants. One of the cleanup crew called the Lincoln Memorial a landfill.

The WWII Memorial was filled with trash.

I don't think it's in dispute that the liberals, progressives, socialists, whatever you want to call them, are fanatics over global warming, or global climate change, if you prefer. That is their issue. They have passed cap and trade through the House. They want to move to electric cars, solar ceilings and end the use of oil. They've even gone so far as to say that anyone that doesn't believe in global warming should be prosecuted for disagreeing (see Robert Kennedy, Al Gore,etc.).

Yet, plastic wrappers, paper cups, cardboard signs, plastic bottles, candy bar wrappers, styrofoam cups, pamplets were all strewn about Washington DC following the rally this weekend.

If these liberals are so concerned about the environment, shouldn't they be the ones picking up after themselves? If the Conservatives are so uncaring about the environment, shouldn't they be the ones that are leaving the mountain of trash behind?

This is a repeat of the Obama inauguration. Remember the trash left behind that followed? This sounds an awful like the parent that tells his/her child "do as I say, not as I do."

You're welcome to comment.



In this posting, I made a mistake and said that the liberal rally was the Steven Colbert and Jon Daily rally when in fact it was the One Nation rally. The Colbert/Daily rally is later this month. Thank you Cindi O for pointing out my mistake.

Hopefully, we'll not have the same trash issue at the next liberal rally.