BloggeRhythms

If folks in any other aspect of life, particularly those in businesses, made comments like most of Nancy Pelosi’s, they’d not only be thought to be total ignoramuses, they’d be ostracized completely.

Yesterday, she said that the incumbent’s “[G]racious and he’s taking responsibility. But that doesn't mean that there was anything in the law that said if you like what you had before [enactment] you couldn't keep it.”

However, aside from the fact that the incumbent’s not being gracious at all, he’s simply trying to cover his tail after getting caught in a flat-out lie, Pelosi’s comment is coming from someone who never even read the law before it was passed. So how would she know what was in it herself?

But she then went on to illustrate further that she either doesn’t truly understand most things she says, or doesn’t care about how ridiculous she sounds when saying them.

According to Fox News.com: “Pelosi suggested Republicans will have to answer for their part in the partial government shutdown that she says hurt the economy.

She also downplayed 39 House Democrats voting Friday on a bill to allow insurance companies to continue offering plans that don’t comply with ObamaCare, saying a similar number of them voted on legislation to delay the law’s employer mandate.”

In the first case, she’s absolutely right, the Republicans will have to answer for their part in the government shutdown, which will likely go a long way to their adding seats in the House, and perhaps gaining the majority in the Senate. Their objection to the horrendous farce of the health care tax is making them stronger every day. So, if Ms. Pelosi wants to denigrate competition, she ought to pick another subject.  

Then, when she went on to discount House Dem’s wanting to delay implementation of the health care tax as similar to those wishing to allow present plan continuance, she blithely ignored the quickly growing dissatisfaction of voters nationwide. But that’s typical Pelosi commentary, which is always done with little thought to facts or truths.

Moving along, I then saw a headline for a story reporting that the administration wants to close Guantanamo because it’s “too costly.”

Here are the details; “Purely from an economic point of view, the administration says Guantanamo is too costly. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told Congress that annual spending on Guantanamo was $454 million — or about $2.7 million per detainee.”

Seeing the number: $2,700,000 per detainee, I went to my calculator to find that: The individual cost equates to: $225,000 per month, $51,923.07 per week, $7417.58 per day, $309.06 per hour, and finally, $5.15 per minute.

After finding that the 2011 Median Income of US households was $50,054 per annum, 53.9 times less than these criminals cost to maintain, I then looked up the the national average for a home loan in the U.S. which is $222,261 with a $1,061 average monthly payment for a 30-year mortgage at 4 percent, according to LendingTree. 

LendingTree also notes that the average home owner in Hawaii would have a monthly payment of about $3,234 for a 30-year mortgage, which is the highest state cost. 

Consequently, we could put each of these international criminals in a Hawaiian home and still have $221,776 left over monthly to pay for guards, clothes, food, utilities, healthcare, and whatever else is needed to keep these terrorists happy. So, I guess this is another example of our government at work. Because they keep talking and promising, but Guantanamo's outrageous costs keep moving right along.

After that, I came across another item on Fox from Chris Stirewalt, who writes that: “According to an Office of Management and Budget report, regulatory paperwork imposed by the government requires The IRS and National Credit Union Administration have proposed new regulations that would lead to 45.9 billion hours of new paperwork. The conservative American Action Forum points out that the new rules would be in addition to 10.3 billion hours of work from existing regulations, equal to “almost 5.2 million full-time workers exclusively to filling out government forms.”

So, I guess this is how the administration’s creating jobs. Because although absolutely nothing productive will be accomplished from adding paperwork, and businesses will be further prevented from operating efficiently, hiring will likely go up. Which is like unions who force employers to bring on “no-show” workers who do absolutely nothing except increase overhead and total costs, precisely the way our whole misguided government presently works. 

That’s it for today folks

Adios