Friday, January 31, 2014


After blocking the Keystone XL for five years without good reason, other than appeasing environmentalist constituents, the incumbent got some very bad news today. Fox News on-line reports that, "The State Department is expected to release an environmental analysis on the Keystone XL oil pipeline as early as Friday that may disappoint environmentalists and opponents of the proposed project, according to individuals briefed on the matter.”

Reading the details, however, discloses some truly incredible information. Shawn Howard, a Keystone spokesman said, "Fifteen thousand pages of scientific and technical study published in four environmental analysis reports since 2010 have all concluded this project would have minimal impact on the environment. We don't see how the final report would come to a different conclusion." 

So, here we have a guy in the White House claiming to be trying his best to help the economy recover while sitting on legislation that would not only create thousands of jobs almost immediately, it would keep billions of dollars from flowing for no reason into the Middle-East. 

As far as opponents go at present, all that’s left is the lame excuse that the number of jobs to be created is “unknown.”

Consequently, its truly incredible that in today’s world, the incumbent can get away with this kind of damage to the nation he’s supposedly heading.

On another matter, many hard-line Republicans are upset because Speaker Boehner seems to be bending regarding illegal aliens. But since it’s highly unlikely that the illegals will really be rounded up and deported any time soon, it appears he’s using an opportunity to get the best he can under the circumstances. And, it’s certainly not a free ride for those that are here. 
First of all, according to Politico on-line“The principles stress that undocumented immigrants will have to go through the current immigration system and complete several prerequisites. Criminals will not be eligible for legalization at all.”

Additionally, “These persons could live legally and without fear in the U.S., but only if they were willing to admit their culpability, pass rigorous background checks, pay significant fines and back taxes, develop proficiency in English and American civics, and be able to support themselves and their families (without access to public benefits),” according to a draft of the document.”

But then, here’s the most important criteria of all. ‘None of this can happen before specific enforcement triggers have been implemented to fulfill our promise to the American people that from here on, our immigration laws will indeed be enforced.’

And especially, that the borders will be secured. 

Consequently, while Charles Schumer thinks he’s going to win immigration concessions and has outsmarted Republican leadership, it’s highly probable that he’s painted himself in a corner as usual. Because, if you searched from here to the outermost galaxy, you couldn’t find anyone dumber than that grade A dunce from new York.

Aside from Schumer, Dem’s in general are now evidently sensing that their days in power are quickly ending. reports that Henry Waxman of California is retiring after 40 years, as follows: “During a congressional career that began when Gerald R. Ford was president, Waxman became one of the Democratic Party's most prolific and savvy legislators, focusing on issues related to healthcare and the environment.”
So, no matter how Dem’s in general, and the incumbent in particular try to spin it, they all know they’ve made colossal blunders setting policy and choosing issues. And that’s why so many of them are “retiring” voluntarily now, rather than having voters do it for them in November.
That’s it for today folks.

Thursday, January 30, 2014


In a Facebook recap of Rush’s reaction to the incumbent’s SOTU speech, he points out the huge discrepancy between the incumbent’s rhetoric and reality. 
In a nutshell, Rush set the premise this way: “I mean, if you watched it and you were from Mars, you would think that this country has never had a stronger economy. We have never been positioned better. We are kicking butt. We are kicking butt and taking names.  We are just rocking.  We are tearing it down.  We are the envy of the world.  I would have never known how good things are had I not watched this speech.”
He continued, “But this speech is the kind of disconnect that gets people in the private sector fired or sued or committed.  It was so far off from reality.  So here in the middle of talking about how many jobs have been created and how great the job recovery's going, we got a whole segment on the need for job training centers. 
Why are 50 million people on food stamps, Mr. President?  Twenty million more people on food stamps than when you were inaugurated.  Why, if the economy is growing so rapidly and if job creation is so momentous, why do we need emergency unemployment extensions?  Why are 92 million Americans on the sidelines?  If we've got such a robust, roaring economy, and the job market is racing back to normal, why are 92 million Americans not in it? 
And then “Why are there 20 million more Americans on food stamps than when he was inaugurated?  Why do we need endless emergency unemployment extensions?”
Rush then provided the answer: “The answer is because he has been president since 2009.  That's why.  Why are so many Americans losing their health insurance?  Why are so many Americans now unable to afford health insurance after the implementation of Obamacare?
Because he has been president since 2009.”
Making matters worse for the health care tax, Fox News on-line discloses that, “A new report released just as Americans begin submitting their federal tax returns finds the agency in crisis.
For example, a staggering 20 million calls to the IRS went completely unanswered last year.”
So, what does that imply for management of the health care tax and those who need medical attention of any kind? The answer is, it's going to be a complete and utter disaster. 
And lastly, here’s some ammunition for whatever Republican winds up contending with Bill’s wife in 2016.
According to CBSDC “For all these people who stand up for Bill Clinton, saying ‘He’s the greatest thing since sliced bread,’ he was a serial philanderer but he also is someone who took advantage of women in the workplace,” Rand Paul told CBS News.”
Now, from Rand Paul’s point of view, he was targeting Bill himself, and the philandering he’s done. However, there’s another question to be asked, which is: Why is that so?
The most likely answer is that Bill, who knows his wife best doesn’t like her very much either. To the extent that he’d risk the damage to his reputation and perhaps, even his presidency, to cavort with someone else.
Therefore, you couldn't find a better testimonial as to what she’s really like, than the one demonstrated to the entire world by her husband who evidently can't stand her himself.
That’s it for today folks.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014


After watching several news recaps and reading quite a few articles on-line regarding the State of the Union message last night, it’s likely that just about all in attendance, except for one, would have gladly given up their place in trade for mine. I was fast asleep in bed, thankfully missing the entire thing.

Charles Krauthammer said that “upon hearing an excerpt ahead of the president's State of the Union speech Tuesday, "you would think that's the campaign speech of someone running against Barack Obama.

Obama is indicting the four years, the five years he's been president," Krauthammer said. "He said, 'the rich have done well, everybody else has stalled, and inequality has increased.' Well, the four years, the five years are his years. So essentially he's saying, 'my job now is to undo what I've done and the five years of my presidency.'"

As for me, while having no interest in the incumbent’s daily stream of gibberish, I was nonetheless curious about his handling of two subjects I mention frequently; the health care tax and global warming. 

Chris Stirewalt of Fox News on-line wrote: “But President Obama barely found time to mention his law in his State of the Union address for this, the year when it is actually going into effect. Obama was more than 40 minutes into his speech before he even mentioned what he called “insurance reform.” Now, political wisdom dictates that one not needlessly remind voters of unhappy events, but the magnitude of ObamaCare and its centrality to his legacy would seem to demand at least a defense of the troubled law. Instead, Obama riffled through his 2012 talking points about uncontroversial provisions, ignored the central aims of the law, skipped his administration’s pratfall of a rollout entirely and fudged again on the numbers.”

So, the cornerstone of his legacy got short shrift because even he knows by now that it’s a total disaster. However, although he’d like the subject to go away altogether, voters in November aren’t going to forget the damage wrought upon them.

And then, the reports that “During the State of the Union, President Barack Obama stated that global warming is a “fact” and that the science was settled. But Obama’s remarks ignore the fact that global temperatures have not significantly risen in 17 years.

“The shift to a cleaner energy economy won’t happen overnight, and it will require tough choices along the way,” Obama said. “But the debate is settled. Climate change is a fact. And when our children’s children look us in the eye and ask if we did all we could to leave them a safer, more stable world with new sources of energy, I want us to be able to say, ‘Yes, we did.’”

His speech came on a cold winter’s night of 18 degrees Fahrenheit with wind-chill, according to the Weather Channel. His climate warning government climate data showed that the so-called “pause” in global warming continued through 2013.” 

In conclusion, then, it seems very strange that someone who’s supposed to be leader of the greatest nation in the world can be so consistently wrong and still have the gall to flout monumental mistakes as if they were successes. 
But if you take the title of yesterday’s address literally, the State of the Union itself is actually extremely good. Because shackled as it is by incompetency at the top, it’s still slowly growing despite how hard the incumbent continually tries to kill it.

That's it for today folks.


Tuesday, January 28, 2014


Drawing up a mental list of things the incumbent could do if he truly wanted to improve the nation’s economic condition, several things became quite obvious. And in every case, the current problems begin with his own policies and legislation thwarting or inhibiting growth and success.
For example, lately, he’s had a lot to say about income inequality and his desire to correct it by raising the minimum wage. However, the question he should be asking is why those at the ladder’s bottom don't’ advance.
And even though, he’d surely deny it, it’s highly likely he knows that a major part of the problem is lack of skills among workers. Yet, that could change quickly if teacher’s unions didn’t stand in the way of curriculum improvement. But, when the educators themselves are inferior and unknowing, how can they help any others improve? And, so long as tenure remains in place, the problem’s sure to get worse.
Then, as far as the economy goes, the health care tax alone is strangling growth like never seen before. Shortened hours, increasing automation, offshore expansion and hiring, along with rapidly rising costs all serve to curtail employee advancement and income potential.
Add to that, the continuing financial drains caused by blocking the Keystone XL pipeline, overregulation by the IRS and EPA and you have significant deliberate obstructions to employment opportunity and advancement.  
So, what it all boils down to is another day and another speech without an iota of substance. Because none of the problems can ever be truly fixed when the guy promising correction is also the one who purposely caused them.
That’s it for today folks.

Monday, January 27, 2014


As mentioned previously, unless someone has a specific reason, such as a job requirement like those in the press or government,  I simply can’t imagine caring a whit about tomorrow’s State of the Union address. And if by chance, something interesting’s said, the press will cover it in detail, so why go through the torture of listening to the boring droning yourself?
As far as the subject matter’s concerned, however, Chris Stirewalt of Fox News posted an item by Bret Baier containing an interesting paragraph, as follows: “Here's how the WSJ writes it: ‘[President Obama] will seek to shift the public's souring view of his leadership, a challenge the White House sees as critical to shaping the nation's policy direction over the next three years. Mr. Obama will emphasize his intention to use unilateral presidential authority -- bypassing Congress when necessary -- to an extent not seen in his previous State of the Union speeches, White House officials said.’”
Now, reading the preceding very carefully, what comes through is that the incumbent not only doesn’t care what the public thinks of his policies, which is not positive at all, but knowing he can’t get congressional support either, he plans to unilaterally authorize unpopular, destructive and divisive legislation all by himself. As a practical matter, executive instability, unpopularity and incompetence can’t get any worse than that.
Along the same lines, on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace spoke to White House Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer. When Pfeiffer talked about “restoring opportunity," Wallace retorted, “Median household income is down. Labor force participation is down. Food stamps are up. Poverty rate is up. If things are so great, how come they are so lousy?”
Added to that is a note from the AP that, “In a first, working-age people now make up the majority in U.S. households that rely on food stamps - a switch from a few years ago, when children and the elderly were the main recipients.”
So, it should be no surprise that anyone with an IQ higher than their shoe size realizes that this administration’s been a total disaster by any measure that can be applied. Therefore it’s no wonder that no one in Congress, except those inextricably politically tied, would want to be seen as being in agreement.   
Consequently, with no one really willing to help, the incumbent has no other options than instituting  his anti-everything constructive legislation himself.
That’s it for today folks.

Sunday, January 26, 2014


Spending significant time researching the news each day, leads to acute awareness of most major issues affecting the nation here and abroad. In that regard, it’s truly incredible, yet true, that the while the current administration is almost invariably wrong in its decisions, it still finds ways to do further damage. And today, another example's arisen.
On Tuesday, the incumbent will deliver the State of the Union address to whoever chooses to listen. However, what’s most interesting is that, according to, “The address will include a “healthy dose” of the income inequality message the White House has focused on in recent weeks, according to one senior administration official familiar with the text.”
However, here again it‘s apparent that relatively few people even care about the subject, and those that do don’t seem to have a problem with it.
In that regard, “A new Fox New poll shows a possible disconnect between President Barack Obama and voters on what the president says will be the top priority for the rest of his term: reducing income inequality. 
The poll finds that only a small minority of voters (13 percent) thinks the government should do something about the fact some people make a lot more money than others.  A 62-percent majority is okay with disparities in income “because that’s just how the economy works.”  Another 21 percent say income inequality “stinks,” but still think the government “shouldn’t get involved.”
So, just like the health care tax, government interference in this area will probably lead to countless negative results, unworkable solutions and more stifling legislation. And in that particular case, according to the New York Times in 2012, the Census Bureau said 15.4 percent of people were uninsured, down from 15.7 percent in 2011.Which means that almost 85% of the population was doing fine until the incumbent decided to disrupt both the market and their coverage. 
Consequently, if the incumbent truly wants to turn the economy loose, stimulate hiring and significantly increase employment, there a few things he could announce in his upcoming speech of the day. Opening the Keystone pipeline, reducing the EPA by 90%, replacing the IRS with a flat tax, significant deregulation, repealing the health care tax altogether, and him going back to Hawaii to play golf for the next three years. But, since that would be good for the nation, these things would never occur to him.
That's it for today folks.

Saturday, January 25, 2014


According to Kate Rogers, Fox News on-line: “ObamaCare hit 3-million enrollees on Friday — still short of the number the administration had hoped for by the end of December — but reached only by including enrollees who have not yet made their first payment.”
But, let’s suppose they all paid. As a practical matter, whereas the nation’s population is currently 313.9 million, enrollees now amount to .000958466 percent.
According to The Weekly Standard, “The latest estimate is that Obamacare will cost $2.6 trillion dollars in its first real decade. The bill does not fully go into effect until 2014, therefore the estimate begins with that year.”
So, what a simple calculation shows is that the finest health care system in the world has been ruined for more than 99% of the American people by a moronic program wrought by dimwitted socialists who’ve never understood anything they’ve ever tried doing.
And then we have another world-class dunce who’s apparently now running Homeland Security. reports that Secretary Jeh Johnson, speaking at  the United States Conference of Mayors on Friday, “said the approximately 11 million people who are in the country illegally have “earned the right to be citizens.”
He went on to state that “It is also, frankly, in my judgment, a matter of who we are as Americans, to offer the opportunity to those who want to be citizens, who’ve earned the right to be citizens, who are present in this country--many of whom came here as children--to have the opportunity that we all have to try to become American citizens.”
Therefore, if we follow this clown’s logic, bank-robbers should be given whatever they steal to keep. After all, these thieves have spent their time and effort laying out plans to take other’s money, and likely have worked very hard toward their goals. Consequently, the right thing to do, according to Johnson, is to appreciate their wishes to better themselves.
Furthermore, if we employ the Secretary’s theorizing, all laws should be ignored if offenders have a particular, self-serving purpose. Because, when it comes to legislation, if certain offenders are to be exempt, what function do laws serve in the first place?
But, I guess the saddest thing of all is to find out now that the Founding Fathers wasted all that time and energy on the Constitution when key government leaders don’t give a good GD about its existence or intentions. 
That’s it for today folks.

Friday, January 24, 2014


While most of the news regards additional detail on many ongoing issues, aside from the stock-market’s sell-off, there’s not very much of particular note.
Nonetheless, there’s considerable media focus on the incumbent's upcoming State of the Union Address, which I have no interest in whatsoever. However, the subject does raise an interesting question, speech-wise. Because here’s a guy who delivers at least one speech a day all year long, so how does anyone know which one’s the State of the Union? And if they do, why would anyone who doesn't have to listen job-wise care at all?
In that regard, Peggy Noonan, of the Wall Street Journal via Drudge, put it perfectly by heading her column today: ‘”The Sleepiness of a Hollow Legend.”
In it, she points out that the incumbent’s goal is to stress a host of other issues he plans to address, downplaying or avoiding altogether any discussion of his health care tax headaches, as follows:
“The bigger problem is that the president stands up there Tuesday night with ObamaCare not a hazy promise but a fact. People now know it was badly thought, badly written and disastrously executed. It was supposed to make life better by expanding coverage. It has made it worse, by throwing people off coverage. And—as we all know now but did not last year—the program was passed only with the aid of a giant lie. Now everyone knows if you liked your plan, your doctor, your deductible, you can't keep them.”
So, in that single paragraph, Ms Noonan covers the issue precisely. Because no matter how many blustering speeches the incumbent delivers, the words no longer matter a whit whereas hard reality’s finally sinking in.
And, speaking of how reality has a way of bringing out the truths of most matters, as time goes by another all talk, no substance political hack is finding that incompetence is eventually ferreted out.
Fox News’ Chris Stirewalt writes today that, “On the heels of a scathing Senate Intelligence Committee report on the State Department’s handling of the 2012 terrorist attack on an American outpost in Benghazi, Libya, a new Fox News poll shows Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is getting the blame from voters. The poll finds 60 percent of respondents blame Clinton for what happened, with 28 percent blaming her “a great deal.” Even among Democrats, 41 percent blame the former Secretary for the security failures that led to the deaths of four Americans.”
Additionally, “The poll also finds 49 percent of respondents feel the Obama administration’s use of doctored talking points in the aftermath of the attack was intended to shield the president politically in the midst of his re-election campaign. Twenty-two percent said the talking points were simply a mistake, while 19 percent said it was a virtuous deception intended to protect American interests. Fifty-nine percent blamed President Obama for failing to prevent the attack, including 38 percent of Democrats.”
So, what the polling indicates is that for both the incumbent and Slick Willy’s wife, despite all the talk, hype and bluster, the truths are continually piling up. Which means that except for their hardest core constituents, these two top Dem’s are primarily talking to themselves.
That’s it for today folks.

Thursday, January 23, 2014


You couldn’t find a better example of liberal economic dysfunction if you searched for an ion, as illustrated below.
Chris Stirewalt’s,  Fox News on-line notes that, “At the White House, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, lionized on the left for his focus on hiking taxes and spending to battle income inequality, can expect to hear a great deal on the subject from President Obama. Obama is warming up for next week’s State of the Union address, which is expected to focus on the same theme. De Blasio is also slated to address his fellow mayors today. In the universe of heavily-Democratic, very liberal, big-city mayors, the message about income inequality is a sure-fire winner.”
Then, further down in the same column is another item, via Breitbart stating that, “[Gov. Scott Walker, R-Wis., proposed] $800 million in tax cuts Wednesday evening, representing most of the state’s $912 million revenue surplus. Half of the cuts will be achieved through property tax reductions, and the other half will consist of lower payroll taxes, as well as lower income tax rates for the lowest state bracket. ‘What do you do with a surplus?  Give it back to the people who earned it.  It's your money,’ Walker [said] in his annual State of the State address, according to an excerpt released to the press. The tax cuts will be a core part of Walker’s new budget for the state, entitled the ‘Blueprint for Prosperity.’”
So, although time after time liberalism fails completely, these wrongheaded theoreticians keep pushing the same economy-destroying ideology, further crippling future advancement hopes of those who need help the most. 
But, beyond the proven positive results of lower-taxation and minimization of government intervention, it's also apparent that even the groups targeted by misguided liberals don’t want their help or interference, as follows:
“A new Fox News poll reveals that Americans aren’t exactly up in arms over the president’s preferred topic in this midterm election cycle. Only 13 percent said the government should act to promote economic fairness. Sixty-two percent said income disparities exist “because that’s just how the economy works.” While the president and some Democrats like to charge the rich are getting richer on the backs of the poor, 84 percent of those polled say that’s not so. Only 12 percent said inequality is the top economic issue facing the country. In the lead: Creating new jobs, the top concern of 40 percent of respondents. Seventy-four percent said they thought the country was still in a recession.”
Consequently, just like where government stepped in and ruined the best health care system on the planet to “help” 5% of the population most of whom aren’t even signing up, these two fiscal ciphers, the incumbent and de Blasio, will now dream up ways to further tax producers and in the process, kill what’s left of the economy altogether.
And, as far as the health care tax itself is concerned, a major insurer, Aetna,  is considering leaving the program altogether because “Obamacare has failed to attract the uninsured.” And worse, there are indications the target group may not really be interested in signing up at all, as follows from Drudge:
“A survey from the conservative American Action Forum could explain the low numbers of young adults who are voluntarily enrolling in ObamaCare ahead of looming penalties under the law. The group found it is cheaper for 86 percent of young people to pay federal fines than enroll in the troubled entitlement program. “Even after the mandate penalty is fully implemented, a majority of young adult households will find that it is financially advantageous for them to forgo health insurance, pay the mandate penalty, and personally cover their own health care expenses,” the report says. The study predicts that when the punishment for those who refuse to comply with ObamaCare increases in 2016, it will still be financially advantageous for 62 percent of young people to defy the law.”
So, today we have two glaring examples of what happens when politicians plow ahead while having no practical knowledge of the issues they adopt. And what’s even more despicable is that they amass significant fortunes for themselves, while “redistributing” the assets earned by everyone else who’s attained them. And I, for one, believe there’s something monumentally wrong with that.
That’s it for today folks.

Wednesday, January 22, 2014


In recent months, I’ve often mentioned the shortsightedness and almost total ignorance of Democrats regarding anything having to do with the economy. This is especially true in the case of businesses, where there’s little to no knowledge at all, stemming right from the top, whereas the incumbent himself knows nothing about commercial operations whatsoever.
In that regard, last week I cited the pitfalls involved in the administrations pushing for a significant increase in the minimum wage. Because, while the pay hike might sound attractive and benevolent, especially among those in the category, business owners aren’t going to sit still while their margins are shrunk in a competitive world. Especially if other options are available to them.
At the time, I suspected that a dramatic wage hike might accelerate trends toward automation of routine, repetitive, manual labor occupations. And then today, I came across this article by Mark Prigg of via Drudge, titled “Scientists predict a 'jobocalypse' as robots take over manual jobs.”
The key line reads: “A huge 70% of occupations could become automated over next 30 years. Drivers, teachers, babysitters and nurses could be replaced by robots Could mean the end of the eight-hour, five-day working week.”
Consequently, the answer to increased income isn’t driving wages to the point where employers are forced to seek other methods for business operation. The route to higher income is attaining skills and abilities that aren’t easily replaceable. And for those who choose to ignore the coming occupational revolution, Democrats might raise minimum wage rates even further. But unfortunately, no low end jobs will be in existence. 
In the same vein, according to Defense News, a US military magazine, also via Drudge, “Gen Robert Cone, head of the army's training and doctrine command, is considering shrinking the army’s brigade combat teams from about 4,000 soldiers to 3,000 and using more robots.”
So, it won’t be long before the trend toward operating efficiency will be seen in every aspect of life and business especially. But Democrats prefer to ignore the obvious, and instead of preparing for the future themselves, they’ll continue to keep their constituents ignorant, relying on bilking the successful as usual.
On another subject, illustrating how those who protest against progress think, here’s an item from Robert Wilde of Breitbart.
“On Monday, four members of an anti-fracking group wound up in jail for using bicycle locks and glue to fasten themselves to gas pumps at a petrol station in Great Lever, England. The group sacrificed themselves in order to protest the hydraulic fracking activities of Total, a French petroleum company.
But, to their embarrassment, the group sacrificed themselves to the wrong petrol station, which was no longer owned by Total. The petrol station was owned by Certas Energy, who neglected to take down the signs after buying the station.”
So, I guess that brings up the question of cause and effect. Because, which scenario’s correct? Are these protesters stupid because they oppose progress, or do they oppose progress because they're stupid?
According to Mr. Wilde, the petrol station’s manager, Reezwan Patel, put it this way, “Some protesters were peaceful, but that those who shackled themselves to the pumps “were stupid and have cost us a lot of money.” He added that, “We had to close for six hours, so with the loss of customers and the damage to the pumps, it could be a couple of thousand pounds we have lost.”
But, in the end, I guess that protesting serves a purpose. Because in a shrinking job market, unskilled people remain unemployed. So, this way, at least the protestors have something to do with their time.
That’s it for today folks.

Tuesday, January 21, 2014


While the wheels continue to fall off the entire administration, most of the failures involve the incumbent himself.
Aside from instituting anti-business policies that have stagnated the economy while increasing true unemployment, the nation’s relinquished its position in foreign affairs. While adding to that the killing of the leading healthcare system in the world, another presidential dream has also failed completely.
Bret Baier the Fox News anchor wrote a column today headed, “As Obama hammers ‘income inequality,’ gap grows under his presidency.”
Although the incumbent railed on incessantly about equaling opportunity and targeting the “rich,” the actual results of his performance show the complete reverse.  
According to Mr.Baier, the top 1 percent saw a 45 percent increase in income under Clinton and a 65 percent increase under Bush. 
However, “That number has dramatically increased since Obama's inauguration in 2009. By 2012, the top 1 percent was back to where it was decades ago -- taking in about a quarter of all pre-tax income. Yet the bottom 90 percent saw their share fall below 50 percent for the first time in history.”
Overall performance has gotten so bad that even a liberal icon has had enough. According to Garth Kant of via Drudge, the legendary liberal Nat Hentoff urges Obama's impeachment.
The article resonated with me because Mr. Hentoff  mentioned an issue I’ve been writing about for years. The complete deterioration of the educational system in the nation, as follows: “A big part of the problem, the journalist believes, is what he calls the utter ignorance of a huge portion of the population, which is not outraged at losing its basic right to be self-governing.”
He continues, “And Obama doesn’t give a damn, because he can get away with whatever he wants.”
Mr. Hentoff then goes o to provide some examples of “Obama changing or issuing laws with the stroke of a pen by issuing executive orders including:
Delaying the employer mandate in Obamacare
Changing the types of plans available under Obamacare
Ensuring abortions would be covered under Obamacare
Enacting key provisions of the failed Dream Act to halt deportations of illegal immigrants
Enacting stricter gun-control measures
Sealing presidential records
Creating an economic council
Creating a domestic policy council
Changing pay grades
So, what we have here is further evidence of party faithful's who have had enough flowering talk while watching results deliver the complete reverse. Which means that once again, all that Republicans need do is stand quietly by as their competition self-destructs. Because as things stand now, the only one’s that can beat them in November is themselves.
And finally, I can’t let the entry end without mention of another trend. This one regarding global-cooling.
Kristina Pydynowski of reports that, “Along the leading edge of the invading polar blast, accumulating snow was spreading from the Midwest to the East Coast on Tuesday.
Snow was reaching the mid-Atlantic coast during Tuesday midday and afternoon, and will then turn northeastward toward southeastern New England Tuesday evening.
As the storm gains strength Tuesday night, blizzard conditions may unfold in portions of Long Island, southeastern New England and during Wednesday in portions of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.”
Which, I guess, is why I saw AlGore on my corner this morning setting up a stand to sell fur coats and hats, snow shoes, skis and sleds because, after all, a guy’s got to make a buck, no matter.
That's it for today folks.

Monday, January 20, 2014


Not a lot in the news today, just some interesting and amusing odds and ends. The first couple of items are from Chris Stirewalt’s column on Fox News on-line.
To begin, “Democrats have cheered Pope Francis’ laments about income inequality and capitalism, and President Obama is said to be lining up a meeting.”
And I guess a key question for both of them is, since they’re both so anti-capitalist yet have such huge financial needs to support their social programs, where’s the money going to come from when everyone's equally broke?
Which segues right into the next example of leftist's distortion of reality, as follows:
“Texas Democratic gubernatorial frontrunner Wendy Davis has long emphasized her rise from teenaged single mother living in a trailer to Harvard Law School to a successful legal career to the state Senate. It was there that she became a heroine to American liberals for her arduous, though ultimately unsuccessful, fight to preserve legal access to late-term, elective abortions in the state.”
However, Ms Davis’ version of her tale seems to be just a bit out of synch with reality because, “The Dallas Morning News reports that Davis’ story of hardship and self-reliance omits a key figure: her second husband. “Davis was 21, not 19, when she was divorced. She lived only a few months in the family mobile home while separated from her husband before moving into an apartment with her daughter. A single mother working two jobs, she met Jeff Davis, a lawyer 13 years older than her, married him and had a second daughter. He paid for her last two years at Texas Christian University and her time at Harvard Law School, and kept their two daughters while she was in Boston.” 
So, like a lot of stories told by Democrats, especially those from the one at the top of their party today, while they all sound extremely good, none are ever very close to the truth.
And then there’s this one that clearly illustrates what to expect when government becomes involved in anything more complex than handing out parking tickets. 
“As Maryland’s ObamaCare Web site continues to sputter, officials have been directing frustrated consumers to a toll-free number for help. But even that hasn’t gone well. The phone number provided by the Web site directed users to call a pottery supply store in Seattle rather than a help desk. The state’s Republican Senate Minority Leader David Brinkley, told the Baltimore Sun, “You can't make this stuff up, and I guess if it wasn't so serious, it could be funny.” Officials say they were unaware of the problem until the newspaper contacted them.”
Then, last but certainly not least, there’s this one from The College Fix edited by Nathan Harden via Drudge:
“Hillary Clinton is planning to visit the perennial battleground state of Florida next month, prompting more speculation about her presidential ambitions in 2016.
The University of Miami announced Clinton will visit the campus on February 26, to address students, faculty and “invited guests” in the critical swing state.”
Now, while all these media types are keying on everything Bill’s wife does as indications of her presidential ambitions, what they’re missing is the consistency in her history.
Having done nothing for her term as Secretary of State, except for dropping the ball in Benghazi, she’s acutely aware of the benefits of travel. Which, in turn, has certainly taught her about the effects of weather. And since, in this extremely harsh winter in the north, Florida’s a very good place to do nothing next month, which also happens to be her forte. 
So, why not take a mid-winter trip and leave the snow and ice behind, especially because nobody's going to miss her.
That’s it for today folks.

Sunday, January 19, 2014


As debate continues on curbing NSA’s eavesdropping capabilities, there are several critical things to remember. First and foremost, the World Trade Center destruction on 9/11, and since then the Newtown, Conn. shootings and the Boston bombings, two more that we know of. 
But what we don’t know, however, is how many others have been prevented, whereas full disclosure by authorities is too much information in the hands of the public. Especially when release of those details could very well aid enemies residing or operating within the U.S.
Therefore, having the capability to gather helpful information and not using it in a world that’s changed dramatically regarding terror simply makes no sense. Especially since the data-gathering’s gone on for some time now, and hasn’t been abused or misguided at all.
In that regard, it seems that Democrat Senator Patrick Leahy, of Vermont is taking a position that he ought to rethink. He’s chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and according to Fox News on-line he said today that, “the upper chamber will continue working on legislation to limit NSA spying, suggesting President Obama has not gone far enough in making changes to protect Americans’ privacy.”
The article reports that, “There’s a concern that we have gone too much into Americans’ privacy,” the Democratic lawmaker told “Fox News Sunday.” “There’s still going to be legislation on this.”
Reading further on though, it appears that Leahy’s displeasure is either pure political hype, or he’s a very confused individual, because he later said, “he wouldn’t fight the president on his proposed NSA changes -- including additional court approval, a non-government agency holding phone meta-data and limiting the extent of the data collection.
“I think we have a way we can do this,” he said. “I believe in going after the bad guys. But I also believe in some checks and balances, so you don’t have a government run amok.”
So, if he truly believes we should pursue the “bad guys” and has no qualms or disagreements with the incumbent's suggested changes in procedures, and that’s the core of issue at hand, what is Leahy talking about? This is nothing more than political double or triple speak where a Senator says I demand a change but want to leave everything as it is now.
That’s it for today folks

Saturday, January 18, 2014


Although he campaigned hard against W. Bush’s expanded use of intelligence within the nation, the incumbent now apparently sees how much things have changed since 9/11/2001 and the value of gathering vital information about potential enemies and their activities within our borders.
Perhaps that's why yesterday, he babbled on in a speech, trying to calm folks down, but as usual really not saying much either.
However, as I’ve previously mentioned, maintaining this kind of surveillance is critical, far overriding concerns of privacy violations. Because to have this kind of electronic capability in today’s world and not use it is ridiculous. And it’s probable that if the Founding Fathers could even imagine the need for this kind of national protection they likely would have allowed for it in the Fourth Amendment, despite what Rand Paul thinks.
But what’s most amazing is that even in a case where he’s probably right for once, the incumbent’s staff is still trying to make the case that incumbent didn’t know much, if anything, about the issue anyway.
David Plouffe, Obama’s advisor, said, “Things seem to have grown at the NSA. I think it was disturbing to most people, and I think he found it disturbing.”
So, I guess you can add this one to all the other things going on here and around the world that the incumbent’s ignorant of. But, at least he’s consistent, because whether the situation's a bad or good one, it’s a safe bet, he knows nothing about it now and never did.
And then, on another important issue, Fox News on-line yesterday reported about Secretary of State, John Kerry’s, views regarding the stalled Keystone XL pipeline, as follows:
“Kerry, who has rarely spoken about the pipeline since taking office a year ago, said "a lot of questions" were raised about the project in a lengthy public comment period the State Department conducted. "Those comments have necessitated appropriate answers," he said.
"I can promise our friends in Canada that all the appropriate effort is being put into trying to get this done effectively and rapidly," Kerry added.”
However, it’s highly doubtful that Kerry or anyone else in this administration is going to budge an inch on the pipeline because the delays likely haven't a thing to do with anything other than protecting friends like Warren Buffett.  
As reported by Bloomberg’s  Jim Efstathiou Jr., back on Jan 23, 2012: “Warren Buffett’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration’s decision to reject TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit. 
With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department. 
“Whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul,” Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc. said in an interview. If Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.”
And then today, there’s this report: “According to the AAR, the amount of crude oil moved by rail has skyrocketed, from around 9,500 carloads in 2008 to nearly 300,000 carloads during the first three quarters of 2013 alone (One tank car can reportedly hold anywhere from 600 to 750 barrels of crude.) Most of those oil cars are owned by the railroads' customers or leasing companies, with the railroads themselves owning less than 1 percent.”
So, Secretary Kerry can hold all the news conferences he pleases to try to convince the public that an honest effort ‘s being made to open the pipeline. But, it’s simply impossible to believe that the growth in railroad usage began in 2008, as did the incumbent's term in office, and that Warren Buffet’s profits rose by coincidence. Chicago politics simply don’t work that way now and never did.
That’s it for today folks.

Friday, January 17, 2014


Picked this up on Chris Stirewalt’s  blog on Fox News this morning. Had to read it several times, to be sure I’d understood it correctly.
“The House Majority PAC is currently running an ad in Arizona calling Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz., “a whistleblower on the disastrous healthcare Web site.” The ad concludes saying, “Ann Kirkpatrick, seeing what’s wrong, doing what’s right.” For the PAC backed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to be running ads describing ObamaCare as something on which whistles must be blown, something must be terribly wrong.”
I had to keep asking myself if this was the same Nancy Pelosi who touted the health care tax incessantly from inception, most famously stating that “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” And in the last few months, I guess she’s found out for herself and her party. Making her as unhappy with it as everyone else.
Ms Pelosi isn’t alone, though, when it comes to doubletalk. The Stirewalt column also included the following;
“Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., says her committee’s damning Benghazi report is not an indictment of Democratic 2016 frontrunner Hillary Clinton. Feinstein told reporters that the bipartisan 58-page report, which offers a stinging rebuke to the State Department when it was under the command of the former first lady, does not mention Hillary by name. Feinstein faulted Republicans for using the report to advance a political agenda. “I want the record to be clear,” Feinstein said, “I condemn any effort to use this report for political purposes.”
Now, anyone with an IQ having more than two figures understands that Ms Feinstein is simply covering her political tail with her comment regarding Bill’s wife. But she also knows that she better pursue Benghazi honestly, because the truth’s finally starting to surface. And as a result, although Ms Feinstein is fully aware that Hillary’s at fault, she’s ducking her head knowing full well that somebody else will pursue it.
So, when all’s said and done, looks like another very good day for Republicans.
That's it for today folks.

Thursday, January 16, 2014


While the incumbent holds strategy meetings with college professors, rather than top business experts, to theorize why his economic plans fail, a couple of today’s news items might give him a clue as to why he can’t turn a couple of the nation’s most pressing problems around. 
According to Neil Munro,  White House Correspondent of the via Drudge; “More Americans, 42%, say they are financially worse off now than they were a year ago, reversing the lower levels found over the past two years,” Gallup announced Wednesday.
Just more than a third of Americans [35 percent] say their financial situation has improved from a year ago.” Gallup reported.
And one of the major reasons for the nation’s fiscal woes is very likely the drain on the economy caused by the nonsensically high cost of oil.  
In that regard, by still pandering to lobbyists, instead of really trying to fix the problem, the Keystone pipeline’s been delayed so long that Dan Springer reports, “With the Canada-to-Texas Keystone XL pipeline stuck in limbo on the U.S. side, Canada’s Energy Board recently gave a thumbs up to a $6.5 billion pipeline designed to carry 525,000 barrels of oil per day from the oil sands of Alberta to ships on the British Columbia coast. The final destination is most likely Asia.”
The story goes on to say, “The development has the U.S. oil industry attacking the Obama administration over its drawn-out process. Noting that, “It’s taken longer to approve the Keystone XL pipeline than it did to win World War II, longer than it took us to put a man in space, and almost as long as it took to build the Trans-Continental railroad 155 years ago,” said Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute.”
However, aside from the incumbent’s domestic misjudgments and outright incapability causing the nation to flounder economically,  foreign policy flaws, recently exposed by Robert Gates, have now been expanded, as follows: 
The Daily Beast on-line, posted an item headed “Senior UK Defense Advisor: Obama Is Clueless About ‘What He Wants To Do In The World’ 
The article says that, “Sir Hew Strachan, an expert on the history of war, says that the president’s strategic failures in Afghanistan and Syria have crippled America’s position in the world. Strachan, a current member of the Chief of the Defense Staff’s Strategic Advisory Panel, cited the “crazy” handling of the Syrian crisis as the most egregious example of a fundamental collapse in military planning that began in the aftermath of 9/11”’
Sir Hew continues, “If anything it’s gone backwards instead of forwards, Obama seems to be almost chronically incapable of doing this. Bush may have had totally fanciful political objectives in terms of trying to fight a global War on Terror, which was inherently astrategic, but at least he had a clear sense of what he wanted to do in the world. Obama has no sense of what he wants to do in the world,”
So, while none of this is really new, what’s interesting is that the negative commentary's coming from highly respected experts while the incumbent’s still in office. All of which indicates that the commentary isn’t specifically political, but more a current sincere concern about the need to fix the huge problems before they get any worse, if possible. 
Then there’s the administrations ploy to utilize athletes to promote the poorly constructed and unneeded health care tax among young people. And who was chosen? Magic Johnson and Alonzo Mourning.
According to the Washington Times on-line, “Johnson, the point guard who led the Los Angeles Lakers to five NBA championships in the 1980s, retired from the NBA in 1991 after announcing that he had contracted HIV. Johnson is still living with HIV and is required to take a cocktail of drugs daily to prevent the virus from becoming AIDS.”
And as for Mourning, the “seven-time NBA All-Star, was diagnosed with a rare kidney disease in 2000 and was forced to retire briefly in 2003 while he received a kidney transplant.”
Consequently, while there’s no doubt that name recognition of these two NBA greats most surely is huge, I doubt many healthy young folks are going to identify with their medical problems. Because the odds of making it to the NBA as a player and contracting serious illness in this age group are likely pretty much the same.
That’s it for today folks.

Wednesday, January 15, 2014


Several items today worth mentioning.
Haven’t addressed the hubbub about NSA spying whereas it’s not worth the effort. That’s because, regardless of whatever the administration says about changing or otherwise adjusting the program, the spying’s going to continue anyway, primarily because it should in defense of the nation and its citizens.
In that regard, today Fox News reported that “The National Security Agency has placed software on nearly 100,000 computers around the world that allows the U.S. to conduct surveillance on those machines using radio frequency technology, The New York Times reported Tuesday.”
The story includes the following, “The NSA describes the effort an "active defense" and has used the technology to monitor units of the Chinese Army, the Russian military, drug cartels, trade institutions inside the European Union, and sometime U.S. partners against terrorism like Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan.”
Consequently, with the available technology today in a world that contains significant peril, it would be immature, and likely suicidal, not to avail the nation with every possible protection obtainable.
On the other hand though, its possible that employing the NSA for national defense is perhaps the only thing this administration's ever done right.
Terry Miller  of the The Wall Street Journal on-line via Drudge reports that: “World economic freedom has reached record levels, according to the 2014 Index of Economic Freedom, released Tuesday by the Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. But after seven straight years of decline, the U.S. has dropped out of the top 10 most economically free countries.”
Mr. Miller goes on: “It's not hard to see why the U.S. is losing ground. Even marginal tax rates exceeding 43% cannot finance runaway government spending, which has caused the national debt to skyrocket. The Obama administration continues to shackle entire sectors of the economy with regulation, including health care, finance and energy. The intervention impedes both personal freedom and national prosperity.”
After reading the preceding, I had to laugh when I came across this one from CBS DC also via Drudge: “On Wednesday [the incumbent]will go to North Carolina to draw attention to the type of manufacturing innovation hub that he promoted in his 2013 State of the Union speech. On Thursday he has invited college presidents to discuss ways to improve workers’ skills.”

This is the same guy who’s health care tax bill includes approximately $30 billion in revenue that the 2.3% tax on device purchases is supposed to raise over the next decade.

So, its not hard to see why the nation’s going backward economically. Because the guy at the top knows less than nothing about how business or taxation works and when in trouble seeks the advice of college professors and administrators who are clueless themselves about real-world productivity. Businessmen, however, are neither listened to nor trusted.  

And then we have a further example of administrative policy based on political positioning rather than reality whereas even an ardent supporter like California Senator, Dianne Feinstein, finds fault with false spin from the White House regarding Benghazi.  

According to John Nolte of Breitbart on-line: “Speaking to The Hill newspaper, Feinstein said, “I believe that groups loosely associated with al Qaeda were” involved in the attack.
When asked if she believed the infamous anti-Islam YouTube video caused a protest that evolved into a riot, Feinstein said, “It doesn’t jibe with me.”

Mr. Nolte goes even further by reporting that: “It is widely believed that The New York Times report was nothing more than a whitewash to protect Hillary Clinton, the former Secretary of State who is almost certain to run for president in 2016.”

So, another day and another story, slowly but surely exposing why Slick Willy’s wife’s not going to get a free and easy trip to the White House. Especially because when put to just about the only test she’s ever faced, Benghazi, she blew it in spades.

And then there’s this one on one of my favorite subjects.

CBS Boston via Drudge reports that: MIT Professor Richard Lindzen is a leading international expert on climate change who says that “The changes that have occurred due to global warning are too small to account for. It has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with where we live.”

Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. The opportunities for taxation, for policies, for control, for crony capitalism are just immense, you can see their eyes bulge.”

What’s most important about this one is that a highly regarded climate expert, from MIT no less, has finally put the “climate change” farce in proper, finite, perspective. Noting that global warming  supporters are far more interested in financial gain than anything really having to do with the weather.

In conclusion, then, its probably a very good thing that fewer and fewer folks pay much attention to the incumbent’s continual speeches at all. Because other than for a continually shrinking number of believers, facts and reality are steadily refuting just about everything he says, promises, believes or promotes.

That’s it for today folks.


Tuesday, January 14, 2014


For starters today, Rush posted the following item on Facebook which I’m sure made his day, if not his whole year: “ polled the most admired people in America and in the world. They did this in 13 countries that have more than half of the world's population. In America, in last place at number 10, was Hillary Clinton. Number nine was your host, me.”
Aside from Limbaugh, the former president's wife got another bit of bad news when, according to Chris Stirewalt of Fox News on-line, newly released declassified testimony about the attacks in Benghazi state that: “Minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation’s top civilian and uniformed defense officials -- headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama -- were informed that the event was a ‘terrorist attack,’ declassified documents show.”
This could bode ill for Bill’s wife because it will likely spur her opposition to find new ways to promote her now famous loss of her cool when she screamed in a Senate hearing, “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?”
Well, the point is, as Secretary of State she was supposed to know exactly what happened. And, as a matter of fact she did, but didn’t seem to admit it, likely holding the administration's line of distorting the story for political purposes. 
However, whether it's Hillary or the incumbent, foreign affairs don’t seem to be their forte, because after giving away our hard fought gains in Iraq, we now appear to paving the way for Iran to take over control of the Middle-East.
Paul Richter of via Drudge, writes today that, “Iran’s chief negotiator Abbas Araqchi disclosed the existence of [a] document in a Persian-language interview with the semiofficial Iranian Students News Agency.
In his interview, Araqchi touched on the sensitive issue of how much latitude Iran will have to continue its nuclear research and development.
U.S. officials said Sunday that Iran would be allowed to continue existing research and development projects and with pencil-and-paper design work, but not to advance research with new projects. Araqchi, however, implied that the program would have wide latitude.”
Araqchi concluded that, “No facility will be closed; enrichment will continue, and qualitative and nuclear research will be expanded. All research into a new generation of centrifuges will continue.”
All of which means, that unless you’re dumb enough to buy a bridge  from a guy claiming to  own one connecting Manhattan and Brooklyn, Iran will keep developing their nuclear arsenal.
And if that wasn’t enough, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani “has praised a landmark nuclear deal struck in Geneva as his country's victory, telling a home crowd it effectively means the "surrender" of Western powers to Iranian demands.”
So, with all due respect to the former president's wife, when you consider the military gains made by hostile Middle-Eastern nations and their threat to their region and likely the entire world, understanding precisely what goes on every moment, everywhere all the time makes a huge “difference” in global security. 
But, when just like her former boss, she has no experience or real credentials either, her frustrated outbursts against well-earned criticism are par for the course.
That’s it for today folks.

Monday, January 13, 2014


It’s doubtful one could find an issue more petty than whether or not a governor was aware of highway lane closures his opposition learned were intended as punishment toward a local mayor. If that’s all that the left-leaning media can find to smear a conservative politician, things must be pretty good in the Republican world.
My only interest in the matter, however, stems from New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's insistence that he knew nothing about the incident until afterward, at which time he took appropriate action, firing the responsible subordinate. And that’s a very critical point.
Because, if the governor’s telling the truth, his opposition is doing huge harm to itself by pursuing an issue that can come back and haunt them immeasurably, as follows.
Yesterday, according to Fox News on-line, “New Jersey Assemblyman John Wisniewski, chairman of the legislative panel probing the closures, cast doubt on the governor's claims in an interview with Fox News. "It's hard to believe in the middle of a gubernatorial election that the governor didn't have a conversation with somebody on his senior staff about a big problem in Fort Lee," he said.” 
Going even further, he stated “The Assembly has the ability to do articles of impeachment," suggesting that would be an option if it turns out Christie was involved in a cover-up. However, Wisniewski added: "We're way ahead of that, though." 
And finally, the most significant comment: “The lawmaker acknowledged that officials have found no "direct communication" tying Christie to the scandal, but repeatedly challenged the notion that his deputy chief of staff -- whom Christie fired for her role in the closures -- did not loop him in. 
"It's unbelievable," he said.”
And that’s where shortsighted politico's don’t think through the possible ramifications of issues before making statements that appear beneficial at the time. Because whether the governor’s guilty or not, the assemblyman’s making the case that it seems unbelievable that he wasn’t “looped in” on such an important issue. 
Consequently, if a governor’s supposed to be aware of things as minor as traffic jams, what should a president know about four diplomats being killed in Benghazi? Or the details of the IRS targeting political opposition? And how about a health care tax implementation that still doesn’t work, leaving millions unsure about insurance coverage?
While the list of presidential lack of knowledge covers many other subjects, from foreign affairs to the economy to spying by the NSA, the incumbent steadfastly claims he was unaware throughout.
Therefore, if the New Jersey assemblyman believes a governor lying about a traffic jam is potentially subject to impeachment proceedings, what should the penalty be for a fabricating POTUS? 
So, by pursuing this trivial issue the assemblyman might do some minor harm to the governor, but in the process might also subject POTUS to much greater scrutiny and severely damaging backlash as well. Therefore, it’s wise to be careful what you wish for in politics, especially when making a potential fool of yourself.
That’s it for today folks.

Sunday, January 12, 2014


Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates memoir, "Duty," is getting significant media attention. Primarily because of his extremely tough criticism of the incumbent, especially regarding the military, where he noted an “absence of passion, this absence of a conviction of the importance of success that disturbed me." 

Large numbers of media types have now opined that in view of the Secretary’s many disagreements with the manner, approach and attitude displayed by the incumbent, he should have resigned immediately, rather than not only remaining, but disclosing his dissatisfaction in a “tell-all” publication.

I mention this because, it clearly illustrates to me a significant problem with those who sit on the sidelines critiquing issues and situations while having no personal experience or basis to draw from, yet babble on, regardless.

In my own case, though not in government, I’ve held senior managerial positions in several organizations where mergers or acquisitions have taken place. What was common to them all was that regardless of how closely related combined enterprises are to each other in appearance, “corporate cultures” very rarely mix, subjecting employees to discomfort and confusion at the least, or dismissal or redeployment of some sort at the worst.

Consequently, solid managers, and especially those with the well-being of their employees at heart, will do all they can to support and protect them, often including remaining in positions with acquirers they neither like nor respect if that’s the only avenue available to them. Because, once those caring managers resign, any ability to influence managerial decision-making is gone completely.

So, although having no information nor insight as to what  spurred Secretary Gates to remain with an administration he had little regard for, I believe his decision included serious concerns for those he was responsible for, and a desire to protect them from transitional damage or loss in their careers.  

And I can certainly identify with the Secretary's decision to remain whereas more than once I stayed on while incompetent slugs with checkbooks took over and ruined organizations built by myself and others. Because by leaving, the situations would have been even worse, employee devastation more drastic and far sooner, and I'd have had no opportunity to participate at all.

Consequently, I believe those in the media claiming Secretary Gates' decision to stay on was incorrect have one minor flaw in their argument. With no hands-on working experience whatsoever, they haven’t a shred of knowledge, capability, insight or expertise to draw on and therefore, ought to keep their opinions to themselves until they do.

That’s it for today folks.

Saturday, January 11, 2014


Very slow news day. Nothing really worth much mention. Thus, I went back to look at more detail in the Christie road-blockage case with the results pretty much the same as concluded yesterday.
Once made aware of the intentional closure of traffic lanes in Fort Lee, NJ, causing purposeful traffic delays, Governor Christie moved swiftly to rectify the issue, by firing his deputy chief of staff. And, according to Fox News on-line: “He [also] sidelined his former campaign manager, nixing a lucrative contract and shutting him out of a plum job at the helm of the state GOP. Two Port Authority officials previously had resigned.”
The same article then went on to note that: “By contrast, the Obama administration's meandering response to three major controversies -- the Benghazi attack, the IRS targeting scandal, and the botched ObamaCare rollout -- often has seemed less decisive.”
In that regard, the article points out that: “The administration's commitment to thoroughly investigating these issues was called into question again this week after it was revealed that the point person investigating the IRS scandal is an Obama backer who has donated thousands to his two presidential campaigns.
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on Thursday urged Attorney General Eric Holder to take the donor off the case.

By selecting a significant donor to President Obama to lead an investigation into the inappropriate targeting of conservative groups, the Department has created a startling conflict of interest, they wrote.” 

But it gets even more preposterous than that because reading further reveals totally ridiculous premises in federal law.

In response to Congressmen Issa and Jordan’s request, the Justice Department “balked” replying “it would be contrary to Department policy and a prohibited personnel practice under federal law to consider the political affiliation of career employees or other non-merit factors in making personnel decisions." 

Furthermore, a statement from the Justice Department added: “Additionally, removing a career employee from an investigation or case due to political affiliation, as Chairmen Issa and Jordan have requested, could also violate the equal opportunity policy and the law." 

So, here we have policies and laws creating governmental Catch-22’s whereas employees making politically motivated decisions harmful to the opposition can’t be curtailed or replaced because political affiliation doesn’t even exist  in the eyes of the law. 
And what’s even worse is that employees actually using political affiliation violates “equal opportunity,” which is totally ridiculous because their opposition isn’t even in the discussion and therefore has no “opportunity” whatsoever at all. 

So, I guess today’s question is where the divide comes between those running states and those heading the nation. Because both work with basically the same sets of rules. Therefore, maybe it isn't what’s in the law books that counts at all, but simply a matter of attitude between those choosing to serve the public versus those only pleasing themselves and their cause.

That’s it for today folks.