Saturday, May 31, 2014


The first thought when reading about White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney’s, resignation yesterday was news anchor Howard Beale in the movie Network,  tearing his hair out and screaming, “I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!"

Beale then thrashes around on the stage, and drops to the floor in a coma. The only difference between Carney and Beale is that Carney probably did it off-screen.

Whether it was now being forced to defend the fiasco surrounding the scandal in the VA system, promoting the climate change farce, aiding the Benghazi fabrications, denying the shrinking economy, covering up the ruination of foreign policy, shielding power abuses by the IRS, evading Russia’s regaining international status, promoting dependency on others for fossil fuels, or simply exhaustion caused by constantly protecting an incompetent boss, even the dyed in the wool Kool Aid drinker must have finally worn out.

However, in leaving the post, the payback now begins. Which will likely include significant checks for appearances, perhaps consultancy gigs and maybe a book that will get a seven figure advance although no one may ever read it except Steven Spielberg and Whoopi Goldberg.

As for myself, things won’t change at all. Because, regardless of whatever flack winds up in the press secretary’s spot for this administration, I’ll still do what I did when Carney was there and continue to either change the channel or turn the TV sound off.

That’s it for today folks.


Friday, May 30, 2014


The resignation of Eric K. Shinseki as Secretary of Veterans Affairs is somewhat complex to analyze. Whereas many of the problems were strategically hidden from him by underlings, he was unaware of their existence. But now that the situation’s exposed, he might very well be the best person to fix it quickly, due to his knowledge of the system itself.
On the other hand, since he was in charge when the mismanagement took place, he’s also responsible for the result and therefore, resignation’s called for.
The most interesting thing to me, though, was the incumbent’s comment about the secretary’s departure. According to Fox “Speaking after a meeting with Shinseki at the White House, Obama said Shinseki had offered him his resignation."
“With considerable regret, I accepted,” Obama said. “We don’t have time for distractions,” he added. “We need to fix the problem.”
Now, reading those words carefully you realize they presently also apply to the entire nation, where almost every aspect of national governance is at its worst in history. And therefore, if Shinseki should go, so should the guy who hired him. 
Which leads in once again to Bill Clinton’s wife, another failed hiree.
According to Politico, a leaked chapter of her soon to be released memoir “unloads on critics of the administration's response to the Benghazi terror attack.”
She accuses her detractors of using the tragedy as a "political tool” using a “34-page chapter on Benghazi to rebut criticisms and rebuke critics.” 
Reportedly, she wrote, "Those who exploit this tragedy over and over as a political tool minimize the sacrifice of those who served our country."And also, “seemed to make reference to the election-year select committee being led by congressional Republicans, saying: "I will not be a part of a political slugfest on the backs of dead Americans. It's just plain wrong, and it's unworthy of our great country. Those who insist on politicizing the tragedy will have to do so without me." 
Furthermore, “In the chapter, the former secretary decried the "speculation and flat-out deceit" surrounding the attack, while apparently taking responsibility and describing her grief over the four deaths as a "punch in the gut."
However, the whole chapter seems nothing but empty words on paper.
Senator Ron Johnson, R-Wis., who has clashed with Clinton over Benghazi in the past, told Fox News in response to the book excerpts: "Sounds like a carefully crafted framework for a defense that answers nothing."
And, the senator’s exactly right.
That’s it for today folks.

Thursday, May 29, 2014


All the clamor about forcing Veterans Affairs Secretary, Eric Shinseki resignation, probably doesn’t matter very much among voters. Those not knowing anything about the issue obviously don’t care at all, while those believing it’s an administration failure will vote Republican to show their displeasure, regardless.
As far as the administration itself is concerned, since the magnitude of their mismanagement is so widespread, if there’s improvement in the VA system it will be attributed to pressure brought to bear by Congress, committees and oversight. And if problems remain constant or increase, it will serve to reinforce the administration's list of incapability's. Therefore, either way, the incumbent’s side loses.
Which brings us once more to Bill Clinton’s wife.
According to “An array of Democrats — including Hillary Clinton’s allies — are meeting this week to hammer out a united front on national security issues, including a clear response to Republicans over the Benghazi controversy. They see an opportunity to wrest control of a narrative that some allies fear could be damaging to Clinton if she moves ahead with a 2016 presidential campaign.”
So, what this means is, that in typical Dem fashion, political strategies are now being devised and designed to cover-up the boss’s wife’s incapability and managerial failures. However, this time around that may not be so easy to do, as reported in The Blog in the Weekly Standard, as follows:
“Hillary Clinton will be speaking at the 1STBANK Center next week in Broomfield, Colorado. But it appears event organizers are having a hard time selling out: tickets to the event have been put on sale, and are now selling for 66 percent cheaper than the original sale price.
The sale is being offered through Living Social, which titles the event, "Ticket to Keynote Speaker: Hillary Rodham Clinton."  
While tickets for the speech are now $59, instead of the original $175, according to Living Social, despite the great sale, only 200 tickets have been purchased through the discount website. The 1STBANK Center, can apparently hold between 6,500 and 7,500 for an event.
The lack of interest in the event isn’t too surprising though. Because, unless you’re the loyalist kind of supporter, or perhaps masochistic, paying to hear Bill’s wife speak is like begging a dentist for unneeded root canals. 
That’s it for today folks.

Wednesday, May 28, 2014


Today’s items illustrate what may be a changing tide for the Dem party, and the incumbent in particular.
According to Fox a bipartisan bill making it easier to uncover abuses and fire officials at the scandal-plagued Department of Veterans Affairs easily passed in the House last week. Even Nancy Pelosi, along with 388 colleagues of both party’s, voted for it. 
However, Senators Harry Reid and Bernie Sanders [I-Vt.] blocked the same bill in the Senate, which could be a huge mistake. Because this situation concerns a group that’s served the nation without question, with personal risk at the highest possible levels, up to and including their very lives. Which means there’s no political aspect to the legislation at all.
Nonetheless, these two self-serving hacks are insinuating politics anyway, thereby further highlighting their primary interest in partisanship, regardless that a vast majority of the voting public has the proper perspective, wishing to see that military veterans always promptly receive the medical care and attention they so greatly deserve.        
On another subject, the Washington Post reported the incumbent’s latest position on Afghanistan writing that that, “The Afghan decision would be understandable had Mr. Obama’s previous choices proved out. But what’s remarkable is that the results also have been consistent — consistently bad. Iraq has slid into something close to civil war, with al-Qaeda retaking territory that U.S. Marines once died to liberate. In Syria, al-Qaeda has carved out safe zones that senior U.S. officials warn will be used as staging grounds for attacks against Europe and the United States. Libya is falling apart, with Islamists, secularists, military and other factions battling for control.”
Aside from encapsulating the significant foreign policy mistakes made to date, what stands out about this one is that the source is a newspaper that’s ordinarily highly supportive of the incumbent, regardless. Therefore, if you add this now bipartisan opinion about world affairs to the horrendous errors made here at home, it seems like the walls are finally crumbling in the protective media like they should have all along.
Along the same lines, notes that “Receiving tepid applause and a short standing ovation from less than one-quarter of the audience upon his introduction [at the West Point graduation ceremony], Obama argued for a contradictory foreign policy that relies on NATO and the United Nations while insisting that 'America must always lead on the world stage.”
Aside from the fact that the incumbent used an occasion that should have been about the graduates exceptional academic performance to date to instead pushing a self-serving political platform, it was obvious by their lackluster reaction to his presence that the majority in attendance couldn’t have cared less about him or whatever his message was.
After the contradictory opening, the double-talk continued, whereas, “Indeed, Obama's central foreign policy argument on Wednesday was that while he 'believe[s] in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being,' American leadership in his administration will continue to consist of working through international coalitions.”
So, what that means is that America will lead by becoming a member of a group, which is like saying we’re going to do it my way, unless others disagree with my decisions.
Then there was his statement that, “'You will embody what it means for America to lead,' which apparently doesn’t mean very much if he’s in charge of the nation, whereas, “Republicans in Congress have consistently argued that Obama has weakened the United States. Polls in Europe and elsewhere indicate that citizens of foreign nations have lowered their opinions of the United States since he took office.”
Therefore, West Point graduates groomed to attain positions of leadership here and abroad, were addressed by a chief executive of the nation who not only never effectively led anything in his life, but has also taken the country backward in the eyes of the world.
That’s it for today folks.

Tuesday, May 27, 2014


As suggested here quite often during the past four years, if the Republicans truly wish to win the majority of upcoming Congressional elections, and then retake the White House in 2016, all they need to is sit back, keep quiet and watch as the party of the most incompetent president ever known self-destructs.
And, as has also been mentioned here many times before, the happiest man in the entire U.S. has got to be Jimmy Carter, who formerly held the title of worst chief executive ever to serve as POTUS.
The first of the flubs reported today came from Tom McCarthy of the U.K.s Guardian via Drudge who writes, “The White House blew the cover of the top CIA agent in Afghanistan on Sunday, when the person’s name was included on a list given to reporters during a visit to the country by President Barack Obama.
The name was then emailed by the White House press office to a distribution list of more than 6,000 recipients, mostly members of the US media.
The agent in question, listed as chief of station, would be a top manager of CIA activity in Afghanistan, including intelligence collection and a drone-warfare programme under which unmanned aerial vehicles mount cross-border attacks into Pakistan.”
Apparently blame's being placed on young, inexperienced personnel in the White House, overwhelmed by the tasks associated with the incumbent’s visit to Afghanistan. Which appears to be, in its own way, as bad as the error itself. Because the question then becomes: Why should newcomers and trainees be given that magnitude of responsibility? And also confirms management failures and incompetency from the top on down in the entire administration.
Next, there’s another complete miscalculation demonstrating an inability to differentiate administrative skills versus political posturing and campaigning. This one regarding the incumbent's ill-thought-out health care tax which is now financially penalizing formerly strongly-supportive constituents.
The Wall Street Journal reports that, “Unions and employers are tussling over who will pick up the tab for new mandates, such as coverage for dependent children to age 26, as well as future costs, such as a tax on premium health plans starting in 2018. The question is poised to become a significant point of tension as tens of thousands of labor contracts covering millions of workers expire in the next several years, with ACA-related cost increases ranging from 5% to 12.5% in current talks.”
An example is that, “One pressure point is the higher costs of new mandates, especially the requirement that health plans expand coverage for dependents. For Unite Here, adding that coverage for 14,000 dependents raised costs in the health-care fund run by the union’s Las Vegas local by $26 million since 2011, said union spokeswoman Bethany Khan.”
And, “Jim Ray, a lawyer who represents the Laborers International Union of North America in benefits negotiations, said these provisions have increased construction-industry health plans’ costs by 5% to 10%, and already resulted in lower wages for some laborers.”
So, that’s what you get when politically-motivated bureaucrats attempt to take over a system that’s a thousand miles over their heads. Which is also confirmed by the fact that simple arithmetic proves that when you’re trying to give 47 million uninsured folks a free ride, somebody’s got to pay for it. And in today’s case, you can add millions of union members to the list of those stuck with the medical bills.
Then we come to another case where a huge political scam gains further press exposure.
Rowan Scarborough of writes that, “Retired military officers deeply involved in the climate change movement — and some in companies positioned to profit from it — spearheaded an alarmist global warming report this month that calls on the Defense Department to ramp up spending on what it calls a man-made problem.”
The report itself was “immediately hailed as a call to action’ by the administration.
However, “[It] was issued not by a private advocacy group but by a Pentagon-financed think tank that trumpets “absolute objectivity,” although “The research was funded by a climate change group that is also one of the think tank’s main customers.”
Then we get to the individuals involved.
"One of the CNA panel’s vice chairmen, retired Navy Vice Adm. Lee Gunn, is president of a private think tank, the American Security Project, whose prime issue is warning about climate change.
The other vice chairman, retired Army Brig. Gen. Gerald E. Galloway Jr., is a prominent adviser to the Center for Climate and Security, a climate change group.
In all, four CNA board members sit on the panel of advisers to the Center for Climate and Security, whose statements on climate change are similar to those found in the CNA report.
Other board members work in the climate change world of consulting and technology, while “The CNA advisory panel is headed by retired four-star Army Gen. Paul Kern, who sits on the board of directors of a company that sells climate-detection products to the Pentagon and other government agencies. At least two other board members are employed in businesses that sell climate change expertise and products.”
So, following one of the coldest winters on record and quite cool spring, global-warming hustlers continue coining money and fleecing the public via government-granted cash. All of which is remindful of the Wizard of Oz and his predictions made through a megaphone.
And just like in that guy’s case, this coming November I’ve got the sense that voters are going to close their own screens and make sure that when the total’s counted, his is going to get pulled too. Except it will be in the other direction, opening it to let him know they realize what a total fraud he is, and so are his cohorts.
That’s it for today folks.

Monday, May 26, 2014


Something learned in a long career in the commercial finance business is risk analysis. Because the lender’s basis for any type of capital extension is determining the probability of the borrower to pay back as agreed.
While there are many formulae, steps to be taken and procedures for determining a borrower’s capability of meeting financial obligations, one of the basics is a broad-based assessment of outcome probability. This can easily be achieved by review of historical performance of others in similar endeavors, and of course, that of specific applicants themselves. That’s because most often, regardless that although new situations might be different, the likelihood is performance procedures and outcomes will be similar and consistent with those of the past. 
Therefore, if the same analytical criteria were to be applied to the administration’s involvement in the nation’s health care system, a fundamental step would be a review of other situations in which the government participated actively. Two examples follow in that regard:
Amtrak annual report points out that in 2010, its farebox recovery (percentage of operating costs covered by revenues generated by passenger fares) was 79%. In Fiscal Year 2011, the U.S. Congress granted Amtrak $563 million for operations and $922 million for capital programs. According to its publicly listed financial statements, in 2013 the railroad’s net loss was  $1,228.2 million which followed a$1,239.4 million net loss in 2012.
Then we have an article by Devin Leonard on May 26, 2011, in  Bloomberg Businessweek about the nation’s postal service stating that: “Since 2007 the USPS has been unable to cover its annual budget, 80 percent of which goes to salaries and benefits. In contrast, 43 percent of FedEx’s (FDX) budget and 61 percent of United Parcel Service’s (UPS) pay go to employee-related expenses. Perhaps it’s not surprising that the postal service’s two primary rivals are more nimble. According to SJ Consulting Group, the USPS has more than a 15 percent share of the American express and ground-shipping market. FedEx has 32 percent, UPS 53 percent.
The USPS has stayed afloat by borrowing $12 billion from the U.S. Treasury. This year it will reach its statutory debt limit. After that, insolvency looms.”
Added to those two financial quagmires, is seventeen trillion in U.S. debt and climbing, primarily due to governmental fiscal incapability.
Therefore, one doesn’t have to be a financial wizard to quickly see what the odds are that the government can effectively manage any kind of enterprise fiscally. The probability of success is currently at zero, or less. And, while both Amtrak and the USPS are huge organizations, both are dwarfed by the health care system which currently equals 20% of the nation’s economy.
So, while all the bickering, sniping and vindictiveness flies back and forth among politicos about government’s capability of managing the health care system effectively, the ultimate outcome is quite obvious.
Because, regardless of political affiliation, the odds are perfectly clear to anyone paying attention that as history’s proven time and again, government cannot operate any kind of financial system profitably. Which means that, its only a matter of time that the past will repeat itself, whereas most often, that’s precisely what it does.
That’s it for today folks.

Sunday, May 25, 2014


Not much in the news today, however, the following story on a recurring topic has a couple of amusing reader comments that illustrate the hypocrisy of hard-core environmentalists arguments crystally clear.   
Joseph Weber,, writes that “Oil companies say a weeks-old Obama administration ruling that protects a Southwestern prairie bird has already halted oil-drilling operations in Kansas and is costing the U.S. economy tens of millions of dollars, as a GOP congressmen suggests the move is another job-killing attack on fossil fuel.
He estimated that about 3,000 people in the Kansas region will be impacted, considering it has roughly 50 oil rigs that each employ about 15 workers, who are typically married with two children.
"It's certainly a job-killer in my district," Kansas GOP Rep. Tim Huelskamp told on Wednesday. "You have to wonder if it's by design when you have a president who has declared a war on coal."
Here are the readers comments:
mallet wrote: “A bird stops drilling yet the windmills are chopping up birds by the thousands....some liberal is going to have to explain the logic of this to me." added: ‘Taste like chicken, great with BBQ sauce and a little hot sauce.”
Some things to think about.
The article itself is well worth reading, so here’s a link: Oil companies say new federal regulations on Southwest bird have halted drilling in Kansas
That’s it for today folks

Saturday, May 24, 2014


Fox reports that “Poland's former president and Nobel Peace laureate, Lech Walesa, said Friday he plans to urge President Barack Obama to take a more active world leadership role when he visits Poland in June.
Speaking to The Associated Press, Walesa said "the world is disorganized and the superpower is not taking the lead. I am displeased."
What’s truly amazing about president Walesa’s comments is the speed with which the incumbent reduced the U.S.‘s position in world leadership. It took only five years to undo what the nation and it’s citizens built over the previous 238.
Then, running true to form, while the country loses ground in every area of importance, here and abroad, Charlie Spiering of writes that, “President Obama visited Chicago last night for a fundraiser, joking with some of his closest wealthy friends that it was difficult to talk about global warming after a cold winter.”
According to the National Weather Service, it was one of the Windy City’s coldest winters in history. But nonetheless, the incumbent said, “I know it's hard to talk about global warming here in Chicago after this winter. But everybody here understands that it's changing weather patterns that are at stake here, with potentially devastating, catastrophic consequences.”
He went on to point out that “Republicans continued to “deny the science” on climate change but highlighted the progress that his administration had achieved in subsidizing solar and wind energy.” And that, “Climate change remains a generational challenge that we've got to tackle boldly. And, unfortunately, we've got a Congress that right now just can't seem to get anything done.”
Then, farther along in the article you find that the comments came while, “Obama attended a fundraiser at the home of Michael Polsky, the president and CEO of Invenergy, an energy company heavily invested in wind and solar power.”
So, as the old saying goes, “everyone has a price,” which many might feel is arguable. However, in the incumbent’s case, the evidence that he’s been bought and paid for is so obvious, it’s hard to believe anyone with more than half a brain could possibly doubt it. 
But, even so, and regardless of how much cash is as stake, it’s absolutely astounding that someone could stand in a city that just came through one of the coldest winters in its entire history and still try to sell a global warming farce. And although that may not take a lot of intellect, it certainly requires fortitude as bold as brass.   
That’s it for today folks.

Friday, May 23, 2014


Interesting dichotomy came to mind while reading the news this morning. According to Fox More than 318,000 federal workers and retirees owe just over $3.3 billion in back taxes, the Internal Revenue Service said Thursday."

Nearly 3.3 percent of all 9.8 million federal workers and retirees are behind on their taxes. Delinquent taxpayers in the overall population are estimated to be at least 8.7 percent.

While 714 people work for the House and Senate, IRS officials said the data used to compile the report does not indicate whether any of those delinquent taxpayers were members of Congress.
Additionally, 821 employees of the nation's federal courts have overdue tax bills but the data didn’t indicate whether any of them were judges.

Fox wrote that, “Agency officials said the IRS pursues delinquent taxes from federal workers the same way it goes after money that others owe. The agency will initially send at least two bills for the taxes it believes are due, a process that eventually can evolve into garnishing wages from paychecks or seizing property.”

Almost 4.1 percent of active civilian government workers owe back taxes, and “Among Cabinet-level departments, the highest rate of delinquency is at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, where 5.3 percent of workers have overdue taxes. The lowest was at the Treasury Department — which includes the IRS — where 1.2 percent of workers were delinquent.”

Now we come to the incredible part.

According to Wikipedia using information taken from reliable records, “Over the two years between April 2010 and April 2012, the IRS essentially placed on hold the processing of applications for 501(c)(4) tax-exemption status received from organizations with "Tea Party", "patriots", or "9/12" in their names. While apparently none of these organizations' applications were denied during this period only 4 were approved. During the same general period, the agency approved applications from several dozen presumably liberal-leaning organizations whose names included terms such as "progressive", "progress", "liberal", or "equality."
The list, first distributed in August 2010, suggested intensive scrutiny of applicants with names related to a number of political causes, including names related to the Tea Party movement and other conservative causes. 
Eventually, IRS employees in at least Cincinnati, Ohio; El Monte, California; Laguna Niguel, California; and Washington, D.C. applied closer scrutiny to applications from organizations that: referenced words such as "Tea Party", "Patriots", or "9/12 Project", "progressive," "occupy," "Israel," "open source software," "medical marijuana" and "occupied territory advocacy" in the case file. 
Other key words or phrases included:

Outlined issues in the application that included government spending.
Government debt, or taxes; involved advocating or lobbying to "make America a better place to live"

Had statements in the case file that criticized how the country is being run; advocated education about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights

Were focused on challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — known by many as Obamacare; questioned the integrity of federal elections.

So, while the IRS, the nation’s tax collector, assigned employees full time across the country to seek out potential political foes of the administration, federal personnel owing almost 3 1/2 billion dollars got a couple of letters and a threat of possible further action, which apparently, never happened because the tax debt is still outstanding. And if that isn’t evidence of targeting and abuse of power, among many other derelictions of duty, one has to wonder what is.

Therefore, I guess that is why Lois Lerner hid behind the 5th Amendment, refusing to testify before Congress. And if I were in her shoes, I think I’d be interested in another kind of fifth, and probably be drinking one or two daily, because she's still got a lot of explaining to do.

That’s it for today folks.


Thursday, May 22, 2014


By now, it’s become obvious to anyone anywhere, regardless of political affiliation, that the incumbent’s incapable, unfit and far too inexperienced to successfully carry out the responsibilities required by the office of POTUS. Dem’s however, because their party’s at stake, steadfastly cling to the ruse that all the scandals, miscues and fiascos are Republican caused. And up to today, that sham has held together for the most part. 
But, this time around, an issues been greatly mishandled that affects members of all major parties, to the extent that even hard-core leftists are up in arms, screaming for correction of rampant mismanagement at the Veteran's Administration.
Jim McElhatton of The Washington Times reports that, “The documents, obtained under a Freedom of Information Act request, show the problem extended back to at least the middle of the Bush administration but remained unresolved when Mr. Obama won election in 2008, and the VA was unable to say this week whether it ever took any steps to correct the problems.
According to the documents, the VA inspector general told the Obama transition team of three audits dating back to 2005 that revealed significant problems with wait times and scheduling.
One of those audits showed an instance in which the department reported 2,900 veterans waited more than a month for medical appointments. The actual figure was closer to 28,000 veterans, according to the auditors.”
Now, while the facts speak for themselves, and to date obviously the problem’s never been corrected at all, here’s what the incumbent had to say when campaigning for office the first time around:
“How can we let this happen? How is that acceptable in the United States of America? The answer is, it’s not. It’s an outrage. And it’s a betrayal, a betrayal of the ideals that we ask our troops to risk their lives for.” – then candidate Barak Obama, criticizing President George W. Bush’s management of veterans care during a 2008 stump speech.
So, once again, and absolutely true to form, the incumbent did back then what he still does now. Made a speech from notes on a cue card and then promptly forgot about the subject like he’s done regarding just about everything else since both his elections. But, I’d bet big bucks he never forgets a fund-raising date or a tee time.
On another subject, according to Fox News on-line, “On Wednesday, [Nancy] Pelosi appointed five Democrats to the [Benghazi] committee, giving Democrats another crucial mission in the months ahead of what was already a tough election year: act as Clinton’s first line of defense.”
In this case, though, the Dem strategy may turn out to be problematical. Because while planning to defend their front running presidential candidate, Bill Clinton’s wife, they may very well be heading into a buzz saw. 
It’s quite doubtful that the investigative committee head, Republican Trey Gowdy, will make many mistakes, if any. He’ll take an orderly approach to gathering information and facts, letting the evidence speak for itself. Which means Dem blustering, ranting and raving will make them appear even guiltier than they do at present, slowly but surely placing blame right where it belonged in the first place; squarely in the department then headed by Slick Willie’s spouse.
That’s it for today folks.

Wednesday, May 21, 2014


Very interesting day yesterday for Republicans. Poll results in several Congressional primaries across the nation indicate that the party’s seemingly coalescing while Dem’s have been predicting the party would splinter due to internal discord.
One of the standout results on the Dem side, while knocking out a contender for a House seat, may also indicate problems ahead for Bill Clinton’s wife.
Fox reports that, “Bill and Hillary Clinton can fundraise and stump for old friends like few others, but their political touch was not enough Tuesday to help an in-law win back her old House seat. 
Marjorie Margolies, whose son Marc Mezvinsky is married to Clinton daughter Chelsea, lost the Democratic primary for an open House seat in Pennsylvania representing eastern Philadelphia and its more affluent Montgomery County suburb.”
Now here’s the part that may be quite ominous and foreboding. “At times, her campaign rhetoric even sounded like Hillary Clinton’s, as she talked about the need to elect more women to Congress, the burden of being the early front-runner, and her own post-political career working at a nongovernmental organization (Women’s Campaign International) helping women around the world. But in a sign that voters are focused more on the future than the past—and a sign of the limitations of running on Clinton nostalgia—Brendan Boyle, an upstart 37-year-old state representative backed by labor, came from behind to handily defeat Margolies.”
And what’s even worse, the race wasn’t even close whereas “With 95 percent of precincts reporting, Boyle led Margolies, 41 to 27 percent.”
So, I guess folks are tired of political baggage and rhetoric, wanting instead someone in office they think can actually produce for them.
Then, for the second time this week, media powerhouse Charles Krauthammer said something on “Special Report with Bret Baier,”  I don’t concur with at all, as follows:
“We have a president always trying to downplay the threat which is out there, and then we're surprised there's no domestic support for robust opposition against terror…. Unfortunately, we live in a world where these people exist and the role of the president is to lead the nation in recognizing the threat – mobilizing support – to oppose it. He's done precisely the opposite. Psychologically he demobilized the country.”
Now, while his assessment of the incumbent's misleading the public resulting in a weakened, or non-existent, position regarding terrorism certainly correct, I don’t believe that “Psychologically he demobilized the country.” Terrorism’s still a major concern for significant numbers of citizens and being mentioned daily on Fox News, the very station Mr. Krauthammer appears on frequently himself. Benghazi alone is still a subject discussed in depth.
So, just because people aren’t picketing, massing in meetings or demanding immediate action doesn’t mean they don’t care or have forgotten. And their concern will be reflected in November when Republicans control both Congressional houses once more, which coupled with Trey Gowdy’s Benghazi hearings, will put the whole terrorism subject in the forefront again, where it belongs.
Then lastly, there’s an article from by Brendan Bordelon that has to be one of the most glaring example of media bias ever seen, while also demonstrating inane irrationality beyond comprehension.  
Mr. Bordelon writes that “CNN President Jeff Zucker declared his network was “not going to be shamed” into covering Benghazi and other stories without “real news value” at an awards dinner Monday.”
Then, Zucker went on to say that, “Climate change is one of those stories that deserves more attention, that we all talk about,” he explained — though he lamented the fact that “when we do do those stories, there does tend to be a tremendous amount of lack of interest on the audience’s part.”
So, here’s a guy whose own audience, which tends to be a left-leaning group, demonstrates clearly they couldn’t care less about, nor do they believe in the effects of climate change. Yet, he insists he won’t address the issues that the polls and his own viewers care about most.
Which, I suppose, is why, after reading further, I had to sit here and scratch my head in outright wonder. Because Mr. Bordelon then noted that; “Zucker, who is famous for his inept tenure as president of NBC, moved to CNN in January 2013 and almost immediately drove its U.S. operation into the ground, with the original cable news network suffering its worst prime time ratings in twenty years.”
Therefore, one would have to conclude that this guy Zucker is pretty much in a class by himself. Because most hard-core promoters of things like climate change are in it for the money. Such as AlGore and billionaire Tom Steyer. But this guy’s so devotedly dense he’s already one tanked one network and on his way to shredding another. Which is very much like what happens to lots of lunatics;  winding up drooling in rubber rooms mumbling only to themselves.
That’s it for today folks.

Tuesday, May 20, 2014


A Charles Krauthammer comment on “Special Report with Bret Baier” yesterday triggered the thought that many Republicans are on the wrong track regarding the incumbent’s performance in office.
Mr. Krauthammer said, “[President Obama] acts as if – it was the same with the IRS, eavesdropping on the AP, and all the other scandals, the Obamacare launch – he stumbled upon the presidency and discovered all this horrible stuff is happening. He’s in charge of these departments. At some point, you’ve got to ask, ‘Where has he been, and where is the competence, the elementary competence, he promised when he ran in 2008?’
And although Mr. Krauthammer’s critique is certainly correct, at this stage of the game it rates a big “So what?.” Because anyone with an iota of sense understands clearly what an absolute failure the incumbent’s been in every aspect of his tenure as POTUS.
After years of campaigning, and five on the job, there's no category of governance that’s improved, while just about every aspect and quality of life in the nation has suffered significantly.
Therefore, while by this point the failure’s crystal clear, nothing significant is likely to change no matter how many negative’s surface unless the offenses are impeachable. And what that means is, every effort should be made to ensure Republican majorities in both houses of Congress this coming November, which, according to Gallup’s latest results, is certainly possible if not probable.
Poll numbers show that “Twenty percent of Americans name unemployment or jobs as the most important problem facing the country in May, up from 14% who mentioned these issues in April. Dysfunctional government (19%) and the economy in general (17%) also rank among the top problems.
Democrats are most likely to name jobs or unemployment as the country's most important problem, whereas Republicans' top response is the economy more generally. Democrats, Republicans, and independents are about equally likely to cite dissatisfaction with government. The federal budget deficit is a much larger concern among Republicans (16%) than among independents (7%) and Democrats (3%).”
Here are the charted results:
Most Important Problem Facing the U.S., Top Responses, April and May 2014

What’s most interesting about the data is that if you analyze the categories by the importance to U.S. citizens it becomes crystal clear that the incumbent’s priorities are the complete reverse of the population's, with the environment and race relations having almost  none concerned at all.
Consequently, for those truly wanting to unseat the incumbent and his party, their best bet is to just ignore him. Because he’s doing a masterful job of self-destruction of both all alone.  
That’s it for today folks.

Monday, May 19, 2014


Texas governor, Rick Perry, visited Fox & Friends this morning discussing his state’s appeal to the business community. Listening to his quite casual listing of some of the things done to insure business growth, development and success not only illustrates clearly why his state has become a business haven, but also why other places, like New York and California are total economic disasters.
For the past ten years, Chief Executive magazine has ranked Texas first as the best state for business, which among other things, the governor attributes to four primary issues. Favorable tax structure, less regulation, limited legal system and a school system based on merit.
He also strongly emphasized the critical importance of total energy independence, although finding the Keystone pipeline from Canada acceptable for now. Believing that as many as 5 million jobs could be created if domestic oil was drilled for, he pointed out that using shale resources at present has not only already created jobs, but also lowered nitrous oxide production by 62%, while reducing ozone output by 23%, as well.
And the most frustrating aspect of watching the governor’s presentation is not only knowing that what he’s conveying is certainly correct, but that the overall U.S. economy is being strangled for purely political reasons only.
Consequently, every citizen who uses any kind fossil fuel is paying dearly because the incumbent’s been bought and paid for by environmentalists having a totally self-serving agenda. All of which makes one wonder how so many citizens of what’s supposed to be the most open and free society on earth, could be taken advantage of so easily by a handful of conmen ripping them off without an iota of concern for the truth among them. 
That's it for today folks.

Sunday, May 18, 2014


I rarely, if ever, pay attention to anything Press Secretary Jay Carney says whereas his commentary's so manufactured and biased it’s not only rarely true, but even the occasional factual statements sound like fabrications.

Then today, while searching a story on-line, I came across a link to a Carney interview back in April by a female CNN anchor who “expressed outrage over an obviously weak excuse for the gender pay gap that exists among White House staffers.”

Recently, the incumbent signed directives attempting to close the so-called gender pay gap, supposedly ensuring that women are paid the same as men for the same type of work.

However, according to the American Enterprise Institute, women who work in the administration get paid 88 cents for every dollar that men get paid.

When Carney was asked about that gap on CNN, he replied  yes, it exists but it’s still better than the national average of women getting paid 77 cents for every dollar.

At the end of the segment, the CNN host said she was “stunned” by the answer, but, the best response was found in the reader comments following the article where responder, Jimmy Hicks, wrote, “So,,, basically he's saying "Instead of smacking our women 5 times a day, we only smack them 4 times.”

And if that doesn’t pretty well sum up how this administration dodges issues, nothing does.

Then we come to today’s episode regarding Bill Clinton’s wife.

Fox News on-line reports that “Former Vice President Dick Cheney said on “Fox News Sunday” that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “bears responsibility” for the State Department’s chaotic handling of the Benghazi terrorist attacks in Libya on Sept. 11, 2012.

“She was Secretary of State at the time that it happened -- she was one of the first in Washington to know about it,” Cheney said. “I think she clearly bears responsibility for whatever the State Department did or didn’t do with respect to that crisis.”

Mr. Cheney concluded that, “I do think it’s a major issue. I don’t think we’ve heard the last of it yet.”

So, the beat goes on, and although Dick Cheney’s come under considerable negative pressure himself, there are many voters that regard him highly.

But the most important aspect of the issue is that it isn’t going to go away any time soon. And when added to all her other miscues, mistakes and indications of incompetence, Bill Clinton’s missus has an awful lot of explaining to do that her loyal backers might readily accept. 

Nonetheless, though, the other 60% of the voting public hasn’t drunk the Kool-Aid yet, and likely won’t which means that verifiable answers are needed which aren’t either Clinton’s strongest suit. So, if that’s truly the case, perhaps the younger female White House interns have a very good chance of staying safe after all.

That’s it for today folks.


Saturday, May 17, 2014


While my wife watched Fox New’s Bulls & Bears this morning, I paid little attention, focused on a book I was reading. However, I heard one of the panelists mention that under the incumbent’s heath care tax, costs were rising in general for the insured while services and practitioner selections were shrinking, which was not what the incumbent promised when promoting the law.
The panelist then went on to remind listeners that although the incumbent’s campaign promise when touting his tax was that if you liked your plan, provider or doctor, you can “keep them,” the opposite was taking place. Plan options, choices and medical providers were now shrinking.
At that point, this guy, Jonas Max Ferris, replied that the incumbent’s promises were only part of campaigning and the truth didn’t matter whereas fewer health care options were better and cheaper for a public that had more medical choices than needed. And that’s when I screamed so loud at the TV that my wife thought I’d lost it completely, and was having some kind of attack.
What had actually happened was that this Ferris enraged me altogether with his one short reply that spoke volumes about huge problems that are somehow acceptable today. Because if its proper, and according to him apparently acceptable, for candidates to lie through their teeth when seeking election, then how do voting citizens ever know what to believe and beyond that, what’s the purpose of making speeches at all?
What’s more, after looking this guy up to find that he’s an economist, investment advisor and Fox News economic analyst, if he puts no value on words delivered by the President of the United States, I’d have to assume that for him, lying’s a trivial matter and not only perfectly natural, but to be expected.
Consequently, as means to an end, anyone hearing his opinion on integrity now knows his words are valueless because he apparently has no moral base whatsoever where his self-interest’s involved. And it’s truly a shame that politics can reduce people to this level.
As far as the incumbent goes, although Ferris doesn’t think it’s important, I looked up the incumbent’s campaign promises and found the following:
According to in the Tampa Bay Sun Times, there were “37 instances we could find in which President Barack Obama or a top administration official said something close to, “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” referring to health insurance changes under the Affordable Care Act.”
Here are two samples; “Rose Garden remarks, July 15, 2009. "If you like your doctor or health care provider, you can keep them. If you like your health care plan, you can keep that too."
And, “Town hall in Grand Junction, Colo. Aug. 15, 2009: "I just want to be completely clear about this. I keep on saying this but somehow folks aren't listening — if you like your health care plan, you keep your health care plan.  Nobody is going to force you to leave your health care plan.  If you like your doctor, you keep seeing your doctor."
Now, if that's simply meaningless campaign rhetoric, then what does an outright lie look like?
If you want to see the rest, here’s a link: Obama- 'If you like your health care plan
On another matter, although I planned to find something regarding Bill Clinton’s wife each day if I can, I doubted that even she could keep shooting herself in the foot that often. But, the way things are going, perhaps she can.

Today, Joshua Rhett Miller of writes that: “As Hollywood hotshots protest the iconic Beverly Hills Hotel over its ownership by Brunei's sultan -- and his recent full-fledged embrace of Islamic law -- it turns out the Brunei government has financial connections to another American institution: The Clinton Foundation. 

The nonprofit foundation lists Brunei alongside Kuwait, Oman and Qatar as donors that gave between $1 million and $5 million through last year. The foundation confirmed the donation from Brunei was made in 2002, in connection with the construction of the Clinton Presidential Library in Arkansas.” 
According to the foundation's website: "The Clinton Foundation's impact would not be possible without the generous support of our donors. Their contributions have made a difference in the lives of tens of millions across the world."

Furthermore, “In total, the Clinton Foundation has received at least $492 million since its inception in 1997 through 2007. Other notable names or entities within the high-donation bracket include filmmaker Steven Spielberg, the Boeing Company and The Walmart Foundation.”

So, as I keep mentioning, Bill’s wife hasn’t yet officially announced entry in the presidential race, yet negative’s keep mounting anyway, almost daily. Thus I guess the question is, what else will surface when the opposition really starts looking?

That’s it for today folks.


Friday, May 16, 2014


It’s very common for politicians to promote farces for personal or political benefit, because after all, their entire existence depends completely on what they can sell to those that can help then with votes, cash, or anything else that they can beg, borrow or steal.
However, one of the most pleasurable things that can happen for one who observes politicians mistruths is when they’re caught lying outright or otherwise distorting facts. And today’s one where Mother Nature, no less, blew a hole you could push a battleship through in the global warming farce by simply performing as she’s done throughout history.
Ian Hanchett of Breitbart TV on-line reports that “McHenry and DeKalb Counties, IL were hit with a surprise snowfall earlier this morning as low pressure swept into the area. Even though the Chicago area usually hits the 70s this time of year, the temperatures aren’t forecasted to get above the 50s.  The snow isn’t the latest snowfall Chicago has ever received. In 1910, snow fell on June 2.  The last time Chicago received measurable snowfall in May was in 1989.”
Mr. Hanchett went on that: “Chicago isn’t the only place with uncharacteristic cold today. The National Weather Service has forecasted “unseasonably low temperatures across parts of the Midwest and northern Plains Friday morning, with overnight lows 10-15 degrees below normal” and “frost advisories and freeze warnings are in effect across the region.”
However, what Mother Nature also proved is that aside from tiring of people trying to enrich themselves by fabricating tales about her behavior, she has a sense of humor and irony too. Because the place she picked to totally disprove environmentalist's theory’s about global warming happens to be the incumbent’s home town.
Then, for those who follow the ranting's of the incredibly boring Harry Reid and are aware of his newest scapegoat, the brothers Koch, a new poll shows that while most voters don’t even know who Reid is, even less have heard of his current targets.
Kathleen Hunter of Bloomberg on-line writes that: “A George Washington University poll conducted March 16-20 found that almost half of likely voters nationwide -- 41 percent -- hadn’t heard of or had no opinion of Reid, while 35 percent held an unfavorable view of him. Almost two-thirds of likely voters -- 63 percent -- weren’t aware of or had no opinion of the Koch brothers, while 25 percent viewed them unfavorably, according to the same poll.”
And, “A Gallup Poll released yesterday showed that 32 percent of Americans hadn’t heard of Reid, while 41 percent held unfavorable views of him. That survey was conducted April 24-30.”
So, what the statistics indicate is that although Reid has a relatively low profile for a major public figure, of those who do know who he is, a significant percentage of them don’t like him at all.  
Then, on Wednesday, I noted that Bill Clinton’s former Press Secretary, Mike McCurry, might have floated a trial balloon by suggesting that Bill’s wife might decide not to run for president in 2016 because her life was so fulfilling as a private citizen.
Now, today, Thomas Lifson of the American Thinker writes that “Bill Clinton did more today than defend his wife, Hillary Clinton, from recent accusations leveled by GOP strategist Karl Rove that she suffered brain damage after falling in December 2012.
The former president revealed that his wife’s injury “required six months of very serious work to get over,” he said during a question-and-answer session at the Peterson Foundation in Washington.”
Mr. Lifson then quotes Bill saying, “They went to all this trouble to say she had staged what was a terrible concussion that required six months of very serious work to get over. It’s something she never low-balled with the American people, never tried to pretend it didn’t happen.”
However, “Bill Clinton’s timeline appears to differ from official comments from the State Department at the time.” Because spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, told reporters at a State Department briefing Jan. 7, 2013, about a month after Hillary Clinton’s fall and concussion occurred: “Judging by the woman we saw this morning and the workload that she’s got she seems to be fully recovered.”
Thus, judging from both Clinton’s past performance, it’s certainly questionable as to which story’s the truth. But, it nonetheless seems extremely possible that Bill’s comments yesterday about the seriousness of his wife's injuries are one more step toward her deciding to pass on a presidential run.
That’s it for today folks.

Thursday, May 15, 2014


Dems' in general, and hard-core leftists in particular, must be going bonkers today. Because there couldn’t be much worse happening than Conservative radio commentator, Rush Limbaugh, winning the "Author of the Year Award" at the Children's Choice Book Awards for his book Rush Revere and The Brave Pilgrims: Time-Travel Adventures with Exceptional Americans. But that’s precisely what he did.
Making things even more enraging for liberals, although the book’s never been a critical favorite,  one reviewer even accusing it of "disdain for even the most rudimentary standards of storytelling," it’s been an enormous commercial success.
And what’s most horrendous for his opposition, the four finalists for the award were chosen because of their places on bestseller lists, with the winner was chosen by children's votes. Which means it was the kids themselves that put El Rushbo over the top.
In accepting the honor, Limbaugh said, "I love America. I wish everybody did. I hope everybody will. It's one of the most fascinating stories in human history...and it's a delight and it's an opportunity to try to share that story with young people so they can grow and learn to love and appreciate the country in which they're growing up and will someday run and lead and inherit.”
Reading that last comment reminded me of Rush’s frequent reference to kids as having “little skulls full of mush,” meaning that their minds aren’t really fully formed yet. However, it seems like he’s succeeding significantly in getting young one's on the “right” track.

On another favorite subject, Ben Webster of London’s The Times reports that, “A leading climate scientist has resigned from the advisory board of a think-tank after being subjected to what he described as “McCarthy”-style pressure from fellow academics.
Professor Lennart Bengtsson, a research fellow at the University of Reading, said the pressure was so intense that he would be unable to continue working and feared for his health and safety unless he stepped down from the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s academic advisory council.”
Supporting the professor, “Lord Lawson of Blaby, the former chancellor of the exchequer who founded the think-tank because of his belief that the risk from global warming has been exaggerated, condemned the treatment of Professor Bengtsson.

In a letter to him yesterday, Lord Lawson wrote: “I fully understand your reason; but it is an appalling state of affairs, and your reference to McCarthyism is fully warranted.”

The most important point in the article, though, was Professor Bengtsson telling The Times that the strongest opposition had come from the U.S. “It was the climate science community in the US which took this very negatively. I think the reason is the very loaded atmosphere in the US… they would like to do something very substantial about climate change.”
Which leads right into the next item, from Chris Stirewalt’s Fox News Column:
“Billionaire Tom Steyer's environmental group is using its social media prowess to hit Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on his recent climate change comments. NextGen Climate, which Steyer founded in 2013, released a Web video on Wednesday chiding Rubio for getting caught ‘on the wrong side of the numbers’… The video challenges all potential 2016 presidential hopefuls, including Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), former Gov. Jeb Bush (R-Fla.), Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-La.) and others to answer where they stand on climate change. ‘If you are thinking about running for president, answer this: Do you stand with the facts, or do you stand with Sen. Rubio? The pressure's on,’ the video states.”
This one’s astounding in its assumption that the public are dunces, and is incredibly insulting to anyone with an IQ having more than one digit. Because what the “facts” show is that while the climate hasn’t changed at all in the past seventeen years, currently temperatures are lowering because polar shifts are now taking place as they have throughout history. 
So, I have two suggestions for billionaire Steyer. First, take a course in remedial reading. And two: Look up, read and assimilate the facts before spouting distortions in order to promote your self-interests     
And lastly, a new Fox News poll shows what might be good news for both the incumbent, and also Bill Clinton’s wife.
The results show that: “Fifty-four percent of voters think the Obama administration has been deceitful about the events surrounding the Benghazi attacks. Half say the same about former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton (50 percent).”
The reason that those numbers indicate hopefulness is because the poll was conducted by Fox, which is an audience I’d expect to have 75, 80% or more, finding both parties deceitful to the core. Therefore, perhaps things aren’t really so bad for them after all, because if the numbers are a true indication, only half the population mistrusts them, not three quarters.  
That’s it for today folks.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014


Not very much in the news today, however, a couple of items clearly illustrate how incredibly costly and ill-conceived the idea of the incumbent’s health care tax really is.
Breitbart’s Wynton Hall reports that “Democratic California Gov. Jerry Brown warned on Tuesday that his state's Obamacare program will cost California taxpayers $1.2 billion more than the state originally budgeted for.”
Now, aside from the incredible additional burden placed on working Californians, what’s most interesting is the governor’s commentary, as follows:
"I'm proud we did it," said Brown. "But we also have to take into account this thing is growing." Followed by his comment that “the Obamacare exchange, known officially as Covered California, and the state's Medi-Cal expansion represent "a huge social commitment on the part of the taxpayers of California."
So, here’s an elected official proudly proclaiming that redistribution of incomes from earning them to those that can’t or won’t, is a “commitment” made by taxpayer’s themselves. However, that isn’t what the evidence shows.
According to Fox, “Census data shows that more Americans have left California since 2005 than have come to live in it. The finding is a sharp contrast to earlier decades -- 4.2 million Americans moved to California from other states between 1960 and 1990. 
The report found that since 1990, the state has lost nearly 3.4 million residents through migration to other states, like Texas, Nevada, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Idaho, Utah, Georgia and South Carolina. The average number of residents leaving the state each year over the last decade is 225,000, the report found.”
Consequently, while the governor's patting himself on the back, and proclaiming how committed to socialism his taxpayers are, those same taxpayer’s are picking up and leaving his state in droves. So, maybe this guy borrowed a thick-lensed pair of rose-colored glasses from Bill Clinton’s wife. I guess I’ll have to ask Karl Rove about that one.
And then, on the subject of the outrageous costs of the health care tax, Brianna Ehley, of The Fiscal Times on-line notes that: “A handful of state-run exchange websites—which cost nearly half a billion dollars to build—still don’t work, nearly seven months after they first went live. Largely inoperable state exchange websites in Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon and Nevada have racked up $474 million federal tax dollars so far, Politico first reported. The costs will continue to climb as states scramble to salvage the flailing websites or transition onto the federal exchange.”
So, as each day goes by, evidence grows illustrating governmental incompetence. And this is only the set-up stage. Which leads to the really obvious and far more important question that if these government system operators can’t even figure out to how to sign folks up, what’s going to happen if someone actually needs medical help?
Then there’s today’s item about Bill Clinton’s wife, via Chris Stirewalt, Fox News on-line.
“Taking a contrarian view, Bill Clinton’s former press secretary Mike McCurry does not see 2016 Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton making another White House bid. In a recent interview with Real Clear Politics the Clinton confidant said, “The work she is doing through the Clinton Foundation with her husband and her daughter she finds terrifically rewarding . . . we all know what running for president is like. It’s kind of hanging around in Manchester, N.H., and Otumwa, Iowa, at the local Denny’s shaking hands with a lot of sometimes less-than-interesting local political people.” McCurry furthered, “So she is going to do that for the next 2½ years at the age of 65 when she could be doing all this great stuff on a global stage? I don’t know. I think that’s why she hasn’t said ‘I’m doing it.”
I mention this one because it struck me as perhaps a trial balloon, testing the reaction to a potential decision for Bill’s wife not to run for the presidency again.
And, from her perspective, that decision seems to make a lot of sense. Because, except for hard and fast, do or die, ardent supporters, her credentials don’t measure up in any way to what’s required for the office of POTUS. 
Yet, on the other hand, her significant mistakes, abuses of power and underhandedness appear in the press almost every day although she hasn’t even announced her candidacy yet. 
Consequently, although its still far too early to have real significance, it wouldn’t be a surprise whatsoever if Mr. McCurry’s correct and Willy’s wife ultimately dropped out altogether before the real embarrassment kicks in.
That’s it for today folks.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014


Things may be starting to come together for the Republican party. And if its members use their heads, 2016 can certainly be a solid presidential follow-up to big congressional wins this year, including regaining the majority in the Senate.
As far as the next presidential race goes, the past couple of days has seen critically important support developing for Jeb Bush.
The Tampa Bay Tribune reports that at a Manhattan Institute dinner in New York, “Former New York City Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, introduced Bush, saying the former Florida governor was elected with 61 percent of the Hispanic vote. ‘Wow,’ Giuliani said. ‘It just could be that our party could win an emerging group and get a big vote and change the nature of politics. Oh well, I hope we can.’ ‘There’s a lot of speculation that he may run for president,’ Giuliani said. ‘He’s got a very, very high problem to overcome: He’s got a record of success.’’’
In regard to Hispanics, a “mega-donor” Paul Singer said: “For the life of me I have a hard time understanding why people are fearful of our own heritage, our own history… The rules are you come to this country, you pursue your dreams, you create value for yourself and your families and others and great things happens to you and to our country. Why would we ignore that at time when we need to restart and rejuvenate our economy? It makes no sense to me.”
Similarly, the Washington Examiner noted that: “House Speaker John Boehner said he is ‘nudging’ former Florida [Republican] Gov. Jeb Bush to run for president and he wants to take up immigration reform legislation in small pieces, starting first with border security. Boehner made the remarks at the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce during a question-and-answer session with the editor of Texas Monthly.”
So here we have two Republican giants, Rudy and Speaker Boehner, along with a major donor, beginning a push for Jeb Bush who has a solid professional and personal history of successful Hispanic relationships. And he also applies common sense to the matter, realizing border security comes first, as opportunities are created via immigration reform.  
And then we have two of the most sensible paragraphs seen lately, via Chris Stirewalt, putting the Keystone pipeline into crystal clear perspective.
Senator Lindsey Graham’s running for re-election in South Carolina, and his campaigns running a 30-second ad, ‘Pipeline.’
In the video, “former U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins praises Graham for being the first U.S. senator to visit the oil sands in Canada. ‘Every drop of oil we get from Canada is one less drop we have to get from countries in the Middle East, countries that don’t like us.  Lindsey Graham understood that before most people understood it,’ Wilkins, a former South Carolina state House Speaker, says in the TV ad.”
Then there’s also a “60-second radio ad, also released on Monday, [that] opens to the sound of gunfire in a war zone as the narrator asserts that ‘terrorism is on the rebound.’ The voice goes on to state that despite the increase in terrorism, the U.S. continues to import nearly $400 billion a year in foreign oil.”
So, what today’s items illustrate is that Republican's, as usual, have solid ideas and easily workable solutions to putting the nation on the right track again (no pun intended.) Their problem, however, remains a huge one. How to get the premises of common sense in government and rebuilding personal opportunity across to a very, very spoiled, complacent, and lazy electorate.
That's it for today folks.

Monday, May 12, 2014


Former Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, has now written his book, as most retired politicos do as a vehicle for collecting millions in payback earned while in their posts.
In this one, he discloses further evidence of how the current White House occupants seek to distort news events, data and political positions to cover-up harmful truth’s or mislead the public in general.
Daniel Halper, in his blog in The Weekly Standard via Drudge, quotes from the new memoir, Stress Test: Reflections on Financial Crises,” as follows:
“I remember during one Roosevelt Room prep session before I appeared on the Sunday shows, I objected when Dan Pfeiffer wanted me to say Social Security didn’t contribute to the deficit. It wasn’t a main driver of our future deficits, but it did contribute. Pfeiffer said the line was a ‘dog whistle’ to the left, a phrase I had never heard before. He had to explain that the phrase was code to the Democratic base, signaling that we intended to protect Social Security.”
So, here’s another case where White House staffers employ pressure as envoys of the POTUS, to put politics and power retention ahead of the nation’s best interests. Which is why  it's now time to repeat that at present, Jimmy Carter has to be one of the happiest folks on the planet. Because although he was up to now the worst chief executive in the nation’s history, compared to the present incumbent, Carter was a world-class leader and statesman.
In other news, an Associated Press (AP)  article titled, “Hillary Clinton sees an airing of her political past as she mulls 2016 presidential run,” appeared on Fox News on-line this morning. 
In the column AP writes that, despite many negatives, “Yet many Democrats say reminders of the 1990s -- remember the booming economy? -- could help Clinton, and that rehashing her past more than two years before the next presidential election could dispense with a variety of distractions.” 
If a Republican challenger or a Democratic primary opponent invoked Lewinsky, Whitewater, cattle futures or other retro story lines in 2016, Clinton's team could try to dismiss it all as old news.
"For the majority of people, this is an eye roll," contended Maria  Cardona, a former Clinton campaign adviser."
However, whoever this Maria Cardona is, it’s likely she’s either shortsighted or not very well informed. Because, what all the combined historical events and current miscues of Bill Clinton’s wife clearly illustrate is a solid consistency in her complete incapability, coupled with total self-serviance. 
As far as the economy was concerned in Bill’s administration, its doubtful he knew the first thing about how it worked at all. Which is probably why he left economist Allan Greenspan as Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Mr. Greenspan served in that capacity from 1987 to 2006, originally selected by Ronald Reagan, kept in office by George H. W. Bush, then Bill Clinton, and all the way to George W. Bush, as well. He retired five years after Clinton left office.
So, if you want to praise the Clinton economy, you have to give the credit to a conservative Republican who was the driving force stimulating and managing that economy throughout. 
On the other hand though, if you remove solid economic performance -which Bill’s wife has nothing to do with in any way shape or form whatsoever- from the equation, what’s left is continual evidence of poor judgment coupled with total incompetence.
As a practical matter, going back to the past is actually very important, because the passage of time doesn’t mean that there will be improvement, only solid evidence of positive growth and success can to that.
Which is why in this case, what’s obvious today is total consistency of incapability on the part of Bill Clinton’s wife. Because, back when he was in office there were scandals like the Lewinsky affair, Whitewater, and cattle futures to name a few that his wife was involved in, while today there’s Benghazi and Boko Haram on the negative side with not a one on the positive. 
Therefore, when push comes to shove, although the past should surely be used to set the framework displaying her administrative ineptitude, mentioning only the present will still clearly illustrate the incapability's of Bill Clinton’s wife.
That’s it for today folks.