BloggeRhythms

With November 4th only four days it’s still anybody’s guess as to how the results with turn out, despite all the pundit speculation that it will be a Republican rout.

 

Nonetheless, a reader on an on-line a few days ago, whose name I didn’t record, posted the following list of the current administration and it’s party record to date, as a reminder of Democrat performance. I’ve cut and pasted it unedited.

 

EBOLA
ISIS ('JV Squad')
IRS
Iraq, Benghazi & Libya
Bowe Bergdahl
$17.8 trillion in debt and growing
NSA
Vets dying due to VA Neglect
REDLINE & RESET
Muslim Bros
OWS
Fast & Furious
Solyndra
ObamaCare, website & 'you can keep your Dr.'
Amnesty for 22 million illegals
"Spontaneous riots due to offensive to Islam YouTube’s"
Dream Act
Promise to close Gitmo in his 1st year
"You didn't build that"
'Shovel ready jobs
'America will be respected again when I'm president'
Eric Holder
Sending a larger delegation to Ferguson thugs funeral than PM Thatcher's funeral
Keystone Pipeline
Sequester (it was Jack Lew's idea)
Closing down the WWII Memorial
Voluntary Ebola Quarantine, Workplace Violence (not terrorism), and finally, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it"

 

Reading through the items listed, really makes one stop and think because, it seems that that many total disasters seem impossible to have been accomplished by only a handful of incompetents in a relatively short amount of time.

 

Which only goes to prove how much damage can be done by those who are truly dedicated to a cause, such as the the undoing of the nation as we know it in order to come down to the level of third-world failures.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Anyone shocked, or even slightly surprised, by the growing rift between the current administration and Israel, has simply not been paying attention to the situation for quite a long time.

 

Shown below is an item from breitbart.com columnist, Ben Shapiro, which was reprinted here back on March 13, 2012, as follows:

 

“President Barack Obama’s longtime pastor at Trinity United Church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, has announced his support for the anti-Semitic “March to Jerusalem” at the end of March. The White House has refused comment.

 

The “March to Jerusalem” is a massive campaign designed to send anti-Israel partisans across Israel’s borders and into Jerusalem. The National Conference on Jewish Affairs reports Iran's government is involved in the organization of the event and plans to send thousands of participants in caravans, whose schedules have been published by the Quds News agency.”

 

Consequently, the movement away from Israel and towards Iran, up to and including Iran’s development of nuclear weapon capability, seems perfectly natural considering the incumbent president’s apparent religious proclivities.  

 

On a similar aspect of foreign policy, Mark Landler, White House correspondent for The New York Times writes that: “One day this month, as the nation shuddered with fears of an Ebola outbreak and American warplanes pounded Sunni militants in Syria, President Obama’s national security adviser, Susan E. Rice, invited a group of foreign policy experts to the White House to hear their views of how the administration was performing.

 

“She was peppered with critiques of the president’s Syria and China policies, as well as the White House’s delays in releasing a national security strategy, a congressionally mandated document that sets out foreign policy goals. On that last point, Ms. Rice had a sardonic reply.

 

“If we had put it out in February or April or July,” she said, according to two people who were in the room, “it would have been overtaken by events two weeks later, in any one of those months.”

 

Now, let’s bear in mind that the article’s source is the New York Times. As solid a liberal media ally than any Democrat politico could possibly hope for, and having a strongly partisan readership. Nonetheless, though, the comments following the text indicate that even this hard core, usually dependable base of readership, is seriously dissatisfied with the “leader” they elected.

 

Examples of their comments illustrate their frustration far better than this writer, so they’ve been posted below: 

 

MFW of Tampa, FL wrote: “Yes, of course its a big joke over there. What newspaper endorsed and promoted a "community organizer" to be our president? What news organization papered over not only his lack of experience, maturity, temperament, and judgment, but his basically anti-social personality?

 

“We are living through some of the most dangerous moments in our history. Not because the world is any worse, that is demonstrably not so. Despite the tone of this story ("All of these problems! Who could cope!"), it is the talent we've tasked with the problems that is lacking.

 

“Susan Rice, a serious contender for least talented individual (and a slam dunk for most deceptive) ever to serve in the federal government, can't produce a national security strategy because events would overtake it. This only proves she doesn't understand what strategy even means.

 

Your article reveals that you are finally on to this White House. Sadly, we needed you to report this stuff in 2008. And certainly by 2012.”

 

Then came this one from John in Atlanta: “Let's not forget that Barack Obama never held a management job of any kind prior to taking on the most challenging executive leadership job in the world. He had never managed a shift at a fast food restaurant, never run a small business, and certainly never managed a division of a company or a military unit. In that context, can it be surprising at all that his administration is in total disarray?”

 

So, to repeat. While dissatisfaction such as that displayed is quite commonly found on more conservative outlets, such as Fox or Breitbart, the negativism is far more rare on bastions of liberalism like the flagship newspaper the New York Times. Which may be one of the best indications that next week’s elections may truly wind up to be a major Democrat awakening of serious trouble ahead for them, nationwide.  

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Less than a week remaining before the midterm elections finds Democrats scrambling to entice supporters to vote, whereas numerous polls show Republicans poised to increase their majority in the House, and likely take control of the Senate, as well.

 

One of those working hardest to drum up the numbers needed at the polls is Bill Clinton, who’s worth mentioning because of something he said while campaigning this week.

 

Following messages delivered last week by First Lady Michelle Obama and his wife, former Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton, he “urged voters not to vote their fears about ISIS or Ebola,” alleging that that’s what Republicans are encouraging them to do. And that’s something that needs to be read twice, or more, to be sure to fully comprehend what the former president is actually suggesting.

 

While the ISIS uprising is the direct result of the incumbent president’s misjudgments in foreign policy, fully supported by Democrats in Congress, and the handling of the Ebola crisis is fraught with administration mistakes, confusion, ineptitude and  inconsistencies, the former president is trying to convince supporters that Democrat incompetency doesn't matter.

 

And, obviously, as far as he’s concerned, Republicans pointing out the truth is far less important than continuing to vote for candidates who are incapable of fulfilling the responsibilities they’re charged with carrying out.

 

At the same time, an aide valiantly tried to undo the damage that Bill’s wife did to herself, and her likely presidential campaign, when she proved last week that she has no idea whatsoever about how the nation’s economy works.       

 

The aide claimed her remarks at a Maloney event, wherein she stated that “corporations and businesses’ don’t ‘create jobs” doesn’t make much sense as a concept. Instead, what she’d meant to refer to was “tax cuts” for corporations.

 

Now, considering that she’s been a political animal for most of her adult life, and an ardent Democrat as well, it makes perfect sense that she has no clue as to how businesses, or the entire US economy, actually work. Therefore, it’s also perfectly logical that she can’t grasp the proven concept that reducing corporate taxes frees income for reinvestment, expansion, growth, hiring and ultimately, a bigger pie for everyone. Including far more taxes paid to the government from the business expansion, more employment and rising payrolls.  

 

But what’s even more ridiculous about her lack of knowledge regarding basic business economics is that to date, “she and her husband have raised about $1 billion from U.S. companies and industry donors in support of various policy and political goals over the past two decades, according to a  Wall Street Journal analysis.”

 

So, what the evidence indicates is that, although she has no idea at all of where money comes from, or how a capitalist society functions, she’ll gladly take every penny ever offered to her, while remaining totally ignorant of how, where, or why it was derived.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

While today’s topic, illegal immigration, is critically important on its own, what’s of even more concern is the source of the following story that appeared on foxnews.com.

 

Fox says, “The Associated Press reported last week that the new federal contract proposal from the Homeland Security Department would allow the government to buy enough supplies to make as many as 34 million immigrant work permits and residency cards over the next five years. The move appeared to suggest that the administration is preparing for a surge of work permit applications from illegal immigrants.”

 

The possibility of a flood of new illegals arriving here prompted Kenneth Palinkas, who is president of the National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council, to issue a press release stating his belief that the move indicates the administration is planning to enact “massive unilateral amnesty” after the midterm elections.

The reason his reaction is far more important than most others is, he’s not a politician, isn’t running for office, doesn’t have a voting constituency but instead, holds a post that provides first-hand information about illegal's on a daily basis and is one of those ultimately responsible for dealing with the problems they create. 

 

In that regard, Mr. Palinkas advised that “If you care about your immigration security and your neighborhood security, you must act now to ensure that Congress stops this unilateral amnesty. Let your voice be heard and spread the word to your neighbors. We who serve in our nation’s immigration agencies are pleading for your help – don’t let this happen. Express your concern to your Senators and Congressmen before it is too late.”

While the union “represents 12,000 officers of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,” it’s also the agency responsible for processing visas and other immigration papers.” Therefore, Mr. Palinkas is certainly qualified to observe that, “federal immigration officers are already struggling to complete their mission, and the new contract indicates things could get worse.”

Most damning of all was his summation in which he stated that, “Whether it’s the failure to uphold the public charge laws, the abuse of our asylum procedures, the admission of Islamist radicals, or visas for health risks, the taxpayers are being fleeced and public safety is being endangered on a daily basis.”

So, once again we have evidence of the difference between misguided liberal ideologies and the real world. Which reminds me of the Dean Martin line: “If you are going to hit me with logic, then I don’t want to chit chat,” that ought to be adopted by Democrats as their party slogan.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

With the mid-term elections only a week away, and many Democrat candidates in serious trouble across the nation, one has to wonder about a usually reliable bloc of voters that may have good reason to abandon the party.

 

Because, although several huge mistakes by the administration are currently making headlines, taking up significant amounts of news-space, such as the ISIS uprising, IRS targeting, hordes of illegals crossing the border and now, Ebola, that doesn’t mean voters are forgetting other horrendous slights directed at formerly ardent supporters: American Jews.  

 

Mcdowellnews.com reprinted an AP column reporting that: “Still miffed over negative comments that Israel's defense minister made about Secretary of State John Kerry's Mideast peace efforts and nuclear negotiations with Iran, the Obama administration this week refused his requests to meet several top national security aides, U.S. officials said Friday.

 

While Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon did see Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, the officials said the White House and State Department rejected Israeli proposals for meetings with Vice President Joe Biden, national security adviser Susan Rice and Kerry on his five-day trip to the United States. The administration had sought to stop Ya'alon from seeing Power but the objections were made too late to cancel the meeting, according to the officials.”

 

It’s been quite obvious for a very long time that this administration has never been as friendly toward Israel as any preceding it, except perhaps for Jimmy Carter’s. But this one seems to go out of its way to employ slights as an indication of its disdain.

 

While Israel’s prime minister has been warning of Iran’s nuclear buildup for several years, getting virtually no support from the US president, “This week's refusals [for high-level meetings] come amid increasingly strained U.S.-Israel relations, particularly over criticism of Kerry by several members of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's cabinet, including Ya'alon.

 

Earlier this year, Ya'alon infuriated officials in Washington with comments accusing the administration of being weak on Iran and questioning the U.S. commitment to Israel's security. That followed reports that Ya'alon had criticized Kerry for being unrealistic and naive in trying to forge an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal."

 

Therefore, while the administration continues to increase tensions between itself and Israel, Iran moves closer to nuclear weapon development as Palestinian's gain White House support, it doesn’t seem probable that Americans of Jewish persuasion will let these events occur unnoticed.

 

Which suggests that this once totally reliable voting bloc will now likely be added to the continually growing list of those totally mislead and abandoned by a political party that’s no longer worthy of either their votes or trust.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

The comment made yesterday by Bill Clinton’s wife, about US job creation is so ridiculous and far from the truth that it continues to remain in my thoughts.

 

A primary question arises as to whether Bill’s spouse is so out of touch with the nation’s history and its form of government that she should even propose such a premise, or is she simply adding her agreement to the incumbent’s grossly incorrect similar statement in 2012, made in the context of his belief that wealthy citizens should pay higher taxes to serve the public good.   

 

In Bill’s wife’s case, she told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.”

 

“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” she said, “You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics. That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.”

 

What’s most interesting, is that even the incumbent, who has little, if any, understanding of how the economy actually works, had a fiscal motive in his 2012 speech: movement toward higher taxes from the successful. Bill’s wife, on the other hand, had nothing to offer aside from proof of her sheer ignorance regarding revenue production issues. 

 

However, simply for the sake of examining Bill’s wife’s belief that business doesn’t create jobs, how can she explain the employment opportunities arising from Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Edison’s inventions, PT Barnum’s creativity or Henry Ford’s? How about Thomas Watson's building of IBM? 

 

Was the government behind Ray Croc when he started McDonalds, or H Ross Perot at EDS? 

 

In more recent years, quite a few household names built enterprises having no attachment to government whatsoever, except when they paid significant taxes and/or fines. Including, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Steve Jobs, Steve Wynn, Herman Cain, the Koch Brothers, George Steinbrenner, Mark Cuban, Oprah Winfrey, Martha Stewart, Joan Rivers, Oracle founder and CEO Larry Ellison and Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg.

 

On the other hand, what has government accomplished that’s put so much as a dime in taxpayer’s pockets? 

 

Solyndra, Cash for Clunkers, the GM bailout, Obamacare, the EPA, Fast & Furious, the IRS, Ebola, Benghazi, scandals at the VA and NSA, the growth of the welfare state, illegal immigrant hordes and the global-warming farce have all been huge financial fiascos, while no income-producing successes exist.

 

Therefore, although she's got still got two years to go before the next presidential election, it might do  Bill’s wife well if she took a few courses in economics and American history before making speeches that make her sound like she flunked Obama-Talk 101. 

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

While news that the administration is weighing the possibility of allowing Tehran the right to maintain uranium-enrichment facilities comes as no surprise, whereas that eventuality has been expected by this writer for years, another item sheds even more light on the truth of the matter.

 

Alana Goodman of the Washington Free Beacon, reports that: “A food cart that hands out anti-Israel propaganda with each of its sandwiches has received funding from a foundation run by Secretary of State John Kerry’s wife.

 

“Conflict Kitchen, a pop-up restaurant located at the intersection of Carnegie Mellon University and Pittsburgh University, seeks to use food to educate locals and college students about countries that are allegedly in conflict with the United States.

 

“It recently began serving Palestinian food wrapped in leaflets that include quotes from Palestinians defending terrorism and opposing the existence of Israel.

 

“How can you compare Israeli F-16s, which are some of the best military planes in the world, to a few hundred homemade rockets?” states one quote on the wrapper, a reference to Hamas rocket attacks against Israelis. “You’re pushing them to the absolute  extreme. So what do you expect?”

 

So, as is the case with many things politicians try to hide, the truth eventually surfaces in one way or another with the passage of time. And in this situation, it’s certainly doesn’t seem like an accident that Secretary Kerry not only married money again, but someone also in tune with his anti-Israeli ideology. 

 

While not on precisely the same subject, another ideological similarity arose today. This one involving Bill Clinton’s wife.

 

Breitbart TV reports that, “Appearing at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Hillary Clinton told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.

 

“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said.

 

“You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics,’” she continued. “That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.”

 

“You know, one of the things my husband says when people say ‘Well, what did you bring to Washington,’ he said, ‘Well, I brought arithmetic,’” Clinton said, which elicited loud laughs from the crowd.”

 

So, here we have someone who’s gone to extremes to convince her corps of followers (and anyone else who’ll listen) that she’s very electable. Because, if nothing else, she promotes that she's quite different than the incumbent policy-wise, and therefore, much better for them and the nation altogether.

 

Yet, while making a major speech in support of a gubernatorial candidate, she proved once again that she not only knows absolutely nothing about how the nation’s economy functions, but repeated one of the biggest mistakes the incumbent himself ever made by showing the American public he didn’t have a clue as to how a capitalist society works either.

 

Which only goes to prove that indeed, Bill’s wife’s election as president would mean four more years of precisely what we have at present, except that her extensive travel would then be on Air Force One again.  

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

It was only a matter of time, and that time has come quickly, before the administration's gross mismanagement of the Ebola crisis would surely endanger the US population.

 

Due to “political correctness,” the incumbent’s administration has irrationally continued to resist a travel ban and quarantines of those arriving here from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, hot spots for the epidemic that has killed thousands in Africa. Although screening of arrivals has been increased, ensuring that they are monitored for 21 days, the incubation period for the deadly disease.

 

Today, however, www.foxnews.com/politics reports that, Dr.Craig Spencer, who recently returned from treating Ebola patients in Guinea, became the first person in the city to test positive for the virus Thursday in New York City.

 

Before being hospitalized, he “had traveled on the A and L subway lines Wednesday night, visited a bowling alley in Williamsburg, and then took a taxi back to Manhattan.” Then was, “rushed to Bellevue Hospital Center and placed in isolation at the same time as investigators sought to retrace every step he had taken over the past several days.”

 

It’s known that, “At least three people he had contact with in recent days have been placed in isolation. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which dispatched a team to New York, is conducting its own test to confirm the positive test on Thursday, which was performed by a city lab.”

 

Now, it’s highly probable that despite concerted screening efforts, the dreaded disease would still have a chance to enter the country via a multitude of ways. There are far too many travelers to meticulously inspect every individual thoroughly, while others would surely slip through the cracks. Nonetheless, refusing  to take the simplest of steps, such as a temporary travel ban from known  Ebola hotbeds, is far beyond rational comprehension, perhaps even criminal. 

 

A reader, “otay,” on www.thegatewaypundit.com, put it this way: “Politically correct insanity is more dangerous and contagious in this country than Ebola.”

 

A confirming thought on the subject of presidential ineptitude appeared in an article by Adam Kredo on freebeacon.com, regarding comments by Ali Younesi, senior advisor to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, who said: “Obama is the weakest of U.S. presidents, he had humiliating defeats in the region. Under him the Islamic awakening happened.”

 

In a Farsi language interview with Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency, Younesi said, “Americans witnessed their greatest defeats in Obama’s era: Terrorism expanded, [the] U.S. had huge defeats under Obama [and] that is why they want to compromise with Iran.”

 

Then, apparently without realizing what he’d said, he endorsed conservatives by stating, “Conservatives are war mongers, they cannot tolerate powers like Iran. If conservatives were in power they would go to war with us because they follow Israel “

 

Which means that, Mr. Younesi understands clearly that if conservatives held control in the US, not only wouldn’t Iran have nuclear capability, they’d be of far less threat to any of their neighbors, including Israel and Saudi Arabia.

 

As far as ineptitude goes, though, the incumbent’ surely not alone. It runs in the family.

 

Yesterday, his wife flubbed on the campaign trail, apparently confusing Colorado Democrat Senator, Mark Udall, with his Republican opponent.

 

Speaking in Denver Thursday at a campaign event for Udall, who’s in a heated battle with Republican Representative, Cory Gardner, she touted Udall’s Senate record, calling him a “fifth-generation Coloradan.”

 

Going on to claim that “Mark understands what makes this state special,” turned out to be problematical, however, because not only isn’t Udall a “fifth-generation Coloradan” he was in fact born in Arizona, while his father, former Representative, Mo Udall, served as a congressman from that state for decades.

 

So, what today’s items point out from a practical and personal viewpoint is, that if I changed my perspective in typing these entry’s to reflect what the current administration does correctly, I could save hours of work daily, never having to type anything but the title and the following:

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Confirming data posted here over the past four years, a major figure in climatology has now taken a very firm stand against the fictions proclaimed by global warming zealots, as follows: 

 

Jason Taylor of www.express.co.uk, writes about John Coleman, co-founder of the Weather Channel, who “shocked academics by insisting the theory of man-made climate change was no longer scientifically credible.” He further stated that, “what 'little evidence' there is for rising global temperatures points to a 'natural phenomenon' within a developing eco-system.”

 

In an open letter attacking the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Mr. Coleman wrote: "The ocean is not rising significantly. The polar ice is increasing, not melting away. Polar Bears are increasing in number. Heat waves have actually diminished, not increased. There is not an uptick in the number or strength of storms (in fact storms are diminishing.)”

 

He claimed that, “I have studied this topic seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid." And, “he based many of his views on the findings of the NIPCC, a non-governmental international body of scientists aimed at offering an 'independent second opinion of the evidence reviewed by the IPCC.'

 

In conclusion, he added: "There is no significant man-made global warming at this time, there has been none in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future. Efforts to prove the theory that carbon dioxide is a significant greenhouse gas and pollutant causing significant warming or weather effects have failed. There has been no warming over 18 years." 

 

Additionally, climate expert William Happer, from Princeton University, supported Mr Coleman's claims, saying, "No chemical compound in the atmosphere has a worse reputation than CO2, thanks to the single-minded demonization of this natural and essential atmospheric gas by advocates of government control and energy production.

 

The incredible list of supposed horrors that increasing carbon dioxide will bring the world is pure belief disguised as science."

 

What’s more, “In 2010 a high-level inquiry by the InterAcademy Council found there was "little evidence" to support the IPCC's claims about global warming. It also said the panel had purposely emphasized the negative impacts of climate change and made "substantive findings" based on little proof.”

 

So, as usual for political frauds who employ questionable tactics to stimulate their voting base, such as the current administration, they may generate significant support from their efforts at selling fables. Yet, there are other kinds of backing they severely lack, such as real credibility developed from documentable facts and historical evidence.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Looking at the state of the nation, one has to wonder about how intellectually dim Democrat leaders truly are. Because they not only don’t learn from their own mistakes, it appears they work very hard at trying to find ways to create new horrendous blunders.

 

As part of last ditch effort’s to inflict significant damage on the American public before leaving office in two years, the incumbent’s planning to open the nation’s doors to hordes of illegal aliens right after the November elections are over.

 

According to www.washingtontimes.com, “The immigration agency earlier this month had solicited a printer able to handle a “surge” of 9 million green cards “to support possible future immigration-reform initiative requirements.

 

In an ordinary year, about 1 million green cards are issued, and over the life of this contract the company is expected to produce up to 34 million cards, a figure representing an increase of the population of the United States by 10 percent.”

 

The cards are part of the incumbent’s promised “executive actions” to bring about an enormous wave of amnesty which many believe are a “transparent” ploy to "expand the Democrat voter base and create a permanent majority."

 

However, bearing in mind that this is a scheme concocted by Democrat minds, there’s also another side to the story.  A Gallup survey finds that 74 percent of Americans want the level of immigration to stay where it is, or be reduced. Which means that the only one’s in favor of the strategy is the hard core liberal base, which at only 24% in support of the maneuver suggests that even the number of ardent backers is shrinking.

 

But, what’s even more indicative of the shortsightedness of the incumbent’s strategies, as usual, is that he’s creating a Catch 22 by his own refusal to accept how the US actually works. Because although it seems he certainly realizes that the Republicans have a decided edge in the upcoming elections, and holding back his immigration plot until after November 4th, he still intends to go through with his vastly unpopular scheme, expecting to increase Democrat voters. 

 

However, a Republican win means a growing economy and, therefore, a significant boost to hiring. And that in turn, means more immigrants, illegal or not, are going to gain employment. More employment, and higher wages to follow, mean more credit will be given to those responsible for the opportunities provided. And that means more Republican supporters in the long run, just like all those successful Cubans in Florida. 

 

So, once again the incumbent’s about to shoot himself and his party in the political foot. And what’s really ironic about one who’s supposed to be so brilliant, is that he’s loading the gun himself.  

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Yesterday afternoon, on the Fox News business channel, a business pundit was interviewed whose name I unfortunately didn’t catch. He was asked, however, what the business community expected if the Republicans were to actually win both houses of Congress in November, as expected by most polls.

 

Without hesitation, the pundit replied that most importantly, the US economy would rebound significantly, and the overall national productivity growth would be huge. Examples he cited included, continuing reduction in the price of oil, due to expanded fracking and opening of the Keystone pipeline, and trimming the power of the EPA. Those steps alone would put multiple billions back in citizen’s pockets, he said, that could now be spent on food, rent, personal items, automobiles and everything else that would spur the economy. At the same time creating countless new jobs due to the growth.

 

Expanded job growth, in turn, would increase government revenue, decreasing the national debt, while lowering unemployment costs as well. More people could then afford healthcare, while the medical equipment sector would also grow, due to Republican repeal of the device tax. 

 

New business development would blossom whereas the corporate tax rate would be lowered to be more competitive internationally, while the trillions of dollars parked overseas would come back to the US, helping make things better here very quickly.

 

While rattling off the short list of benefits took the pundit only a couple of moments, and didn’t include countless other things that would change for the better, there really wasn’t anything surprising in his commentary. What did make one stop and think, however, is that while the cures for the nations economic ills can be cured very quickly by a Republican win in November, every one of the problems now facing the nation were deliberately caused by a Democrat POTUS who took the nation down simply to appease a political bloc, while strangling everyone else financially in the process. 

 

Along the same lines, an on-line segment from Rush’s radio show yesterday offered a similar commentary from a major Democrat icon, Tina Brown, as follows:

 

Rush said, “She was on Morning Joe today. She's the founder and former editor of The Daily Beast and Newsweek, and founder of Tina Brown Live. They were having a discussion about recent polls that showed the Democrats are struggling with women in the 2014 midterm races. And we've mentioned this, that this so-called War on Women is actually coming back to bite the Democrats in a lot of ways, but this sound bite -- well, just hear it on your own. I don't even want to characterize it before you hear it. She was talking to the cohostette, Mika Brzezinski, who said, "Tina, what do you think is behind these numbers, the Democrats losing women?"

 

Ms Brown answered: “Particularly for women, I don't think he makes them feel safe. They're feeling unsafe. They feel unsafe economically. They're feeling unsafe with regard to ISIS. They're feeling unsafe about Ebola. What they feel unsafe about is the government response to different crises. And I think that they're beginning to feel a bit that Obama's like that guy in the corner office who's too cool for school, calls a meeting, says this has to change, doesn't put anything in place to make sure it does change. Then it goes wrong, and he's blaming everybody.”

 

The exchange is perfectly fitting, whereas it gave Rush the opportunity to present one of the most comprehensive descriptions of typical Democrat methodology one could find. 

 

Rush explained it this way. “Look, she's exactly right about this. I've been talking about this. Obama and the left, they think they make a speech on something, it's fixed. They write a position paper on something, it's fixed. They call a meeting on something, it's fixed, mission accomplished. Got an Ebola program, go make a speech, done. Got a problem with the economy, go out and do a jobs speech and then add to it with a jobs seminar at the White House featuring columnists from New York Times, job done, mission accomplished. But, of course, nothing's changing, nothing's being accomplished. Everything is falling apart. Everything is fraying, and it's not the fault of the Republicans. It's a golden opportunity. The Democrats are losing in the polls for women.”

 

And that, in a nutshell is not only the story of the incumbent’s entire presidency, but more likely, his entire existence. Because, from the start it’s been all talk and virtually zero action. While in the real world everything promised has crumbled around him, ignored and unsolved.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

While Debbie Wasserman Schultz appeared on “Fox News Sunday,” predicting the Democrats would hold on to the Senate in November, some other interesting items appeared in the news.

 

According to Reuters, “President Barack Obama made a rare appearance on the campaign trail on Sunday with a rally to support the Democratic candidate for governor in Maryland, but early departures of crowd members while he spoke underscored his continuing unpopularity.”

 

At the same time, Peter Sullivan and Bernie Becker titled a column in The Hill via Drudge: “Clinton Democrats' falling flat”

 

The authors state that, “Self-proclaimed Clinton Democrats are struggling this election cycle, and not even their powerful namesakes may be enough to save them.

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton have tried to turn on their charms to help centrist Democrats in Kentucky and Arkansas. But as candidates in both states are slipping, help from the party’s preeminent power couple is falling short.”

So, with the mid-term results only 16 days away, the prospects for Dem’s at present seem quite dim. However, as history illustrates, until all the votes are counted nothing about any kind of election is certain. 

Nonetheless, aside from the present Congressional races, voter’s reactions may be indicating something else, as well. Because, despite all the fawning anticipation gushing from the main-stream media about Bill Clinton’s wife expected run for the presidency in 2016, which they believe she’ll win without doubt, at present both Clinton’s together seem to be losing their clout.

And what’s even worse for her is the fact that back in 2008, when she was thought to be a shoo-in presidential candidate, an unknown, inexperienced, nobody crawled out of the Chicago woodwork and stole the nomination right out from under her. Which means it’s very possible, the same thing might very well happen again next time around. Especially if her popularity slide continues.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Yesterday, an article in the New York Times made one stop and think again about the health care tax. Whereas it not only doesn’t seem to have solved any financial problems for the uninsured, but made their situation far worse instead.

 

Abby Goodnough and Robert Pearoct wrote a column headed, “Unable to meet the Deductible or the Doctor.”

 

The authors state: “About 7.3 million Americans are enrolled in private coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces, and more than 80 percent qualified for federal subsidies to help with the cost of their monthly premiums. But many are still on the hook for deductibles that can top $5,000 for individuals and $10,000 for families — the trade-off, insurers say, for keeping premiums for the marketplace plans relatively low. The result is that some people — no firm data exists on how many — say they hesitate to use their new insurance because of the high out-of-pocket costs.”

 

However, aside from making it more financially difficult for those now forced to pay quite costly deductibles, needed or not, the healthcare tax has caused a heavy financial penalty on them as well. 

 

In that regard, on the Health Insurance website Linda Riddell writes in “Permalink to Uninsured” about how much a doctor’s office visit costs, as follows:

 

“In the United States, uninsured people under age 65 who had a physician office visit in 2009 spent a median of $194. That means half of the people who saw a physician spent less than $194, and half spent more. On average, uninsured people under age 65 spent $630 on physician office visits.” 

 

Furthermore, the Debt.org website says, “In 2011 in America, the average charge for an office visit for an established patient, level 3, requiring approximately 15 minutes with a doctor, was $104. The average total paid was $69.  Some more examples: a flu vaccine incurred an average charge of $25; a cholesterol test has an average submitted charge of $72; and a glucose tolerant test (GTT) has a submitted charge of $60.

 

Office Visit, New Patient, Level 1 – Very minor problem requiring counseling and treatment, may require coordination of care with other providers – approximately 10 minutes with doctor – $68. 

 

Office Visit, Established Patient, Level 5 – Complex medical problem(s) requiring comprehensive evaluation- approximately 40 minutes with the doctor – $234.”

 

Consequently, while still responsible for paying for routine doctor visits themselves, up to $10,000 if married, those needing minimal to no care at all, are now stuck with premiums the government will seek to collect via the IRS to make the program work as structured. Whereas before, these same people simply visited a hospital emergency room and went home unencumbered.  

 

Therefore, now that significant numbers of voters have had some real-world experience with the program, it’s no wonder the incumbent’s holding back the current health care tax enrollment information until after the mid-term elections next month.

 

For today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife, Peter Foster, in Washington for the UK’s The Telegraph, headed a column: "American Way: Hillary must explain why a second Clinton presidency would be good for America."

 

Mr. Foster writes: “Her first problem is the Obama legacy. If a salesman knocks on the door and sells you a package marked “hope and change” and you open the box only to find it empty, you would be forgiven for not buying a box marked “fresh start” from the same company, no matter who the salesperson was.”

 

While the column goes on to cite several examples proving the author's point, a reader’s comment provides a succinct, amusing summation of Mrs. Clinton's presidential qualifications.  

 

Gene Schwimmer wrote: “Here's Hillary's slogan: "For those for whom one Benghazi was not enough"

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

As time passes by, one has to wonder if the administration has some overriding, unintelligible, beneficial purpose in selecting unqualified people for critically important jobs, or are simply the dumbest bunch of incompetents ever amassed together.

 

Faced with the growing Ebola crisis, and needing substantial help in stemming the outbreak, when the decision was made to appoint a leader for the project, instead of searching for the most medically qualified individual they sought out a political hack instead.

 

Although the one they chose certainly has been personally successful within, and outside, the Democrat party, he doesn’t seem to posses a whit of knowledge or skill about anything having to do with healthcare whatsoever. 

 

The appointee, Ron Klain, however did serve as chief of staff to Al Gore and later Vice President Biden. And also, one attorney general, Janet Reno. Later he was a senior White House aide to President Obama. 

 

After leaving the White House for the private sector in 2011, Klain became a partner in the Washington lobbying firm of O'Melveny & Myers. However, as far as his new post is concerned, since he himself wasn’t a registered lobbyist, it means the White House ban on hiring lobbyists doesn't apply. 

 

Going through his background, though, some very interesting facts arise. Such as: As Joe Biden's chief of staff, Klain had a key role in implementing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and signed off on one of its most controversial projects: a $535 million loan guarantee to solar panel maker Solyndra.

 

He also supervised the allocation of funds in the stimulus act, which still haven’t done a single thing for the economy, as evidenced by a recap in an article by John F. Cogan, John B. Taylor And Volker Wieland in the Wall Street Journal on Sept. 17, 2009, titled “The Stimulus Didn't Work.”

 

The authors explain that, “The data show government transfers and rebates have not increased consumption at all.” And, “Direct evidence of an impact by government spending can be found in 1.8 of the 5.4 percentage-point improvement from the first to second quarter of this year. However, more than half of this contribution was due to defense spending that was not part of the stimulus package. Of the entire $787 billion stimulus package, only $4.5 billion went to federal purchases and $17.7 billion to state and local purchases in the second quarter. The growth improvement in the second quarter must have been largely due to factors other than the stimulus package.”

 

So, adding the Solyndra debacle to the extremely poor results of the stimulus fiasco, coupled with no medical experience whatsoever, one has to wonder why a loser like this guy Kalin was chosen to ever lead anything. But, then again, we really don’t have to worry because he isn’t reporting directly to the incumbent. His superior is none other than, Miss Benghazi, National Security Advisor, Susan Rice.

 

Which means that this White House team looks more and more like one of those tiny circus cars containing a long parade of clowns that keep climbing out and falling over each other in the spotlight.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Peggy Noonan, as usual, wrote a clear, concise column in the Wall Street Journal, describing the current state of the Ebola crisis in Africa and its threat to the U.S.

 

Titled, “Who Do They Think We Are?” Ms Noonan’s article claims that, “The administration’s Ebola evasions reveal its disdain for the American people.”

 

She writes that, “During an interview of Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control, by Fox News' Megan Kelly, “Dr. Frieden replied that limiting travel between African nations would slow relief efforts. “If we isolate these countries, what’s not going to happen is disease staying there. It’s going to spread more all over Africa and we’ll be at higher risk.”

 

When later in the interview, Ms. Kelly noted that we still have airplanes coming into the U.S. from Liberia, with passengers expected to self-report Ebola exposure, Dr. Frieden responded: “Ultimately the only way—and you may not like this—but the only way we will get our risk to zero here is to stop the outbreak in Africa.”

 

Ms. Kelly said yes, that’s why we’re sending troops. But why can’t we do that and have a travel ban? 

 

The reply was, “If it spreads more in Africa, it’s going to be more of a risk to us here. Our only goal is protecting Americans—that’s our mission. We do that by protecting people here and by stopping threats abroad. That protects Americans.”

 

To that, Ms Noonan stated that, “Dr. Frieden’s logic was a bit of a heart-stopper. In fact his responses were more non sequiturs than answers. We cannot ban people at high risk of Ebola from entering the U.S. because people in West Africa have Ebola, and we don’t want it to spread. Huh?”

 

Therefore, this is another situation where the administration has no clue or capability to deal with a tragic crisis. However, rather than seeking a rational, straightforward solution, the first response as always, is to confuse the issue, cover their ineptitude and attempt to find some way to blame someone else for their shortcomings.

 

Yet, as illogical as the administration’s approach to Ebola is, they still found a way to make things even worse whereas Fox News reports that Ron Klain has been made “czar” for dealing with response to the disease. 

 

Klain, “rose to fame as the chief Democratic lawyer in the 2000 Florida recount, is a political fixer and not an expert in epidemiology or public safety,” Which means, “we can assume that President Obama sees a political problem that needs to be fixed.” 

 

So, once again, regardless of the significant threat posed by the disease and its potential disastrous effect on the nation, the incumbent’s first, and perhaps only, concern is the political outcome.

 

Charles Krauthammer summed the situation up on “Special Report with Bret Baier” this way: “We just heard the head of the CDC [Dr. Tom Frieden] say that we track all the visitors coming in. We couldn’t even track a nurse who treated [Eric Duncan] all the way to Cleveland and we’re going to be assured that a Guyana coming in here is going to be tracked? This is absurd.”

 

And, once again, Mr. Krauthammer’s absolutely correct.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Robert Wilde writes on Breitbart.com about radio talk show host Dr. Michael Savage, PhD from the University of California, who happened to have studied epidemiology as well as botany and nutrition.

 

The doctor’s been “studying epidemics for a long time and insists that the Obama administration has violated “every rule of science, medicine, public health, and epidemiology.” He said passionately, “What Obama is doing is a crime against humanity. There is no other way around this, it is all lies.”

 

Furthermore, “According to Savage, Obama is not the only culprit in the mishandling of Ebola. Savage is not too impressed with Dr. Tom Frieden either: “You listen to that fraud at the CDC – the man should be arrested for lying to the public. Every day he changes his story: ‘You can’t get it on a bus, you can get it on a bus. It’s not airborne, it might be airborne.’ I mean are they kidding?

 

Concluding that “This is a nation whose health is being destroyed by this administration,” Dr. Savage summed the situation up perfectly by saying, “As far as Ebola is concerned, “If you like your Ebola, you can keep your Ebola; it is part of the new Obamacare plan.”

 

On another topic, Rush Limbaugh delivered a long analysis of why the Republican party never attains long-term tenure nationally after winning elections. Most often being voted in periodically as a rebuff to Democrats performance, but soon relinquishing office in following election cycles.

 

In summation, Rush’s conclusion is that if  the Republican Party doesn't start teaching, if it doesn't start becoming demonstrably conservative and doesn't start actively taking advantage of these dramatic incompetent failures of the Democrat Party, [the cycle] is  just going to keep repeating. 

 

However, there’s something critical that Rush misses, brilliant as he is. Because there’s a significant, and much more important point that permits Democrats to recover from electoral losses that Republicans simply don’t know how to do at all.

 

While Republicans always do a far better job in office, they achieve their favorable results by concentrating on their responsibilities and trying their best to maximize positive accomplishments.

 

Democrats, on the other hand, rarely do anything at all except complaining and campaigning continually. And, therefore, while elected Republicans are too busy for speeches and rally's, Democrats degrade them 24/7/365, whether holding office or not.  And its the constant negative drumbeat that ultimately takes it toll at the polls.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Interesting article by C. J. Chivers yesterday in the liberal bible, The New York Times, titled: “The Secret Casualties of Iraq’s Abandoned Chemical Weapons.”

 

Mr. Chivers writes that five years after President George W. Bush sent troops into Iraq, soldiers had entered an expansive but largely secret chapter of America’s long and bitter involvement in Iraq. And, “From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule.”

 

Furthermore, “Congress, too, was only partly informed, while troops and officers were instructed to be silent or give deceptive accounts of what they had found. “ 'Nothing of significance’ is what I was ordered to say,” said Jarrod Lampier, a recently retired Army major who was present for the largest chemical weapons discovery of the war: more than 2,400 nerve-agent rockets unearthed in 2006 at a former Republican Guard compound.

 

Jarrod L. Taylor, a former Army sergeant on hand for the destruction of mustard shells that burned two soldiers in his infantry company, joked of “wounds that never happened” from “that stuff that didn’t exist.” The public, he said, was misled for a decade. “I love it when I hear, ‘Oh there weren’t any chemical weapons in Iraq,’ ” he said. “There were plenty.”

 

Thus, this is another case where lies and cover-ups by the administration presented a picture of political opponents that didn’t exist. Furthering their fraudulent capture of the office of POTUS based on untruths and deception.

 

The article itself is quite informative, so here’s a link: NYT-  PENTAGON HUSHED IRAQ'S USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS

 

The next issue concerns the latest Gallup polls regarding registered voters.

 

Andrew Dugan reports that, “results are from a Sept. 25-30 poll in which Gallup asked registered voters to rate the importance of 13 issues to their vote for Congress, and then to indicate which party would do a better job on each issue.

 

The Republicans in Congress hold significant leads over the Democrats on four of the six issues that U.S. registered voters say are most important in determining how they will vote in November: the economy, the way the federal government is working, the situation with Islamic militants in Iraq and Syria, and the federal budget deficit. Democrats, by contrast, top their Republican rivals on just one of the six: "equal pay for women."

 

On the No. 1 issue, the economy, Republicans have more than doubled their April lead over Democrats, to 11 percentage points.

 

Then, Mr. Dugan lists the five issues least important to voters, which ranks “climate change” at the very bottom. Proving once again, that as far as this administration goes, almost everything they do is totally upside down. 

 

 

 

In that regard, a reader’s comment described the situation just about perfectly.

 

MattMusson Chris wrote: “Arguing with a liberal is like playing chess with a pidgeon. They will knock over the pieces, poop on the board and still strut around like they won.”

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Scanning links on Drudge this morning, I did a double-take, believing I might have suddenly lost my marbles. Because one of them read: “Pentagon spearheads fight against 'threat multiplier' climate change.”

 

My first thought was that, somehow or other, I’d missed some important and serious information regarding the subject, whereas if the Pentagon was involved in combatting global warming, there had to be far more truth to the issue than I’d ever imagined.

 

However, when I clicked on the link, what I found was a story from the Washington Examiner by Zack Colman regarding Defense Secretary, Chuck Hagel who called climate change a 'threat multiplier, as follows: ”Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel called on other nations to join the Pentagon in taking steps to mitigate and adapt to climate change, calling it a "threat multiplier" that could exacerbate global challenges if left unaddressed.

 

Climate change is a threat multiplier," Hagel said at the Conference of Defense Ministers of the Americas in Arequipa, Peru, "because it has the potential to exacerbate many of the challenges we already confront today — from infectious disease to armed insurgencies — and to produce new challenges in the future."

 

So, after reading the gibberish from Secretary Hagel, realizing it was the same old spin the administration’s been spouting for years, I breathed a sigh of relief because climate change still doesn’t exist and I’d missed nothing new or important regarding the subject. 

 

What was even more interesting, though, were the comments from readers, every one of them taking the opposite position, many including statistics and data supporting their opinions.

 

One reader’s thoughts were amusing and accurate, so I’ve posted them below.

 

TripleA60 Mr. Andy wrote:

 

So far Global Warming has been blamed for...
Rising sea levels
Falling sea levels
Flooding
Droughts
Rising temperatures
Cooling temperatures
Decreased sea ice
Increased sea ice
More hurricanes
Less hurricanes
Increase in Polar Ice
Decline in Polar Ice
Increase in severe Thunder storms
Decrease in severe Thunder storms
Increase in near hits by asteroids
The sudden increase of computer hard drive crashes
The increase of E-mails suddenly gone missing
If you don't believe this, then...
You are considered _______________. (Insert any one of many derogatory names the oh so tolerant Left has for anyone who dares to have a different opinion of them)
Oh, and if you even slightly question the BHO then you’re also a racist.

 

And one more from ConservativeLady vacmancan: “Let me help you dear. Tell us how CO2 can lift 300 million cubic MILES of water? That's 3 times the distance of the earth to the sun. Hint: it can't. WATER governs the greenhouse effect, fool. Man can't change that... EVER.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Many of today’s top news items discuss the massive amounts of promotional spending for politicians seeking to win or keep office on November 4th. I find this perplexing because I’ve never understood the purpose of political advertising, speeches or appearances. And except for political junkies or media types, can’t figure out why anyone not paid to show up would attend any kind of political gathering.

 

For most people, especially those with any common sense whatsoever, they’re fully aware of what government does, who’s responsible for the results, and most importantly, how politicians and their party’s affect them directly. Therefore, how is any ad, speech or claim going to change historical circumstance? And then, considering past performance, who on earth with an iota of intelligence is going to believe a political promise?

 

Consequently, except for those directly dependent or tied to a particular party or candidate, most voters decisions are going to rest upon hard fact, current results and personal proclivities. And all the ads and talk in the world can’t reverse or change past performance and evidence. 

 

As far as past performance and evidence goes, another example appeared today in an article by Rebecca Kaplan, political reporter for CBSNews.com.

 

Ms Kaplan writes that, “Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton isn't officially running for president but she's already attracting one of the regular features of the campaign trail: hecklers.

 

During an address to the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics Sunday in San Diego, someone in the 3,000 person crowd began to goad her using a bullhorn,” according to San Diego CBS affiliate KFMB.

 

What’s important in this case, however, isn’t the article itself. Because all politicians attract hecklers.

 

But in this case, there were 77 comments from readers following the article, almost all of which were negative toward Mrs. Clinton, some of them listing past problems in detail. And even worse for her, while the item appeared in a mainstream media forum, not a conservative outlet or biased opponent like Fox, her campaign didn't even begin yet.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Democrat candidates running for office on November 4th are doing their best to disassociate themselves from the incumbent, whereas his administration is coming apart at the seams. In fact the only things these politicians wish to do right now is “hope” that he stays away from their states, and by some miracle or other, things in the nation "change" for the better despite him.

 

Today’s example of major White House failure is reflected in the UK’s Independent, by writer Patrick Cockburn, in an article titled: “War against Isis: US strategy in tatters as militants march on.”

 

Mr. Cockburn reports that, “American-led air attacks are failing. Jihadis are close to taking Kobani, in Syria – and in Iraq western Baghdad is now under serious threat. America's plans to fight Islamic State are in ruins as the militant group's fighters come close to capturing Kobani and have inflicted a heavy defeat on the Iraqi army west of Baghdad.

 

The US-led air attacks launched against Islamic State (also known as Isis) on 8 August in Iraq and 23 September in Syria have not worked. President Obama's plan to "degrade and destroy" Islamic State has not even begun to achieve success. In both Syria and Iraq, Isis is expanding its control rather than contracting.”

 

Many believe that ISIS’ rapid growth and development over the past two years took place because the U.S. pulled up its stakes in Iraq, leaving the area open to attacks against undertrained and incapable Iraqi government forces. However, as far as the incumbent was concerned, campaign promises to his loyalist base were far more important than performing presidentially.

 

Yet, after seeing what happened by ignoring potential threats and now having to relive the battles in the Middle-East all over again, it seems the White House still hasn’t learned a thing from past mistakes, and is now on the verge of making another significant one.  

 

Fox News.com reports today that, “House Speaker John Boehner has denounced any potential White House effort to close the Guantanamo Bay prison facility, saying that such a move is "dangerous," could result in terrorists being relocated into the United States and that overriding Congress is another example of the Obama administration’s “legacy of lawlessness.”

 

However, while Speaker Boehner’s concerns are certainly serious and closing Guantanamo Bay is likely a significant error, history shows that as far as the incumbent’s concerned, it doesn’t really matter where any terrorists are held in captivity. 

 

Because the head of ISIS, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, who many call the new Osama Bin Laden, was released from Camp Bucca in Iraq by Obama in 2009. Baghdadi started ISIS a year later and when he was released from the camp he threatened his American jailers saying, “I’ll see you in New York.” And, the way things are going now, thanks to the incumbent's policy’s he might very well keep his word.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

An AP article reports that, “President Barack Obama on Friday spared from future development nearly 350,000 acres of land within the San Gabriel Mountains northeast of Los Angeles, a move that cheered environmentalists but sparked new criticism of Obama's willingness to use his executive authority.”

 

While the land dedication made the California trip an executive visit, paid for by taxpayer’s, another article by the AP’s Darlene Superville notes that, “Actress Gwyneth Paltrow hosted a reception and dinner benefiting the Democratic Party that marked the start of a three-day, California fundraising swing for Obama. He is scheduled to attend three other Democratic National Committee fundraisers in Los Angeles and San Francisco before returning to Washington on Saturday.

 

Tickets to the reception at Paltrow's home started at $1,000, while dinner tickets cost a minimum of $15,000.”

 

Therefore, by interrupting his fund-raising stops with a few minutes talk at a huge vacant lot, the incumbent stuck the public with the bill for his trip. And most likely, the costs of his whole entourage. Thus, it’s really no wonder why his approval percentage has dropped to under 40%.

 

At the same time, 10,000 pages of records made public Friday cover some of the darker days of the Clinton administration. 

 

According to Fox News.com, “They touch on the Whitewater investigation, Bill and Hillary Clinton's land dealings in Arkansas; Bill Clinton's affair with White House intern Lewinsky; the 1993 death of deputy White House counsel Vince Foster; and the pardons Bill Clinton granted in his final hours as president.”

 

While many, especially Democrats, claim the paperwork is just a repeat of “old news,” they still serve as a reminder of both Clinton’s sordid history. And that ought to present a serious threat to Bill’s wife’s candidacy should she run again for the presidency in 2014. Because last time around, an unknown senator from Chicago showed up out of nowhere, and is still eating her lunch in the White House right now.  

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Jeremy W. Petersoct authored an article in the New York Times titled: “Cry of G.O.P. in Campaign: All Is Dismal.”

 

His first paragraph sums up the story quite well, as follows, “With four weeks to go before the midterm elections, Republicans have made questions of how safe we are — from disease, terrorism or something unspoken and perhaps more ominous — central in their attacks against Democrats. Their message is decidedly grim: President Obama and the Democratic Party run a government that is so fundamentally broken it cannot offer its people the most basic protection from harm.”

 

What was most interesting, though, was the readers comments that followed. The majority sounding like ardent Democrat party supporters. A couple of examples are listed below.

 

DMC from Chico, CA writes: “You want something to fear? How about the Republican lust for guns, guns, guns? How about Wall Street strutting around completely unreformed and ready to crash the car again? How about cops killing kids daily with never a corrective prosecution and conviction? How about runaway climate change being accelerated by our relentless addiction to fossil fuels and refusal to invest in renewables? How about our own gluttony and the obesity epidemic that is making our (mostly red states) population unhealthy?

 

There's plenty to fear, and lots we could be doing to address real problems that cause real harm and misery, but the GOP is lost in a fantasy world of Halloween goblins and willful delusions.”

 

While reader DMC’s complaints about Republicans are typical of Dems, he fails to see why the issues he raises exist at all. As far as guns are concerned, if he truly wants them banned then he should pursue a change to the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution which says, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

 

As far as Wall Street’s concerned, the market growth stems from the current administration’s policy’s of massive artificially low cost borrowing made possible by their pressure on the Federal Reserve, coupled with a stagnating economy due to government interference and over-regulation elsewhere in the business community curbing traditional investment as a result.

 

The case of “cops killing kids daily” results from those very same kids carrying weapons themselves, while refusing to obey officer’s commands, brazenly challenging their authority instead.

 

In the case of climate change, there hasn’t been any at all for the past eighteen years, while current temperatures indicate a cooling trend that will likely make the coming winter one of the coldest in recorded history. At the same time, the reluctance to using “renewables” stems for the fact that aren’t any viable ones in existence at present, unless one wants to cool a home with a windmill.

 

Lastly, a considerable cause of “gluttony and obesity” is probably greatly facilitated by the fact that about 50% of the population is being assisted by government programs such as food stamps, which lead to the purchase of high-calorie processed items, fast foods, beverages and snacks.

 

But, then again, if those people were eating properly and really healthy, they wouldn't have time to sit on the couch with bags of potato chips and pretzels writing comments about nasty Republicans. They’d be out in the workforce, earning a living.    

    

The second comment came from George at coastline, who wrote: “Spending five weeks in the Netherlands recently I had enough time and enough personal contacts to get a feel of how things are there. There economy is much worse than ours, but it didn't seem to depress people too much. The big difference between the mindset of the Dutch and ours was obvious to see: They have a lack of fear. They didn't seem to be afraid of their economic future, despite the grim facts we are all aware of. But most surprising of all-- nobody was afraid to go anywhere or do anything. Walkers not afraid of being run down by bikes. Not afraid while biking of being run down by cars. Not afraid of terrorists blowing them up or shooting them down. Not afraid of diseases from the Africans and Easterners obviously present everywhere on trains and buses. Our media has done a brilliant job of making us afraid, very afraid. The point of this article is right on target.”

 

In this case, to get a better idea of the Dutch situation, I searched and found that the total Netherland population is 16,802,000 people, ranking 64th among the 184 countries which publish this kind information.

 

Therefore, its no wonder they have no fear of almost any threat because nobody’s going to bother with harassing a country that’s about half the size of the state of Florida. 

 

Nonetheless, if George wants to pursue his point again, I suggest he come back when the Netherlands adds about 300 million more folks to its population and also becomes the leading target in the free world due to its success as a nation. Because if its still accident free then, he’d really have something to talk about. 

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios