BloggeRhythms

Picked this up on Chris Stirewalt’s  blog on Fox News this morning. Had to read it several times, to be sure I’d understood it correctly.

 

“The House Majority PAC is currently running an ad in Arizona calling Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz., “a whistleblower on the disastrous healthcare Web site.” The ad concludes saying, “Ann Kirkpatrick, seeing what’s wrong, doing what’s right.” For the PAC backed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to be running ads describing ObamaCare as something on which whistles must be blown, something must be terribly wrong.”

 

I had to keep asking myself if this was the same Nancy Pelosi who touted the health care tax incessantly from inception, most famously stating that “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” And in the last few months, I guess she’s found out for herself and her party. Making her as unhappy with it as everyone else.

 

Ms Pelosi isn’t alone, though, when it comes to doubletalk. The Stirewalt column also included the following;

 

“Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., says her committee’s damning Benghazi report is not an indictment of Democratic 2016 frontrunner Hillary Clinton. Feinstein told reporters that the bipartisan 58-page report, which offers a stinging rebuke to the State Department when it was under the command of the former first lady, does not mention Hillary by name. Feinstein faulted Republicans for using the report to advance a political agenda. “I want the record to be clear,” Feinstein said, “I condemn any effort to use this report for political purposes.”

 

Now, anyone with an IQ having more than two figures understands that Ms Feinstein is simply covering her political tail with her comment regarding Bill’s wife. But she also knows that she better pursue Benghazi honestly, because the truth’s finally starting to surface. And as a result, although Ms Feinstein is fully aware that Hillary’s at fault, she’s ducking her head knowing full well that somebody else will pursue it.

 

So, when all’s said and done, looks like another very good day for Republicans.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

While the incumbent holds strategy meetings with college professors, rather than top business experts, to theorize why his economic plans fail, a couple of today’s news items might give him a clue as to why he can’t turn a couple of the nation’s most pressing problems around. 

 

According to Neil Munro,  White House Correspondent of the dailycaller.com via Drudge; “More Americans, 42%, say they are financially worse off now than they were a year ago, reversing the lower levels found over the past two years,” Gallup announced Wednesday.

 

Just more than a third of Americans [35 percent] say their financial situation has improved from a year ago.” Gallup reported.

 

And one of the major reasons for the nation’s fiscal woes is very likely the drain on the economy caused by the nonsensically high cost of oil.  

 

In that regard, by still pandering to lobbyists, instead of really trying to fix the problem, the Keystone pipeline’s been delayed so long that Dan Springer reports, “With the Canada-to-Texas Keystone XL pipeline stuck in limbo on the U.S. side, Canada’s Energy Board recently gave a thumbs up to a $6.5 billion pipeline designed to carry 525,000 barrels of oil per day from the oil sands of Alberta to ships on the British Columbia coast. The final destination is most likely Asia.”

 

The story goes on to say, “The development has the U.S. oil industry attacking the Obama administration over its drawn-out process. Noting that, “It’s taken longer to approve the Keystone XL pipeline than it did to win World War II, longer than it took us to put a man in space, and almost as long as it took to build the Trans-Continental railroad 155 years ago,” said Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute.”

 

However, aside from the incumbent’s domestic misjudgments and outright incapability causing the nation to flounder economically,  foreign policy flaws, recently exposed by Robert Gates, have now been expanded, as follows: 

 

The Daily Beast on-line, posted an item headed “Senior UK Defense Advisor: Obama Is Clueless About ‘What He Wants To Do In The World’ 

 

The article says that, “Sir Hew Strachan, an expert on the history of war, says that the president’s strategic failures in Afghanistan and Syria have crippled America’s position in the world. Strachan, a current member of the Chief of the Defense Staff’s Strategic Advisory Panel, cited the “crazy” handling of the Syrian crisis as the most egregious example of a fundamental collapse in military planning that began in the aftermath of 9/11”’

 

Sir Hew continues, “If anything it’s gone backwards instead of forwards, Obama seems to be almost chronically incapable of doing this. Bush may have had totally fanciful political objectives in terms of trying to fight a global War on Terror, which was inherently astrategic, but at least he had a clear sense of what he wanted to do in the world. Obama has no sense of what he wants to do in the world,”

 

So, while none of this is really new, what’s interesting is that the negative commentary's coming from highly respected experts while the incumbent’s still in office. All of which indicates that the commentary isn’t specifically political, but more a current sincere concern about the need to fix the huge problems before they get any worse, if possible. 

 

Then there’s the administrations ploy to utilize athletes to promote the poorly constructed and unneeded health care tax among young people. And who was chosen? Magic Johnson and Alonzo Mourning.

 

According to the Washington Times on-line, “Johnson, the point guard who led the Los Angeles Lakers to five NBA championships in the 1980s, retired from the NBA in 1991 after announcing that he had contracted HIV. Johnson is still living with HIV and is required to take a cocktail of drugs daily to prevent the virus from becoming AIDS.”

 

And as for Mourning, the “seven-time NBA All-Star, was diagnosed with a rare kidney disease in 2000 and was forced to retire briefly in 2003 while he received a kidney transplant.”

 

Consequently, while there’s no doubt that name recognition of these two NBA greats most surely is huge, I doubt many healthy young folks are going to identify with their medical problems. Because the odds of making it to the NBA as a player and contracting serious illness in this age group are likely pretty much the same.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Several items today worth mentioning.

 

Haven’t addressed the hubbub about NSA spying whereas it’s not worth the effort. That’s because, regardless of whatever the administration says about changing or otherwise adjusting the program, the spying’s going to continue anyway, primarily because it should in defense of the nation and its citizens.

 

In that regard, today Fox News reported that “The National Security Agency has placed software on nearly 100,000 computers around the world that allows the U.S. to conduct surveillance on those machines using radio frequency technology, The New York Times reported Tuesday.”

 

The story includes the following, “The NSA describes the effort an "active defense" and has used the technology to monitor units of the Chinese Army, the Russian military, drug cartels, trade institutions inside the European Union, and sometime U.S. partners against terrorism like Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan.”

 

Consequently, with the available technology today in a world that contains significant peril, it would be immature, and likely suicidal, not to avail the nation with every possible protection obtainable.

 

On the other hand though, its possible that employing the NSA for national defense is perhaps the only thing this administration's ever done right.

 

Terry Miller  of the The Wall Street Journal on-line via Drudge reports that: “World economic freedom has reached record levels, according to the 2014 Index of Economic Freedom, released Tuesday by the Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. But after seven straight years of decline, the U.S. has dropped out of the top 10 most economically free countries.”

 

Mr. Miller goes on: “It's not hard to see why the U.S. is losing ground. Even marginal tax rates exceeding 43% cannot finance runaway government spending, which has caused the national debt to skyrocket. The Obama administration continues to shackle entire sectors of the economy with regulation, including health care, finance and energy. The intervention impedes both personal freedom and national prosperity.”

 

After reading the preceding, I had to laugh when I came across this one from CBS DC also via Drudge: “On Wednesday [the incumbent]will go to North Carolina to draw attention to the type of manufacturing innovation hub that he promoted in his 2013 State of the Union speech. On Thursday he has invited college presidents to discuss ways to improve workers’ skills.”

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

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

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

According to John Nolte of Breitbart on-line: “Speaking to The Hill newspaper, Feinstein said, “I believe that groups loosely associated with al Qaeda were” involved in the attack.

 

When asked if she believed the infamous anti-Islam YouTube video caused a protest that evolved into a riot, Feinstein said, “It doesn’t jibe with me.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

For starters today, Rush posted the following item on Facebook which I’m sure made his day, if not his whole year: “YouGov.com polled the most admired people in America and in the world. They did this in 13 countries that have more than half of the world's population. In America, in last place at number 10, was Hillary Clinton. Number nine was your host, me.”

 

Aside from Limbaugh, the former president's wife got another bit of bad news when, according to Chris Stirewalt of Fox News on-line, newly released declassified testimony about the attacks in Benghazi state that: “Minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation’s top civilian and uniformed defense officials -- headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama -- were informed that the event was a ‘terrorist attack,’ declassified documents show.”

 

This could bode ill for Bill’s wife because it will likely spur her opposition to find new ways to promote her now famous loss of her cool when she screamed in a Senate hearing, “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?”

 

Well, the point is, as Secretary of State she was supposed to know exactly what happened. And, as a matter of fact she did, but didn’t seem to admit it, likely holding the administration's line of distorting the story for political purposes. 

 

However, whether it's Hillary or the incumbent, foreign affairs don’t seem to be their forte, because after giving away our hard fought gains in Iraq, we now appear to paving the way for Iran to take over control of the Middle-East.

 

Paul Richter of latimes.com/world/worldnow via Drudge, writes today that, “Iran’s chief negotiator Abbas Araqchi disclosed the existence of [a] document in a Persian-language interview with the semiofficial Iranian Students News Agency.

 

In his interview, Araqchi touched on the sensitive issue of how much latitude Iran will have to continue its nuclear research and development.

 

U.S. officials said Sunday that Iran would be allowed to continue existing research and development projects and with pencil-and-paper design work, but not to advance research with new projects. Araqchi, however, implied that the program would have wide latitude.”

 

Araqchi concluded that, “No facility will be closed; enrichment will continue, and qualitative and nuclear research will be expanded. All research into a new generation of centrifuges will continue.”

 

All of which means, that unless you’re dumb enough to buy a bridge  from a guy claiming to  own one connecting Manhattan and Brooklyn, Iran will keep developing their nuclear arsenal.

 

And if that wasn’t enough, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani “has praised a landmark nuclear deal struck in Geneva as his country's victory, telling a home crowd it effectively means the "surrender" of Western powers to Iranian demands.”

 

So, with all due respect to the former president's wife, when you consider the military gains made by hostile Middle-Eastern nations and their threat to their region and likely the entire world, understanding precisely what goes on every moment, everywhere all the time makes a huge “difference” in global security. 

 

But, when just like her former boss, she has no experience or real credentials either, her frustrated outbursts against well-earned criticism are par for the course.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

It’s doubtful one could find an issue more petty than whether or not a governor was aware of highway lane closures his opposition learned were intended as punishment toward a local mayor. If that’s all that the left-leaning media can find to smear a conservative politician, things must be pretty good in the Republican world.

 

My only interest in the matter, however, stems from New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's insistence that he knew nothing about the incident until afterward, at which time he took appropriate action, firing the responsible subordinate. And that’s a very critical point.

 

Because, if the governor’s telling the truth, his opposition is doing huge harm to itself by pursuing an issue that can come back and haunt them immeasurably, as follows.

 

Yesterday, according to Fox News on-line, “New Jersey Assemblyman John Wisniewski, chairman of the legislative panel probing the closures, cast doubt on the governor's claims in an interview with Fox News. "It's hard to believe in the middle of a gubernatorial election that the governor didn't have a conversation with somebody on his senior staff about a big problem in Fort Lee," he said.” 

 

Going even further, he stated “The Assembly has the ability to do articles of impeachment," suggesting that would be an option if it turns out Christie was involved in a cover-up. However, Wisniewski added: "We're way ahead of that, though." 

 

And finally, the most significant comment: “The lawmaker acknowledged that officials have found no "direct communication" tying Christie to the scandal, but repeatedly challenged the notion that his deputy chief of staff -- whom Christie fired for her role in the closures -- did not loop him in. 

 

"It's unbelievable," he said.”

 

And that’s where shortsighted politico's don’t think through the possible ramifications of issues before making statements that appear beneficial at the time. Because whether the governor’s guilty or not, the assemblyman’s making the case that it seems unbelievable that he wasn’t “looped in” on such an important issue. 

 

Consequently, if a governor’s supposed to be aware of things as minor as traffic jams, what should a president know about four diplomats being killed in Benghazi? Or the details of the IRS targeting political opposition? And how about a health care tax implementation that still doesn’t work, leaving millions unsure about insurance coverage?

 

While the list of presidential lack of knowledge covers many other subjects, from foreign affairs to the economy to spying by the NSA, the incumbent steadfastly claims he was unaware throughout.

 

Therefore, if the New Jersey assemblyman believes a governor lying about a traffic jam is potentially subject to impeachment proceedings, what should the penalty be for a fabricating POTUS? 

 

So, by pursuing this trivial issue the assemblyman might do some minor harm to the governor, but in the process might also subject POTUS to much greater scrutiny and severely damaging backlash as well. Therefore, it’s wise to be careful what you wish for in politics, especially when making a potential fool of yourself.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Very slow news day. Nothing really worth much mention. Thus, I went back to look at more detail in the Christie road-blockage case with the results pretty much the same as concluded yesterday.

 

Once made aware of the intentional closure of traffic lanes in Fort Lee, NJ, causing purposeful traffic delays, Governor Christie moved swiftly to rectify the issue, by firing his deputy chief of staff. And, according to Fox News on-line: “He [also] sidelined his former campaign manager, nixing a lucrative contract and shutting him out of a plum job at the helm of the state GOP. Two Port Authority officials previously had resigned.”

 

The same article then went on to note that: “By contrast, the Obama administration's meandering response to three major controversies -- the Benghazi attack, the IRS targeting scandal, and the botched ObamaCare rollout -- often has seemed less decisive.”

 

In that regard, the article points out that: “The administration's commitment to thoroughly investigating these issues was called into question again this week after it was revealed that the point person investigating the IRS scandal is an Obama backer who has donated thousands to his two presidential campaigns.

 

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on Thursday urged Attorney General Eric Holder to take the donor off the case.

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

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

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

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

So, here we have policies and laws creating governmental Catch-22’s whereas employees making politically motivated decisions harmful to the opposition can’t be curtailed or replaced because political affiliation doesn’t even exist  in the eyes of the law. 

 

And what’s even worse is that employees actually using political affiliation violates “equal opportunity,” which is totally ridiculous because their opposition isn’t even in the discussion and therefore has no “opportunity” whatsoever at all. 

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

That’s it for today folks.

Adios