BloggeRhythms

The Republican’s lost Keystone pipeline approval in the Senate yesterday, but only by a single vote. Practically guaranteeing passage in January when they become the majority in the chamber. However, the loss also almost surely guarantees that Louisiana Democrat Senator, Mary Landrieu, will now not be reelected. Therefore, having to wait another two months certainly seems to be worth the delay in passage.

 

Then there’s an item from dailycaller.com/2014 by contributor, Michael Batasch, also regarding the votes results headlined: “Activists Bundle Up To Protest Keystone XL Outside Dem Senate Offices.”

 

Mr. Batasch writes: “Democratic Sens. Tom Carper of Delaware and Michael Bennet of Colorado have come out in support of approving the Keystone XL pipeline, which has made them a target of environmentalists who want to see the project defeated in the Senate.

 

“Senator Carper and Bennet must know that if they are going to stand with big oil and support the Keystone XL pipeline, then they will lose the support of the youth vote,” Elli Bloomberg, an American University student protesting at Bennett’s office, said in a statement. “As young people we must demand better of these Democratic senators and hold them accountable,” he said. “Keystone XL is unacceptable, it will ruin my generation’s future, and violates the right of indigenous communities.”

 Now, here's the part that has to be read slowly and carefully to grasp the likely unintended, but certainly most salient aspect of Mr. Batasch’s article: “Environmentalists argue that Keystone will harm the environment and contribute to global warming. So they bundled up to withstand the frigid blast of Arctic weather and protest against Democrats who have pledged to vote in favor of legislation approving the $8 billion Keystone XL pipeline.”

So, here we have a troop of young folks generally regarded as the intellectual elite of the nation standing outside, freezing their tails off, to protest against a fully enclosed pipeline at the beginning of what’s projected to be among the coldest winters in recorded history. Which means it’s no wonder they haven’t a prayer of finding a job that takes more intellect than flipping burgers in fast food joints, because even that may be stretching their ability to function effectively.

On another issue, yesterday Rush discussed an article by Chris Cilia of the Washington Post, titled: “"Why Jonathan Gruber is Conservative Catnip."

 

Mr. Cilia wrote: "The key to understanding why Gruber has become a cause celebre -- but not in a good way -- for conservatives is that his comments about the ACA confirm two things that the right has long believed about Democrats and the law: (a) The ACA was made purposely vague to keep the public in the dark about its depth and breadth, and (b) liberals think conservatives are stupid."

To that, Rush opined, “In other words, as far as Cilia's concerned, this is nothing but personal for us. The reason Gruber is so interesting to us is because he admits that liberals think conservatives are stupid, and that's a point we've been trying to prove for what?”

The subject of Rush’s commentary struck home because it’s one presented here frequently. Especially regarding the White House and its presidential staff. Because, while intellectual capability is critical to managerial expertise, it is something severely lacking in the current group of sycophants surrounding the incumbent president.

Therefore, it’s quite odd, and a dichotomy, to have a staff of supporters so patently dense and arrogant thought by a reporter, Chris Cilia, to be intellectually more adept than rivals who are in fact, considerably above them intelligence-wise. 

Which means, what really occurred when Jonathan Gruber disclosed the fraud and deception behind the health care tax’s passage, the “catnip” had absolutely nothing to do with the intelligence of those in either party. Because, the issue isn’t whether or not one’s holding office are smart enough, it’s whether or not they’re devious, deceitful and arrogant enough to lie, cheat and steal to defraud the entire nation, such as Democrats do in their extreme selfishness on a regular basis.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

The incumbent president’s selling of another major lie, this one about knowing nothing of Jonathan Gruber, seems to make no long term sense. Because, in addition to looking like a guilty child caught misbehaving, his “legacy” will analyze all his untruths in detail, it will insure that his presidency might very well be deemed in the future as the very worst in the nation’s history.

 

What's most remarkable about his habit of instant denial when caught, however, is that with today’s technology irrefutable hard evidence exists proving the prevarication’s.

 

In the current situation, “Obama spoke at the Brookings Institution in a video posted by the conservative group American Commitment on Monday. The president was touting his policy ideas, which stemmed from what he called some of the “brightest minds from academia and policy circles.”… Gruber advised Obama’s first campaign in 2006 and went to the White House at least a dozen times while Obama’s been in office, in addition to receiving an almost $400,000 contract to advise on the health-care law.”

 

On another matter, want to know why the health care tax was so important to pass for the incumbent president, and also why Gruber was such a valuable asset to help mislead the public about it’s structure? 

 

The New York Times reports that, “[S]ince the Affordable Care Act was enacted in 2010, the relationship between the Obama administration and insurers has evolved into a powerful, mutually beneficial partnership that has been a boon to the nation’s largest private health plans and led to a profitable surge in their Medicaid enrollment. The insurers in turn have provided crucial support to Mr. Obama in court battles over the health care law… Since Mr. Obama signed the law, share prices for four of the major insurance companies — Aetna, Cigna, Humana and UnitedHealth — have more than doubled, while the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index has increased about 70 percent.”

 

Which, as usual, proves that for the current administration the same basic premise always applies. And if you want to know why anything is ever pursued by them, just follow the money to get the answer. 

 

And finally, a quote from Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse on “Fox News Sunday.”

  

“I think the new Republican majority has long despised and denigrated this president. And if they can roll him, I think they would like to. And I think it’s important for him to set the stage early on this, particularly when the stakes are so high for climate, for the environment, for the damage that the pipeline will do.”

 

The most interesting point about the Senator’s objection to the pipeline is that if you consider its makeup, all it is a tube that’s buried under the ground having no environmental impact at all. In fact, if it wasn’t marked and fenced off, no one would even know it was there.

 

Therefore, if the pipeline was laid and left unmarked, the only way the Senator could even find it’s location would be with a specifically drawn map and a metal detector. Which means that by comparison, more toxic waste comes out of this guy’s mouth than the entire Keystone XL.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Peggy Noonan in The Wall Street Journal on Friday, headed her column, “The Loneliest President Since Nixon.” The subtitle read: “Facing adversity, Obama has no idea how to respond.”

 

The column began with her quoting a Democrat operative who’d told her that,“People do what they know how to do.” Politicians don’t have a vast repertoire. When they get in a jam they just do what they’ve always done, even if it’s not working anymore.”

 

Ms Noonan followed that observation by writing that, “This came to mind when contemplating President Obama. After a devastating election, he is presenting himself as if he won. The people were not saying no to his policies, he explained, they would in fact like it if Republicans do what he tells them.

 

You don’t begin a new relationship with a threat, but that is what he gave Congress: Get me an immigration bill I like or I’ll change U.S. immigration law on my own.”

 

Farther along, after describing many examples of how the incumbent president has alienated virtually everyone around him, regardless of party or affiliation, she noted that, “The last time we saw a president so alone it was Richard Nixon, at the end of his presidency, when the Democrats had turned on him, the press hated him, and the Republicans were fleeing. It was Sen. Barry Goldwater, the GOP’s standard-bearer in 1964, and House Minority Leader John Rhodes, also of Arizona, who went to the White House to tell Nixon his support in Congress had collapsed, they would vote to impeach. Years later Goldwater called Nixon “The world’s biggest liar.” 

 

But Nixon had one advantage Obama does not: the high regard of the world’s leaders, who found his downfall tragic (such ruin over such a trifling matter) and befuddling (he didn’t keep political prisoners chained up in dungeons, as they did. Why such a fuss?).”

 

Ms Noonan’s column struck home with me completely, whereas I’ve had doubts of the incumbent’s capabilities since he first campaigned for the presidency without an iota of qualifying credentials. Having accomplished far less than a significant segment of the population, possessing absolutely no practical experience whatsoever, his track record in office proves the point undoubtedly.

 

In that regard, a reader once again offered a succinct summation, as follows:   

 

Allen Huggins, wrote, “When he was elected, his critics claimed he was an "empty suit" as he had really accomplished nothing other than getting elected with boastful rhetoric.  Now we realize that it is far, far worse.  He's not an empty suit. He's an arrogant college professor who thinks he has all the answers and looks down at the rest of us fools.  He won't listen to reason, as all he hears is himself.  Very naïve.”

 

In today’s Clinton update, Lee Rood wrote a column in nypost.com, headed “Is Iowa already sick of Hillary Clinton?,” which begins as follows:

 

“If you’re a die-hard Democrat in New York hoping to overcome the disappointment that was Nov. 4, you’re worried.

 

But here in Iowa, where the first-in-the-nation caucuses are a mere 14 months away, some are breaking into a cold sweat.

 

Most party leaders here will assure you all conversations about the 2016 presidential nomination still begin and end with Hillary Clinton.

 

The former first lady and secretary of state is a sentimental favorite. Though she has not formally announced her candidacy, her well-oiled super PAC may be the most deeply rooted ever at this stage in the Hawkeye state.

 

But that may be the problem. Familiarity breeds if not contempt, then frustration.”

 

Ms Rood then mentions Jerry Crawford, “who co-chaired Clinton’s 2008 campaign in Iowa and helps lead Ready for Hillary in the state.”

 

And it’s Mr. Crawford's thoughts that stimulate Ms Rood’s ideas regarding Bill Clinton’s wife’s problems in the state, whereas “Crawford, who has led presidential campaigns in Iowa for almost three decades, acknowledges Clinton could easily stumble out of the gate if sometimes contrarian Iowans believe they are being force-fed an unlikeable candidate.”

 

This is noteworthy today because, while the election’s still two years away, and Bill's wife hasn’t even announced presidential candidacy yet, anti-establishment bias among the voting public may play a significant role in 2016, negatively affecting her especially.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Presently, talking heads across the media are trying to determine just how much Jonathan Gruber’s demeaning of the American public will cost Democrats and especially the incumbent president. In that regard, Rush once again dissected the situation brilliantly, using Ron Fournier, of the National Journal, formerly AP bureau chief in Washington, DC as his model liberal for discussion.

 

Whereas Rush’s analysis is well worth reading, a link to the transcript follows, while several key points continue below.

 

Link:http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/11/13/gruber_s_lies_force_ron_fournier_to_take_off_his_rose_colored_glasses 

 

Rush quotes Fournier as saying:  "If there's one thing that unites clearheaded Americans, it's a belief that our leaders must be transparent and honest." (Guess he never heard of the Clinton’s, Agnew or Nixon.)

 

To which Rush replies: “No, ” then continues, “"If there's one thing that unites clearheaded Americans, it's the belief that our leaders [are not] transparent and honest!" That's what's dawning on people. Yeah, in theory we would hope that they govern as they campaign.  We would hope that they're telling us the truth when they tell us who they are and what they believe.  The sad reality is "clearheaded Americans" are more and more beginning to doubt that their leaders are honest with them, nor are they transparent.”

 

Rush also has a well-thought out explanation for Gruber’s saying about the health care tax that, “we had to lie because the American people are too stupid to understand what we're doing.”

 

Rush's rejoinder: “You know, it sounds to me like what Gruber's actually saying is, they had to lie in order to keep from blowing up the relationship they had with the media.  If you read Fournier's piece, it's clear he was all-in, 'cause he wanted this.  He's a good liberal and he's got compassion and he cares about the poor, and he cares about the budget, and he wants the uninsured to be covered.  It's the only fair thing to do!  We can't bust the budget, and there's the Democrats running around saying it's exactly what it's gonna do.

 

And so he believes it.  It sounds to me like what Gruber actually is saying, they had to lie because of the stupidity of the media. They had to lie so as not to blow up the media bubble that they had created. The media was all-in. The media was thinking it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. The media and the left thought it was compassion central, gonna take care of the poor and the downtrodden, the hungry and the thirsty.  And if the truth had come out... look at Fournier's reaction today.  What if Fournier had this reaction in 2009?  What if others in the media had this reaction they had yesterday and today in 2009?”

 

And finally, Rush hits the nail on the head with: “Because what the Gruber story illustrates is that the left lies about everything and they will lie about everything in order to get what they want, and they will assume that you're either too stupid -- I actually think they think you're too smart.  They can't be honest with you because you would reject it, that makes you too smart, not too stupid.

 

If you were really as stupid as they think, they wouldn't have to lie.  If you were as stupid as Gruber runs around saying, they could say whatever they want, you'd be too stupid to believe it or understand it, and they could get done what they wanted.  The fact that they have to lie, predicated on the fact that you're too stupid, actually means that you're wise to them.  You'll see through what they want to do, even though they're trying to cover it up.” And that's precisely the situation.

 

On another issue. While the incumbent president was busy yesterday pledging three billion of taxpayer money to combat global-warming, Reuters was publishing the following story.

 

“Prices for slaughter-ready or cash cattle in the U.S. Plains hit an all-time high on Friday, fueled by an early winter storm at a time of the smallest herd since the early 1950s.

 

Some beef packers paid record cattle prices of $171 to $172 per hundredweight (cwt) in parts of Kansas and Nebraska. That topped the previous high of $170 set three weeks ago and was up as much as $5 from last week's sales.

 

This week, early wintry weather blew across the Midwest packing heavy snow in the northern Plains along with bitterly cold temperatures that stretched as far south as Texas.

 

"We got an added boost from the weather market," said Jim Robb, director of the Colorado-based Livestock Marketing Information Center.

 

Frigid temperatures made it difficult to sort cattle, said analysts. And, treacherous driving conditions snarled transportation of cattle to packing plants, they said.”

 

And then finally, it’s back to the Clinton’s again.

 

According to the Washington Free Beacon, “At an American Federation of Teachers event in Washington D.C., on Thursday, Vice President Joe Biden subtly undercut Hillary’s oft-repeated claim that the Clinton economy sustained a vibrant middle class. 

 

“The fact is, the middle class started declining in the late 1980s,” he said. “All through the ’90s, with the exception of two years, the middle class was declining — except for the last two years.”

 

So, here we have a leading Democrat who’s sniping at Bill Clinton’s wife, although she hasn’t even announced presidential candidacy yet. Which means that as the 2016 election draws closer, the gloves will really come off to the extent that, with all of their inside information regarding each other, future disclosures by both will likely destroy the two contenders altogether.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Spent some time this week, watching Herring Networks, One America, an all-news “conservative” cable channel that very well might give Fox News a real run for its money.

 

The items and stories presented are basically the same as found on Fox, however, there are far, far fewer interruptions and virtually no commercials. All the breaks in content are informational background on the station itself, or interesting bits of history and Americana.

 

Naturally, the question is: How long can the station keep this up with no revenue from ads? But while it does, it’s certainly a pleasure to not be continually inundated with mindless drivel about products and services one couldn't possibly care less about. Yet, that doesn’t really bother me as much as it could, because I always keep the TV sound off, until some news item catches my eye and I temporarily turn the volume up.

 

In today’s news about the Keystone pipeline, foxnews.com reports that, “Obama said his administration believes the project should be judged on the basis of whether it accelerates climate change. Obama also insisted the pipeline would not be a “massive jobs bill” and would have no effect on U.S. gas prices.”

 

However, the generally reliable bastion of support for the current administration, The New York Times, reported yesterday in article by Nelson D. Schwartz, Clifford Krause, and Dionne Searcy, as follows:

 

“With Americans spending roughly $1 billion a day on gasoline, Tom Kloza, global head of energy analysis at the Oil Price Information Service, estimates that consumers will save roughly $8.4 billion in November and December, compared with the last two months of 2013, based on an average price for regular gasoline of about $2.89 a gallon as opposed to $3.23 last November and $3.26 last December.

 

The typical American household buys 1,200 gallons annually, so if prices fall to the level Mr. Kloza predicts and stay there, that adds up to a yearly savings per household of at least $400. A 15 percent drop in the cost of home heating oil since last winter should also be helpful, especially as cold weather arrives in the Northeast.

 

The extra cash in shoppers’ wallets and pocketbooks could help generate nearly half a percentage point in added economic growth in the fourth quarter, and roughly $70 billion more in consumer spending over the next year, according to Barclays.”

 

Now, I suppose that when your income perspective derives from having the American people pay for your rent, food, fuel, travel and virtually every other cost of your existence, a mere $70 billion in consumer’s pockets likely doesn’t seem like much. Nor does a half percent in the GDP. But, for those living in the real world, the boost to their pocketbooks is huge. 

 

Along the same lines, it may be quite true that the pipeline would not be a “massive jobs bill,” but that doesn’t mean it won’t create any jobs at all.

 

Ellen R. Wald wrote on Forbes.com, that “In January of 2010, Trans-Canada CEO Russell Girling claimed that the project would produce 13,000 construction jobs.  In April of 2011 the number grew to 20,000, which the Canadian Ambassador reiterated in August 2011.  In January 2012 the number was revised back down to 13,000 and this past April the company revised that number even lower, to 9,000 construction jobs.  Meanwhile, both the federal government and the Global Labor Institute at Cornell University’s College of Industrial and Labor Relations examined TransCanada’s application and made their own job creation estimates, at 6,000-6,500 and 2,500-4,500 respectively.”

 

So, here again, while the numbers vary by source, there’s no doubt that a number of jobs will be created. Which is something you’d think would interest an administration that had to shorten the work week and recalculate the formula by which unemployment figures are derived in order to hide the damage done to the working segment of the population by their anti-business policies. 

 

However, this elitist bunch in the White House not only doesn’t know a thing about how the American economy runs, but when given a clear chance to make things better job-wise, continues to protect its political platform rather than boost the nation’s economy. No wonder they lost that last election in a historical landslide

 

In the comments following the Keystone article, lleeds wrote, “Breaking News:  Nancy Pelosi said she never heard of the Keystone Pipeline, so can we just move on.”

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

When any organization, regardless of its chosen endeavor, has no functional capabilities or talents, its virtually impossible to achieve any kind of tangible or meaningful managerial results.

 

And that’s what the current administration is faced with now, whereas it is comprised of hucksters and political types, having no practical experience in governance whatsoever. Yet it’s still trying to run the formerly most successful nation in the free world without the most basic capabilities.

 

Evidence of the administrative talent lack can be seen in virtually every segment of the nation’s various areas requiring operational skills, such as the economy, education, foreign policy, the environment and most certainly, health care.

 

As far as health care’s concerned, the last few days have been quite embarrassing for the administration, and especially the White House, as reported by Lucy McCalmont on politico.com, as follows

 

“The White House is denouncing comments from key Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber that a lack of transparency and the stupidity of voters helped in the passage of the health care law and is instead pointing a finger at Republicans.”

 

In response, having no valid rejoinder, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said during a press briefing in Burma that, “The fact of the matter is, the process associated with the writing and passing and implementing of the Affordable Care Act has been extraordinarily transparent.”

 

Now, while that statement is patently false, Earnest went on to rejoinder with a typical politician’s tactic of smearing rivals when caught red-handed in an untenable situation.

 

Earnest said; “It is Republicans who have been less than forthright and transparent about what their proposed changes to the Affordable Care Act would do in terms of the choices available to middle class families,”and that, “[T]he president is proud of the transparent process that was undertaken to pass that bill into law.”

 

However, anyone with an iota of interest in the subject knows full well by now that if nothing else, Republicans have been crystally clear about their conclusions regarding the health care tax. And were they to have their way, they'd immediately repeal it in total. But, if that alternative wasn’t possible they’d at least permit cross-state-line competition for coverage and stop all protections to the administration’s allies in the medical insurance business for starters.

 

Which makes one wonder about the degree to which a guy named “Earnest” would fabricate the truth to cover up one of the worst pieces of legislation ever foisted on the income-producing half of the American public.

 

On the same subject, and also from politico.com, “House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi dismissed Gruber’s role in Obamacare on Thursday, telling the press, “I don’t know who he is. He didn’t help write our bill.”

 

In response, “Many outlets were quick to point out that Pelosi cited Gruber in a “Health Insurance Reform Mythbuster” on her official website in 2009.”

 

Therefore, today’s responses from key administration and Congressional individuals leads to a truly interesting question. Because if somewhere, sometime, one of them actually did tell the truth to the public, or anyone else, how would they know?

 

That’s it for today folks.  

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

It’s far too early to tell how much damage has been done to the administration in general, and the health care tax specifically. However, there’s no doubt that both have been dealt an extremely costly blow by the comments of the arrogant elitist whom had a great deal to do with the architecture of Obamacare.

 

Aside from MIT economics professor, John Gruber, administration advisor on the health care tax proclaiming American voter’s in general are “stupid,”  a similar slur by him was disclosed on yesterday’s Fox News' "The Kelley File."

 

Shown speaking at an October 2013 event at Washington University in St. Louis, he referred to “the so-called ‘Cadillac tax’ on high-end health plans,” saying, "They proposed it and that passed, because the American people are too stupid to understand the difference."

 

Referring specifically to the way the "Cadillac tax" was designed, he touted the plan to, “instead of taxing policy holders, tax the insurance companies that offered them. He suggested that taxing individuals would have been politically unpalatable but taxing the companies worked because Americans didn't understand the difference.”

 

And once again, the best summation Mr. Gruber’s comments came from a reader of the article.  

 

tishuwish wrote: “Is he really that far off base? After all he is referring to OBAMA SUPPORTERS. Democrats that voted for obama, and I have to agree with him, they have to be the stupidest thing walking! I personally never took offense to what he said because I knew he wasn't referring to me!”

 

Which leads right into the next item from Politico.com, as follows: “A new Gallup poll showing “The favorability rating for Democrats is the party’s lowest since Gallup began asking the question in 1992.

 

Only 36 percent had a favorable view of the Democratic party, a 6-percentage-point drop from before the midterms, the Gallup poll released Wednesday found. With the GOP standing with 42 percent favorability, it is the first time since 2011 the GOP has had a higher rating than the Democrats.”

 

Additionally, John Nolte of Breitbart writes that, “As things stand today, Republicans in Congress enjoy a 42% approval rating. Obama, on the other hand, sits at a 39% approval rating. His disapproval rating sits at a whopping 56%. 

 

When asked by Gallup who should have more influence over the direction of the country, a majority of Americans chose Republicans in Congress over Obama by a whopping 56-36% margin.”

 

While the poll results indicate significant dissatisfaction with the Democrat party as a whole, and the incumbent president even worse, the following item, also from politico.com, by Andrew Restuccia and Erica Martinson, may shed some light on why the public is fed up with both. 

 

The authors write that, “Tied to court-ordered deadlines, legal mandates and international climate talks, the efforts scheduled for the next two months show that President Barack Obama is prepared to spend the remainder of his term unleashing sweeping executive actions to combat global warming. And incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have few options for stopping the onslaught, though Republicans may be able to slow pieces of it.

 

The coming rollout includes a Dec. 1 proposal by EPA to tighten limits on smog-causing ozone, which business groups say could be the costliest federal regulation of all time; a final rule Dec. 19 for clamping down on disposal of power plants’ toxic coal ash; the Jan. 1 start date for a long-debated rule prohibiting states from polluting the air of their downwind neighbors; and a Jan. 8 deadline for issuing a final rule restricting greenhouse gas emissions from future power plants. That last rule is a centerpiece of Obama’s most ambitious environmental effort, the big plan for combating climate change that he announced at Georgetown.”

 

At the same time, Drudge posted the following links.

 

Minnesota shatters snow record from 1898...
KEEP CALM AND SHOVEL ON...
Cold to Freeze East...
WY WINDCHILL WARNING: 35 BELOW...
FROSTBITE IN 10 MINUTES...
Winter still month away...
CHILL MAP...

 

Which leads me to suggest once more, that to find out why the entire global warming farce doesn’t resonate with voters today, or anyone else blessed with common sense, climate change fanatics ought to close their mouths and open a window.

 

Because we’re on the cusp of the coldest winter ever predicted by real experts who actually know what they’re talking about, and not a bunch of money/power-hungry hacks driven by government grants. 

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios