4 June 2010 -- 04:00  EDT


Barack Obama and Admiral Thad Allen are getting so loose with the use of the word "we", that they are taking credit for the work BP is doing and has done in trying to stop the Gulf Oil leak. That's dishonest.


All of those "we" words should be "BP". Those all are the things BP did or is doing. Thad Allen did not do those. The Coast Guard did not do them. And Barack Obama did not do them. That makes Thad Allen and Barack Obama dishonest!

As the incident commander, when Thad Allen says "we" he is by implication including Barack Obama. And our guess is that it is Barack Obama and/or Obama's staff that told Allen to use "we" in these statements.

The White House game plan is to make it look as though Obama is in charge of and on top of the Gulf oil well spill -- especially since Obama made such a clueless butt of himself in his press conference last week. Obama has done little to nothing to get the oil leak stopped. But you can bet Obama and his staff are going to do everything they can, and tell every lie they can, to make it appear that Obama is on top of the gulf oil leak. Obama is not on top of this nor is he in control of it! Obama is little more than a eunich.

In that thread, we believe that Obama's trip to the Gulf Coast today has been timed on the premise that BP will have capped the well by the time Obama gets there.  Then Obama will take credit for capping the oil well. Baloney! It's all BPs work.

That does not make BP any less to blame for the leak. But BP and not Obama is capping the well -- if it indeed does get capped. Please see Demolish (Blow up) Gulf Oil Well You Freaking Idiot Obama!

---

23 May 2010 --- 1700:EDT

Since 20 April 2010, more than a month ago, Obama and all the King's men (and women) have been yapping about the BP Gulf Oil spill (Deepwater Horizon). Yet Obama and all his Secretaries, Under-Secretaries, Directors, Generals, and Admirals have been ineffective in stopping the oil leak and all its environmental damage. It's a catastrophe.

The solution is simple and has been available to Obama and all the King's men and women from the get-go. Blow the darn well.  Anything from some well placed C4, to a well-placed bunk-buster bomb, or even a tactical nuke if necessary is all that it takes to implode the well hole and stop this mess.

We do not feel we need to tell Obama how to do this -- because as commander-in-chief Obama should know about our tactical capabilities. But we will tell Obama if he cannot figure it out.

All it takes is to let a team of Navy Seals do it. Just give them whatever ordnance and equipment they say they need to do the job. Within 24 hours, the hole will be plugged!

Of course we can speculate as to why this already has not been done. BP does not want to spend the money to drill a new well if they can save the leaky well. BP does not give a dang about how much damage is done to the American coast and environment. Of course that has boomeranged on BP. Now if BP meets its promises to pay all the damages, BP will lose much more than the cost of drilling a new well.

Meanwhile, Obama wants this Deepwater Horizon catastrophe to continue so that media attention is diverted away from just how lousy a job he is doing as President -- and the mounting failure of the Obama administration.

It's time to stop the Rube-Goldberg shenanigans. Blow the dang Deepwater Horizon well ASAP!

---

20 May 2010 -- 16:00 EDT

Very Biased Ali Velshi (CNN) Calls Rand Paul and Tea Party People Insurgents -- Fire Velshi!

Ali Velshi is an arrogant, biased, know-it-all-but-doesn't-have-a-clue, CNN anchor. Tuesday afternoon while yapping-on about the elections taking place that day, Velshi started calling the Tea Party people insurgents. And he called Rand Paul an insurgent.

That's right (but actually wrong). Velshi called the Tea Party people insurgents. Velshi is trying to demean the Tea Party by using a descriptive term, insurgent, that these days is tantamount to calling people terrorists.

Even worse, Velshi is labeling any political candidate who opposes incumbents, insurgents.

Velshi has his own agenda. So does CNN. Moreover, Velshi is using his bully pulpit as a CNN anchor to push his agenda.  Velshi should be fired, immediately. You cannot trust Velshi and you cannot trust CNN.

Wake up and smell the roses Velshi and CNN. Political candidates that oppose incumbents are not insurgents and they are not terrorists. Velshi should be fired for calling these candidates insurgents (which has the connotation of terrorist these days). Go sit in a corner for the rest of your life Velshi!

VELSHI: Time for "Wordplay." Every day we take a word or a phrase from a big news story and show you why it's in the news.

Case in point today, insurgent. Not a new word to you. Traditionally, it's a military term. Merriam-Webster says, it's a person who revolts against authority or established government.

Well, nowadays it also reflects the scorched-earth nature of politics. Perfect example, insurgent Rand Paul backed by the Tea Party is expected to defeat the establishment candidate in today's republican Senate primary in Kentucky.

By the way, it's not just conservatives [sic] liberals has [sic] been insurgents, too, consider Bill Halter, the progressive lieutenant governor who is trying to topple the incumbent Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas. CNN 18 May 2010

Velshi calling Rand Paul, the Tea Party, and political candidates opposing incumbents, insurgents, is inappropriate. CNN should fire Velshi for doing that!

---

8 May 2010 -- 05:00 EDT

Fight Back Americans! Boycott San Francisco for Boycotting Arizona

The government of the city of San Francisco (California, U.S.A) has launched a boycott against the State of Arizona. That's because San Francisco California arrogantly thinks it should dictate to the people of Arizona what laws the people of Arizona should have. And that is 100% inappropriate.

The Arizona law at issue is one that allows Arizona law enforcement officers (LEOs) to arrest people who are illegally in the United States of America -- aka illegal aliens. Entering the United States illegally is a crime. Therefore illegal aliens are criminals. They should be arrested just like any other criminals!

San Francisco and the people and organizations that are protesting the Arizona illegal alien law are lying through their teeth about the law -- and they are misapprehending the Arizona law. What they are doing is trying to allow illegal aliens to be present in the United States of America -- and they are trying to give illegal aliens (criminals) amnesty. They are trying to give illegal aliens (criminals) American citizenship. In effect these people protesting the Arizona law are betraying America -- traitors.

Contrary to the claims of San Francisco and those protesting the law, the Arizona law is an immigration enforcement law intended to deter illegal immigration. It is not an immigration law. It does not set up any regulations or procedures for immigration. It does not provide or deny legal immigration status to aliens.

"The provisions of this act are intended to work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States." (Arizona Senate Bill 1070) 

Moreover and contrary to the claims of San Francisco and the protestors, the Arizona law does not establish or encourage racial profiling. To the opposite, the Arizona law prohibits race-based investigatory stops.

"A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the united states or Arizona constitution." (Emphasis added. Arizona Senate Bill 1070)

As much as we enjoy visiting San Francisco, we no longer will visit San Francisco or buy any products that are made in or distributed through San Francisco. We encourage Arizona also to boycott San Francisco. And we encourage all patriotic Americans to boycott San Francisco too. 

What goes around comes around!

---

18 March 2010 - 14:00 EDT
Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the Democrats intend to force ObamaCare on the American people, even though America wants no part of ObamaCare. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the Democrats will do this even if it means deeming ObamaCare adopted without voting on it! This must be stopped! It is tyranny!

The only way to stop this tyranny is to immediately, today, start recall processes for all the Democrats that voted for ObamaCare in the House and Senate bills already. The Congressional Democrats should and must be fired immediately.

The Democrat tyrants plan to usurp democracy and put compulsory ObamaCare into law by Sunday, 31 March 2010, or at least before Easter. That would be before the recall elections could take place. But once the Democrats in the House and Senate see they are going to have to face recall elections now, plus the regular November elections, enough of them will stand up to Obama, Pelosi, and Reid and refuse to adopt ObamaCare.


(The American people are not against health care as Obama and the Democrats would like you to believe. It is compulsory health insurance we oppose. We want limits on health insurance premiums. We want protection from health-insurance companies using pre-existing conditions to cancel health insurance policies -- etc., etc., etc. But it does not take a more or less 2500-page, chock-full-of-pork bill to solve these problems and provide these protections. Fire the Democrats now!)

[Please see also: Obama's, Pre-Existing Illness, Health Insurance Coverage Scam]

---

31July 2009 - 12:15 EDT

No More Cash for Clunkers - It's another Obama Scam!

Obama and the Democrats are pushing dumping more money into the Cash for Clunkers program. That's because the $1-billion or so allocated for the Cash for Clunkers program has been just about all used.

The Cash for Clunkers program is just another example of Obama throwing taxpayer money around to buy votes for his 2012 campaign -- and to buy votes for the Democrat candidates in the 2010 congressional races. This is just another reason why we, the people, must vote against the Democrats in 2010  -- and against Obama in 2012. They are bankrupting the country.

More than likely, the people sucking up on the Cash for Clunkers tax credits are people who were going to buy new cars anyway. Thus, it is doubtful the Cash for Clunkers program really stimulated auto sales or the economy.

Cash for Clunkers is a waste of taxpayer money. It should not have been passed by Congress or signed by Obama in the first place. And Congress should not waste even more money on it now!

If you do not want Congress to waste even more of your tax dollars on the Cash for Clunkers program, you must call, write, and/or e-mail your U. S. Senators and your U. S. Representative now and tell them to vote against spending more money on Cash for Clunkers.

---

27 July 2009 - 06:30 EDT

On the surface requiring health insurance providers to include pre-existing conditions in health insurance coverage sounds like a good thing. But is it a good thing? Think about it!

Providing health insurance coverage for pre-existing medical conditions is comparable to letting someone buy fire insurance or auto insurance after the fire or wreck and then having the insurance policy cover the prior house fire or prior car wreck. That defeats a basic premise of insurance.  Moreover, it skyrockets the price of insurance premiums.

That is 100 per-cent unfair to those that have been playing by the rules and paying premiums for years. Collectively, those people have been contributing to the money pool from which insurance claims/benefits are paid. And they have been doing that prior to having claims themselves - thus building up the pool of money used for paying claims. That's what insurance is supposed to be all about.

There is no question about the harshness to someone who does not have health insurance and who has contracted a disease or medical condition, and then cannot get health insurance coverage for that pre-existing problem. Even so, it is patently and grossly unfair to those who have been paying health insurance premiums for years to ask them to pay possibly double, triple, or more insurance premiums to cover those people who want coverage for pre-existing conditions.

On the other hand, there should be a way to see to it that people who merely are transferring coverage from one insurance provider to another are not penalized where there is an issue of pre-existing conditions. There are solutions - but a blanket requirement that health insurance companies must provide coverage for pre-existing conditions is not the solution!

If you currently have health insurance, the Obama Care plan if passed by Congress as it is now, will hike your health insurance payments. If you do not want higher health insurance payments, you must call, write, and/or e-mail your U. S. Senators and your U. S. Representative now and tell them to vote against Obama's compulsory health care.

---

21 July 2009 - 16:30 EDT

Obama Plagiarist?

 
The line that put Barack Obama on the national political map and put him in the White House is one from his speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention. Essentially that line was:


That line and idea pretty much is a copy of a line from Stripes, a 1981 Bill Murray movie. 



Obama supporters no doubt will split hairs and argue and whine that is not plagiarism. Or they will argue that Obama did not steal the not black, not white, not liberal, not conservative but "there's the United States of America" line or idea from Stripes or Bill Murray's character John Winger. But that is just Obama smoke. We consider it close enough to be plagiaristic and stealing the line and idea from the movie Stripes.

In any event, Obama's not black, not white, not liberal, not conservative but "there's the United States of America" line and idea is far from original. And in any event that is dishonest - and that makes Obama dishonest!

Nevertheless, we believe that the not black, not white, not liberal, not conservative but "there's the United States of America" material from Obama's speeches constitutes plagiarism within the broad definitions of plagiarism. See for yourself. Here are a few definitions of plagiarism from Dictionary.com. We believe they fit!




 

---

9 February 2009 – 15:00 EST:

The economy is getting worse, not better. Congress must do its part to fix the economy now and immediately. Congress must do its part to fix the economy before it does anything else.  But  the Obama  Stimulus  is not going to do it. Obama's  Stimulus  package is politics-as usual bloat and pork.

Every congress person that already voted for Obama's pork and bloat stimulus bill should be recalled immediately. And every Senator who votes against the filibuster should be recalled immediately.

There was lots of talk during the recent campaigns about what the politicians are going to do or suggest should be done. But there has been no doing. It's well past time to stop the talking and start the doing -- and do it right. But Obama is all talk and no substance.

Obama is more like a cattle rustler trying to stampede Congress into a very bad plan. Obama is not a leader guiding Congress to good solutions.

Before anything else, Congress must pass legislation placing a moratorium on mortgage foreclosures for 120 days. That will save the homes of thousands if not millions of homeowners until Congress has time to write and pass some good legislation addressing the foreclosure issues. This foreclosure moratorium already should have been in place.

The bank and Wall Street bailout is no more a solution than was the economic stimulus package. (Please see: “Economic Stimulus Bill a Multi-$Billion Pork-Barrel Scam”, The American Voice, 11 February 2008) And as far as we are concerned, every member of the United States House of Representatives and Senate who voted for the bailout should be kicked out – pronto. (Please see: “Two Days of Infamy. 10-1 and 10-3 2008, Congress and President Betray American People”, The American Voice, 12 October 2008)

The economy problems must be addressed and fixed by Congress right now. But the Obama pork and bloat plan is not the way to do that.  Not only is the Obama pork and bloat plan  not perfect; it's not even close to perfect; it's a miserable failure.

In our 15 October 2008 entry we suggested: “Congress must increase the personal tax exemption ($3,500) and standard deduction (about $5,350), which together are about $8,850 to about $20,000. That roughly means that people making less than $10 or so per hour and working a 40-hour week [or less] do not have to pay any federal income tax at all. “ 

For those people there would be NO federal withholding tax and no waiting for rebates. Those people would take home their entire pay except for their FICA tax. It puts lots of money in the hands of people to spend starting within a week of the bill's passage.

For many people making more than $10 per hour, it would mean lots more take-home pay. And that puts lots of money in the hands of people to spend starting within a week of the bill's passage.

This tax measure should have been in place no later than 14 November 2008. In order to have saved the economy and to get the economy rolling. That would have started people spending-money by getting money into the hands of consumers by black Friday or as soon thereafter as possible.  Had that been done, the economy already would be healing!

People need to have money to spend  to get money, cash, flowing through the pipeline.

The money people spend flows up the chain from consumers, to stores, to manufacturers, and so forth. And the products people buy provide the demand for the production of more products. That means keeping people working and putting people to work. That means people getting paid so that they have money to spend. Get the picture? It is growing the economy through market economics.

This legislation should be two, separate, simple bills – none of the comprehensive, complicated, convoluted, pork-stuffed crap that Obama wants and Congress usually does. Bill #1 simply is a bill staying all mortgage foreclosures. No squabbling about whether the properties are primary residences, rental properties, vacation homes, stores, factories, or whatever.

All are stayed until Congress has time to sort out the details. That way whether you are a homeowner, renter, store owner, or whatever you know you can live where you are living or work where you are working for the next 120-day period.

Bill #2 simple raises the personal tax exemption from $3,500 to $14,650. Then with the current $5,350 standard deduction added in, there are no federal income taxes for anyone making less than $20,000 per year. No comprehensive stuff added. No arguing over exemptions or deductions for kids, or baby sitting, or college, or anything else. Bill #2 simply raises the  personal tax exemption from $3,500 to $14,650 and orders that the personal exemption increase be reflected in withholding taxes immediately.

Moreover, because this was not done in November and the economy is even worse now than then, that increase in personal exemption now should be enough so that anyone making at least $30,000 if not $40,000 per year will be exempt from paying income taxe.

---

2 December 2008 - 06:00 EST: 


In the latest of their bailout binges, Obama and the Democrats now want to give a $25-billion bailout to Chrysler, Ford, and GM. The proposed Chrysler, Ford, and GM bailout is just another political payback for votes and lots more pork! Moreover, it does nothing to solve the financial problems facing America and Americans. And it does nothing to sell American-made cars.

Even worse, GM and the American auto industry are asking the American taxpayers to underwrite and pay for their excessive salaries and profits.

For example, the "estimated . . . average wage, including benefits, for current GM workers [is] $78.21 an hour. (Salaries at GM: $78/hour, The Motley Fool CAPS, November 17, 2008)
 
At the top end, in 2007

• G. R. Wagoner, Jr.'s (GM Chairman & CEO) total GM compensation was $14,415,914.00.
• F. A. Henderson (Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer) got a total GM compensation of $7,608,011.00.
• R. A. Lutz (Vice Chairman for Global Product Development) raked in a total GM compensation of $6,894,024.00.

Rounded off, call it $14-million, $8-million, and $7-million respectively. (General Motors Corp -- Executive Salaries, Bonuses, Stock Options, and Other Compensation, CompanyPay.com, 1 November 2008)

The $25-billion bailout Chrysler, Ford, and GM seek is designed to get the American taxpayers to subsidize Chrysler, Ford, and GM's excessive salaries and profits. And it does nothing to sell American-made cars. Why the heck should the American taxpayers subsidize Chrysler, Ford, and GM excessive salaries and profits?

To solve the American auto industry problems, GM and the other American automakers must produce the best quality cars and trucks at lower prices than any other automaker! They must market that to the consumers. And it does not take a $25-billion bailout from the American taxpayers to do that.

Here's how to do that:

• Cut the total pay/salary and other compensation of each person at the American automakers and their suppliers by one-half. With a maximum salary and other compensation of $1-million and a minimum wage of $10.00 per hour.
  

• For example, at the top end, that cuts G. R. Wagoner, Jr. down to a total GM compensation of $1-million; F. A. Henderson, down to a total GM compensation of $1-million; and R. A. Lutz down to a total GM compensation of $1-million. Just that is a $25,917,949 saving for GM.
  

• Next the Big 3, Chrysler, Ford, and GM, should get rid of all their luxury jets. Then each one of the Big 3 each can have one of a smaller, leaner jet such as the Beech Premier or the Cessna Citation.

• Then for example, those average wages, including benefits, for current GM workers of $78.21 an hour get cut to $39.11 per hour. Etc. Etc. Etc.
  

• Autoworkers that get laid off should collect the standard unemployment insurance rates -- not the excessive unemployment pay they get now for not making cars and trucks.
  

• The automakers have to forgo profits until they are back in the red.
  

• These same sorts of salary, wage, and compensation cuts have to be made by all the companies that supply the automakers. Moreover, those suppliers are going to have to supply the automakers without any net profits themselves until the automakers are back on their feet.  (If the business that suppliers get from American automakers is critical to their businesses, then it is in the suppliers' interests to help to make the American automakers competitive.)
  

The American people should not and must not be asked to fork over money to bailout the American automakers and suppliers in order for the automakers and suppliers to make profits.

If the automakers and their suppliers want profits, they are going to have to do that by being competitive - not by getting handouts or bailouts from the Federal treasury.

The object here is to get the automakers and their suppliers competitive by cutting costs and expenses, while at the same time improving quality - not by handouts or bailouts from the American taxpayers.

---

24 November 2008 - 12:00 EST: 

Bush and the Democrats are using the Bank and Wall Street bailout Bill to bail out Citibank. But to whom are Bush and the Democrats giving American taxpayer money? Arabs-OPEC and other foreign interests, that's whom!

"Kingdom Holding is the largest individual investor in Citibank, owning 3.6 per cent of the firm's equities." 

"Kingdom Holding Company is a public holding company, incorporated in Saudi Arabia, and is the largest company in Saudi Arabia. It is controlled by Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz, and is headquartered in the city of Riyadh. The company is publicly listed in the Saudi Stock Exchange but only 5% of the shares are public, the rest is privately owned with the majority stakeholder, Prince Alwaleed holding 93.5% shares"

Interestingly, Kingdom holding also has interests in Time Warner, Pepsico, Walt Disney, and other supposedly American companies too.

Timer Warner owns CNN and Disney owns ABC. So you might as well figure Kingdom Holding likely owns CNN and ABC. That does not mean that Kingdom Holding owns a majority of these companies. But it means that Kingdom Holding likely owns enough shares in these companies (Citibank, Time Warner, and Disney to strongly influence them.

The Citibank/Kingdom-Holding bailout is no more a solution than was the bank and Wall Street bailout and no more a solution than was the economic stimulus package. (Please see: "Fix the American Economy First, Now, Immediately!", The American Voice, 7 November 2008 and "Economic Stimulus Bill a Multi-$Billion Pork-Barrel Scam", The American Voice, 11 February 2008) And as far as we are concerned, every member of the United States House of Representatives and Senate who voted for the bailout should be kicked out - pronto. (Please see: "Two Days of Infamy. 10-1 and 10-3 2008, Congress and President Betray American People", The American Voice, 12 October 2008)

---

7 November 2008 – 11:00 EST:

 

The economy is getting worse, not better. Congress must do its part to fix the economy now and immediately. Congress must do its part to fix the economy before it does anything else.

There has been lots of talk during the recent campaigns about what the politicians are going to do or suggest should be done. But there has been no doing. It's well past time to start the doing.

Before anything else, Congress must pass legislation placing a moratorium on mortgage foreclosures for 120 days. That will save the homes of thousands if not millions of homeowners until Congress has time to write and pass some good legislation addressing the foreclosure issues. This foreclosure moratorium should be in place no later than 14 November 2008.

The bank and Wall Street bailout is no more a solution than was the economic stimulus package. (Please see: “Economic Stimulus Bill a Multi-$Billion Pork-Barrel Scam”, The American Voice, 11 February 2008) And as far as we are concerned, every member of the United States House of Representatives and Senate who voted for the bailout should be kicked out – pronto. (Please see: “Two Days of Infamy. 10-1 and 10-3 2008, Congress and President Betray American People”, The American Voice, 12 October 2008)

The economy problems must be addressed and fixed by Congress. But a Wall Street and bank bailout is not the way to do that. The Wall Street and bank bailout does NOT fix a thing. Neither did the economic-stimulus bill fix anything.

In our 15 October 2008 entry we suggested: “Congress must increase the personal tax exemption ($3,500) and standard deduction (about $5,350), which together are about $8,850 to about $20,000. That roughly means that people making less than $10 or so per hour and working a 40-hour week [or less] do not have to pay any federal income tax at all. “ 

For those people there would be NO federal withholding tax and no waiting for rebates. Those people would take home their entire pay except for their FICA tax. It puts lots of money in the hands of people to spend starting within a week of the bill's passage.

For many people making more than $10 per hour, it would mean lots more take-home pay. And that puts lots of money in the hands of people to spend starting within a week of the bill's passage.

This tax measure should be in place no later than 14 November 2008. In order to save the economy and to get the economy rolling now, spending-money has to start getting into the hands of consumers by black Friday or as soon thereafter as possible.

People need to have money to spend during the Christmas shopping season. That is not just for all the usual reasons people spend money during the Christmas shopping season. It is to get money, cash, flowing through the pipeline.

The money people spend flows up the chain from consumers, to stores, to manufacturers, and so forth. And the products people buy provide the demand for the production of more products. That means keeping people working and putting people to work. That means people getting paid so that they have money to spend. Get the picture? It is growing the economy through market economics.

This legislation should be two, separate, simple bills – none of the comprehensive, complicated, convoluted, pork-stuffed crap that Congress usually does. Bill #1 simply is a bill staying all mortgage foreclosures. No squabbling about whether the properties are primary residences, rental properties, vacation homes, stores, factories, or whatever.

All are stayed until Congress has time to sort out the details. That way whether you are a homeowner, renter, store owner, or whatever you know you can live where you are living or work where you are working for the next 120-day period.

Bill #2 simple raises the personal tax exemption from $3,500 to $14,650. Then with the current $5,350 standard deduction added in, there are no federal income taxes for anyone making less than $20,000 per year. No comprehensive stuff added. No arguing over exemptions or deductions for kids, or baby sitting, or college, or anything else. Bill #2 simply raises the  personal tax exemption from $3,500 to $14,650 and orders that the personal exemption increase be reflected in withholding taxes immediately.

---

3 November 2008:

Some pundits recently characterized the Obama v McCain race this way. McCain says that Obama is a socialist and Obama says McCain is another Bush.

McCain is not another Bush. Moreover, McCain has showed more backbone in standing up to Bush than has Obama. However, the Obama-Clinton attack machine, which is acting in concert with the liberal media, falsely paints McCain as another Bush.

(Hillary Clinton had a set of nasty professional campaigners such as Bill Clinton, James Carvelle, and company that viciously attacked Obama during the primaries. After the primaries, Clinton and her vicious, nasty attack dogs joined the Obama campaign. Since then, they have changed Obama and his campaign into a hateful, political attack machine.)

Bush has been a horrible President of the United States of America, the U.S.A. But Bush has done much more to ruin the Republican Party than he has done to ruin America.

The U.S.A. fundamentally is sound. But Bush and Cheney have made America more vulnerable to destruction from within.

If Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Hillary Clinton take control of our country, it will not be the red states of America, it will not be the blue states of America – nor will it be black America, brown America, or white America. It will not even be the United States of America any more. They will destroy America from within.

If Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Hillary Clinton take control of our country, it will be the United Socialist States of America, the USSA – not the U.S.A. It will be the destruction of the U.S.A. as we know it -- and as we like it. Obama and Biden will finish the job of destroying America from within that Bush and Cheney started. Obama-Biden will be the continuation of Bush-Cheney.

Even if McCain were another Bush, which he is NOT, I prefer another four years of Bush to an Obama socialist America. In asking Americans to vote for Obama, the Obama-Biden-Clinton attack machine is asking Americans to vote for socialism. I refuse to vote for socialism.

I support freedom not socialism. Therefore, I support McCain!

---

30 October 2008 – 10:00 EDT:

Last night three networks, CBS, FOX, and NBC, ran an infomercial for Barack Obama. However, those networks and stations that ran the Obama infomercial did not also provide McCain an opportunity to respond to Obama's infomercial. That is wrong! That is not fair!

The fact that Obama paid for the infomercial makes no difference. Unless CBS, FOX, and NBC were willing to provide McCain equal time, at no charge to McCain, to respond to Obama's infomercial, they should not have taken the money to run Obama's infomercial – and they should not have run Obama's infomercial.

The legalities here are not important. What is important is the ethics, morality, honesty, and fairness of the equal time principle. And the ethics, morality, honesty, and fairness of the equal time principle dictate that McCain be given equal time to respond to the Obama infomercial.

The three networks, CBS, FOX, and NBC plus all the TV stations that ran the Obama infomercial should provide McCain an opportunity to respond to Obama's infomercial. That should be at an equal time spot too, 8:00 pm on a weekday night.

Thus, at 8:00 pm tonight (Thursday) or tomorrow night (Friday) CBS, FOX, and NBC plus all the TV stations that ran the Obama infomercial should provide McCain one-half hour to respond to the Obama infomercial. It is the ethical, moral, honest, and fair thing to do!

---

15 October 2008 – 10:00 EDT:

Fix, Do Not Bailout, the American Economy

Picture the bailout bill for what it is, a bailout. Picture yourself in the middle of the ocean in a rowboat with a hole in the bottom. You bail out the boat by scooping up the water that's leaking into your boat. Then you throw the bucketful of water over the side of the boat.

But so far you have not fixed the hole in the bottom of the boat. So, the water keeps leaking into your boat and you keep bailing. You and your boat stay afloat as long as you are bailing water.

You keep doing this until you are worn out and no longer able to bail. The boat fills up with water. The boat sinks – and you drown.

If instead of bailing, you plug the hole in the boat, the leaking stops. You do not need to bail out until you are worn out. The boat stays afloat. You don't drown.

President Bush and the Democrat congressional leadership ramroded the bill to bail out the very Wall Street banks and financial institutions that are to blame for the current financial crisis. Overall this plan is bad. And the entire idea of a Wall Street and bank bailout should be thrown out.

The bailout is no more a solution than was the economic stimulus package. Please see: “Economic Stimulus Bill a Multi-$Billion Pork-Barrel Scam”, The American Voice, 11 February 2008)

The economy problems must be addressed and fixed by Congress. But a Wall Street and bank bailout is not the way to do that. The Wall Street and bank bailout does NOT fix a thing.

So far congressional bailouts aren't even keeping the boat afloat. It is one bailout after another. In February there was the tax-rebate economic stimulus scam. But the economic boat kept on leaking.

Then a few weeks ago there was the Wall Street bailout. But the economic boat kept on leaking. Now Pelosi wants another tax rebate. That is not going to stop the economic boat from leaking either. It is not going to stop people from drowning financially.

In our 21 September 2008 entry we listed eight areas that should be addressed to fix the economy. Those are the sorts of things Congress should be looking at to fix the economy – NOT a Wall Street bailout.

When you build a house, you start with the foundation and work your way up. The economy has to be fixed by starting at the foundation, the bottom, and working up.

If people have money they will spend it. Instead of bailing out Wall Street and the banks, we need to be putting money in the hands of people.

When people have money they tend to spend it. But people cannot spend what they don't have. And what drives the economy is people spending money.

When people are spending money, that creates demand for products and services. Demand for products and services maintains and creates jobs. The more people with jobs the more people there are spending money. That creates more demand. That means more jobs. Get the picture.

Thus the real way to fix the economy is to put money in the hand s of people. Putting more money in the hands of the people, you and me, must be started immediately.

To get that ball rolling Congress must reconvene this week. Effective immediately, Congress must increase the personal tax exemption ($3,500) and standard deduction (about $5,350) from about $8,850 altogether ($3.500 plus 8,850) to about $20,000 altogether. That roughly means that people making less than $10 or so per hour and working a 40-hour week do not have to pay any federal income tax at all. *

For those people there would be NO federal withholding tax. No waiting for rebates. And NO bank and Wall Street bailouts.

Those people would take home their entire pay except for their FICA tax. It could and should start with next week's paychecks. And that puts lots of money in the hands of people to spend starting next week.

For many people making more than $10 per hour, it would mean lots more take-home pay. That puts lots of money in the hands of people to spend starting next week. No waiting for rebates. And NO bank and Wall Street bailouts.

Congress needs to forget its current vacation and to get to work fixing the economy right now.

Putting money directly in the hands of American people to spend puts people and factories back to work. That stimulates the economy and helps to fix it too.

That's enough for now. More about the economic problems and how to fix the economy right in future entries to this blog.

* The U.S. Income Tax laws are very complex and so are the laws regarding exemptions, deductions, withholding tax, and estimated income tax. The actual dollar amounts will vary from that $8,850 depending on all sorts of parameters. So will the withholding tax effects.

---

12 October 2008 – 22:30 EDT: 

On 3 October 2008, 263 members of the U.S. House of Representatives defied the will of the American people by voting for the Wall Street bailout.  The day before, 74 U.S. Senators also defied the will of the American people by voting for the Wall Street bailout.

Earlier last week, on 29 September 2008, 228 democrat and republican members of the United States House of Representatives voted against the Wall Street bailout plan. These 228 representatives had the courage to stand up to President Bush and the Democrat leadership to defeat the plan to spend $700-billion to bail out Wall Street – and the banks that have been making the problems.

At that time the representatives were reporting their constituent feedback was running 100 to 1 against the bailout plan.

Nevertheless, the Democrat leadership in Congress was bound and determined to pass a bank and Wall Street bailout despite the will of the people of the United States of America – and despite the 29 September vote of the House of Representatives against the bailout – even though this bailout will not solve the economy problems.

So the Democrat and Republican Senate leadership added $150-billion of sugar, pork, and earmarks to the bank and Wall Street bailout. That worked. The Senate passed the pork-barrel, sugar-pill  $850-billion bank bailout and Wall Street bailout 74 to 25.

At that time, congress people were reporting constituent input was running about 50%-50%. How convenient. Was there really that much changed in only four days from 100 to 1 against to 50-50?

Even if such a change occurred, was it a shift in favor of the bailout or people supporting the sugar and pork added to the bailout bill? Moreover, how about the media hammering the people with fear mongering about the impact of not having a bailout bill?

With the excessive money (often $millions) the network media people make, no doubt they are heavily invested in the stock market and were trying to recover their stock losses by using fear mongering tactics to promote passage of the  pork-barrel, sugar-pill  bank and Wall Street bailout.

This is and was the typical Congressional and liberal mainstream media (MSM) way of getting bills passed no matter how bad they are for America. And the pork-barrel, sugar-pill bank and Wall Street bailout is bad for America. Even worse, it does not solve the economy problems destroying America at this time.

The two days in October 2008 on which the House of Representatives and Senate voted for the pork-barrel, sugar-pill $850-billion bank and Wall Street bailout, and on which President Bush signed the bill, were days of infamy. Perhaps the passage of the bank and Wall Street bailout bill is the worst treachery enacted against the American people and the principles embodied in our Constitution since the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.

I assert that we . . . will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us. (For a Declaration of War, Franklin D. Roosevelt, In Congress, 8 December 1941)

Each and every representative and senator that voted for the bailout must be ousted in the November elections. Additionally, recall actions must be started immediately against each and every one of the 75 senators that defied the American people and voted for the bailout and who are not up for election this November.

This is the only way other than an armed revolution that we, the people, can take control of our nation away from the corrupt politicians, greedy lobbyists, and un-ethical media that betrayed us on 1 and 3 October 2008.  And it is the only way we, the people of the United States of America, can “make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.”

{To see how your representative voted, check here}

{To see how you senator voted, check here}
 

(Note: This article was pretty much written on 3 October 2008. Unfortunately, due to various interruptions and distractions, it was not finished and laid out until today. My apologies. J.J. Publius)

---

1 October 2008 – 11:30 EDT:

On Monday, 228 democrat and republican members of the United States House of Representatives voted against the Wall Street bailout plan. These 228 representatives had the courage to stand up to President Bush and the Democrat leadership to defeat the plan to spend $700-billion to bail out Wall Street – and the banks that have been making the problems.

More importantly, these 228 representatives stood up for the American people. The vast majority of the American people are against the Wall Street bailout.

On the other hand, the 205 representatives that voted for the Wall Street bailout defied the will of the American people by voting for the Wall Street bailout. Each and every representative that voted for the bailout must be ousted in the November elections. And recall actions against each and every one of the 205 representatives that defied the American people and voted for the bailout must be started immediately.

The Senate leadership plans to pass the Wall Street bailout later today. Despite the fact that so many Americans oppose it. How dare they!

Interestingly, the Senate leadership will introduce a Wall Street bailout bill that has all sorts of hard -to-vote-against goodies added to it. Things such as increasing the FDIC deposit protection ceiling from the current $100,000 to $250,000 and relief for victims of the Alternative Minimum Tax. Adding these sorts of goodies is similar in principle to adding earmarks to spending bills.

The increase in the FDIC ceiling should be in its own, separate bill. It should NOT be part of the Wall Street bailout bill. So should relief for victims of the Alternative Minimum Tax and so forth.

Moreover, any and all of these sweeteners should be their own and separate bills. There is a simple, parliamentary mechanism to do that. It is called dividing the question.

Here is the way that works. The traitorous Senate leadership will bring the sweetened Wall Street bailout bill to the Senate floor today or whenever.

When that happens, the Senators that are for the American people and against the Wall Street bailout should move to divide the question. If they can get that motion to divide passed, then the FDIC ceiling increase, relief for victims of the Alternative Minimum Tax, and other such sweeteners are divided into their own separate bills. Then each bill is voted on separately from and independently of and the Wall Street bailout bill.

That way, the Senators that oppose the Wall Street bailout can pass the FIDIC ceiling limit, relief for victims of the Alternative Minimum Tax and so forth -- and yet still vote NO to the Wall Street bailout.

If the Senate leadership manages to torpedo dividing the question one way or another, then the Senators that oppose bailing out Wall Street should vote against the bill -- sweeteners and all. We are not going to let them get away afterwards with saying they were against the bailout but had to vote for the bailout to get the sweeteners! That sort of excuse is just plain crap that we will not tolerate.

President Bush and the Democrat congressional leadership are pushing a bill to bail out the very Wall Street banks and financial institutions that are to blame for the current financial crisis. Overall this plan is bad. And the entire idea of a Wall Street bailout should be thrown out.

Moreover, the vast majority of the American people are against the ($700-billion) Wall Street bailout. Yet these elected politicians seem hell-bent-for-leather to adopt a Wall Street bailout despite the fact their constituents oppose it.

In part that is because they think their constituents will take this betrayal lying down. Even worse, they are ignoring the millions of Americans that are calling, emailing, and faxing them and telling them NOT to vote for the Wall Street Bailout. They should be kicked out of office as soon as possible.

The economy problems must be addressed and fixed by Congress. But a Wall Street bailout is not the way to do that.

(Note: the FDIC ceiling increase would not affect many Americans at all. Unless you have more than $100,000 in your bank account you are below the current FDIC ceiling and the FDIC protects the money in your bank account. Even if you have more than $100,000 you do not need Congress to up the FIDIC ceiling in order to protect your money. All you have to do is to open an additional account or accounts and spread your deposits among your several accounts so that no single account has more than $100,000 in it. FDIC separately protects each account up to $100,000.)

---

28 September 2008 – 02:30 EDT:

President Bush and the Democrat congressional leadership have been pushing a bill to bail out the very Wall Street banks and financial institutions that are to blame for the current financial crisis. Overall this plan is bad. And the entire idea of a Wall Street bailout should be thrown out.

Moreover, the vast majority of the American people are against the ($700-billion) Wall Street bailout. Yet these elected politicians seem hell-bent-for-leather to adopt a Wall Street bailout despite the fact their constituents oppose it. In part that is because they think their constituents will take this betrayal lying down.

The economy problems must be addressed and fixed by Congress. But a Wall Street bailout is not the way to do that.

In our 21 September 2008 entry we listed eight areas that should be addressed to fix the economy. Those are the sorts of things Congress should be looking at to fix the economy – NOT a Wall Street bailout.

The big rush for passing the Wall Street bailout is not because of concerns about the American economy. The big push is to get something, anything, passed by Monday so that the U.S. Representatives and Senators can start a three-month vacation on Monday.  If Congress does not pass this horrible Wall Street bailout by Monday, congress people will have to postpone their 3-month vacation.

These congress people are putting their self-interests above the interests of the American people. They should be thrown out of office right along with throwing out their bailout plan. Don't take this betrayal lying down!

Most states have procedures for recalling their federal representatives and senators. The only way to put the brakes on this Wall Street Bailout rip-off is to start recall petitions immediately for the representatives and senators that support the Wall Street bailout. Don't take this betrayal lying down!

We will try to keep you posted on those representatives and senators that are supporting the Wall Street bailout and/or vote for it. In the meantime, here are some of the people that seem to be backing and pushing the bailout.

If you are in any of their districts, you must immediately start circulating recall petitions for these people. And you need to get started circulating the petitions before the House and Senate can vote on it. Voting could start as early as today.

• House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.,
• Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.,
• Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D.

 

• Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
• Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.,
• Sen. Barack Obama, D-Il.
• Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y

.

• Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah
• Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H
• Rep. Chris Shays, R-Conn.

Also, we are not yet sure but Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, seems to be in favor of the Wall Street bailout.  

Don't take this betrayal lying down. Start circulating recall petitions for these people right away! And vote them out of office in November.

(Note: recall petitions cannot be completed in time to oust these representatives and senators in time to remove these people from office prior to votes on the Wall Street bailout this week. However, if these recall petitions are started as soon as possible, and hopefully today, they will send a message to these elected representatives and senators in time to send them the message: do not vote for a Wall Street bailout or you are out!”)

---

26 September 2008 – 09:00 EDT:

Wednesday, Senator John McCain announced that he was putting his campaign on hold in order to get back to the U.S. Senate – to work on hammering out a solution to the economy mess.

This economy thing is tough. And McCain got going. That's what tough people do. That's what presidents do! When the going gets tough, they get going.

On the other hand, rather than put his country before his campaign, Obama ran from the economy challenge. Obama said he would not go back to Washington unless he was called to do so. That's not leadership. That's running from the gunfire rather than running to it. That's cowardice, not heroism.

Nevertheless, when President Bush called a leadership meeting for yesterday, Thursday, and invited both McCain and Obama, Obama did attend. But Obama ran away first.

Obama ran away from the economy propblem until the President, in essence, forced Obama to get back to Washington and address the economy problem.

And perhaps even worse, Obama now is trying to force having a debate about foreign policy tonight. Wake up Obama, it's the economy stupid!

McCain showed leadership. Obama showed cowardice.

---

21 September 2008 – 17:00 EDT:

No Congress Vacations and No Wall Street Bailouts!

The United States of America is in a horrible financial crisis. This crisis has been brewing for quit some time. Yet Congress plans to take a recess next week – in the midst of this horrible financial situation. Congress people think they can fix that which they have not been able to fix for months, if not years, in a week and then take a vacation. Bah!

Congress pulled the same trick in August 2008. Then we said, “Congress does not deserve a vacation or a recess – moreover there is important people's business that needs to be done now – not after a month-long congressional vacation.” (No August Vacation/Recess for Congress, The American Voice, 30 July 2008)

However, this time, Congress will be taking a three-month vacation while the nation is in crisis. That is nothing less than willful and intentional dereliction of duty! The Congress people are putting themselves before their country. That is NOT acceptable.

While Congress people were enjoying their month-long August 2008 vacation, the American economy was nose-diving. And in just the mere two-weeks since Congress got back in session, the bottom has dropped out of the American economy – to the point where Congress now wants to spend about $1/2-trillion to try to fix it. But that isn't going to fix the economy either.

Congress spending $1/2-trillion of our money to bailout Wall Street is NOT going to fix the economy problems. Increasing the national debt by $1/2-trillion will not fix the economy -- that's stupid economics, stupid.

It's no more a solution than was the economic stimulus package. Please see: “Economic Stimulus Bill a Multi-$Billion Pork-Barrel Scam”, The American Voice, 11 February 2008)

So who benefits from the $1/2-trillion Wall Street bailout? The greedy filthy rich, the Chinese that have invested in American financial institutions, the Arab royalty that have invested in American financial institutions, the speculators, and so forth. Simply put the very people that have been screwing up our economy are the ones that will be bailed-out – not the everyday American people.

There are things that can be done and should be done:

They include, inter alia: 

That puts American people and factories back to work. That stimulates the economy and helps to fix it too. And it protects Americans from unscrupulous, predatory, greedy banks, lenders, and credit card companies.

That's enough for now. More about the economic problems and how to fix the economy right in future entries to this blog. Additionally, getting into the economic problems in any depth is beyond the scope of a blog. We will try to do some full-blown articles on the economic problems when we have time to do so.

For more about the Federal funds rate, please see the Wikipedia “Federal funds rate” entry. 

Here is a nice chart of the Fed Funds Rates from 1954 to 2008. 

* Actually, there was a major revision in usury law in 1974, Loan Interest And Protection Law Act of Jan. 30, 1974, P.L. 13, No. 6 69 An Act

** Of course there are some overseas U.S. bases such as Ramstein AB that are integral parts of support for our troops and operations in combat theatres such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and Korea. Those cannot be closed right now.

---

04 September 2008 – 08:00 EDT:

McCain and Palin Hit Home Runs!

On Friday, 29 August 2008, John McCain hit a home run when he announced that he had selected Alaska's Governor Sarah Palin to be his running mate on the Republican ticket in the 2008 Presidential election.

Then Sarah Palin hit it out of the park on 29 August when she introduced herself to America! When you do a side-by-side comparison of Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, Palin is more qualified to be President of the United States of America than are Barack Obama or Joe Biden so not qualified.

[Note: this article originally was written on 30 August. We are late getting it posted. Since then, last night Palin gave her vice-presidential nomination acceptance speech. It was another home run. More about that in an upcoming entry to this blog. -jjp]

First, the President of the United States of America (POTUS) is an administrator not a legislator. The POTUS is the chief executive officer (CEO) of the United States. Of the four president/vice-president candidates, Biden, McCain, Obama, and Palin, Governor Palin is the only one that is, or has been, a CEO, the CEO of Alaska. She also has been a mayor, the CEO of a city.

Palin wins on executive experience.

Then there is the Commander-In-Chief issue – the military command experience. As governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin is the commander-in-chief of the Alaska National Guard. Moreover, during her term in office as Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin is the commander-in-chief of Alaskan National Guard troops serving in a combat theater, Iraq.

The only other of the four president/vice-president candidates that has any military command experience is John McCain. He is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and the National War College. McCain served as a combat pilot in Viet Nam, was commanding officer of a training squadron, and retired as a Captain in the U.S. Navy (one rank away from being an admiral). That's lots more military and military command experience than either Obama or Biden have.

McCain and Palin win on the Commander-in-Chief experience issue(s).

Incidentally, as commander of a training squadron McCain was in effect the CEO for that squadron and made executive and administrative decisions. That gives McCain more experience as an executive than either Obama or Biden have. Obama and Biden have none as far as we know.

How about energy? Palin wins there too. Alaska is a major oil-producing and exporting state. Alaska also has oil pipelines. And Palin is Governor and CEO of Alaska.  Palin wins on energy experience.

But perhaps most important, Sarah Palin and her husband are regular people, just like us.

Sarah Palin's husband, "Todd . . . is a lifelong commercial fisherman . . .  a production operator . . . in the oil fields up on Alaska's north slopes and he's a proud member of the United Steal Workers' Union and he's a world champion snow machine racer.” And Palin is married to a man she met in high school – and only one marriage. (Transcript of 29 August 2008 Palin speech )

Don't forget, the Palins have a son in the United States Army. That son is scheduled to deploy to Iraq this month.

Here is more Sarah Palin' s introductory speech:

I never really set out to be involved in public affairs, much less to run for this office. My mom and dad both worked at the local elementary school and my husband and I, we both grew up working with our hands.

I was just your average hockey mom in Alaska. We're busy raising our kids and serving as the team mom and coaching some basketball on the side. I got involved in the PTA and then was elected to the city council. And then elected mayor of my hometown, where my agenda was to stop wasteful spending and cut property taxes and put the people first.

I was then appointed ethics commissioner and chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. And when I found corruption there, I fought it hard and I held the offenders to account. Along with fellow reformers in the great state of Alaska, as governor I stood up to the old politics as usual, to the special interests, to the lobbyists, the big oil companies, and the good old boy network.

When oil and gas prices went up so dramatically, and the state revenues followed with that increase, I sent a large share of that revenue directly back to the people of Alaska. And we are now embarking on a $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.

I signed major ethics reforms and I appointed both Democrats and Independents to serve in my administration. And I've championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress, thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, I said, we'd build it ourselves.  (Transcript of 29 August 2008 Palin speech)

It's no wonder the Obama-Biden campaign and the left-wing democrats are eating their hearts out and trying to dig up dirt on Sarah Palin and her family. Palin is everything they want to be and pretend to be but are not.

[Note: as soon as McCain announced Palin would be his VP nominee, the Obama-Biden camp and biased liberal-media started spreading all sorts of rumors in an attempt to discredit Palin. In part, that shows just how threatened they are by having to face a McCain-PALIN ticket. Some of these rumors might have merit and some not. But it is too soon to tell. If enough of these rumors are true and significant, then Palin could turn out to be a bad choice. Time will tell. For now we consider Palin a home run. -jjp]

---

30 July 2008 – 15:30 EDT:

 

Congress plans to leave Washington, D.C. in just a few days for a month-long August vacation, which it calls a recess. That's baloney! Congress does not deserve a vacation or a recess – moreover there is important people's business that needs to be done now – not after a month-long congressional vacation.

First, hundreds of thousands of American are facing foreclosures of the mortgages on their homes – and thousands more soon will be facing foreclosures.

The rushed housing bill Congress just passed is a piece of crap. First, it does not even kick in until October 1. That means for all of August and September there will be no relief, under the housing bill to, people faced with losing their homes. While congresspeople are lounging around on summer vacations, thousands of Americans will be losing their homes.

Second, it seems Congress will be helping the vultures to buy foreclosed-upon homes from the banks -- by giving people tax breaks for unscrupulously preying upon the ravages of foreclosing banks and giving municipalities money to do the same. What Americans need is Congressional action that will help Americans to stay in their homes – not help the vultures and the banks to foreclose on them.

(If the banks know they will have trouble unloading foreclosed upon homes, they well be more likely to negotiate with the homeowners to solve the overdue payments problems. If the banks know, thanks to the housing bill, that it will be easy for them to unload foreclosed upon homes, the banks have no incentive to negotiate with the homeowners.)

We will take a closer look at the crappy housing bill as soon as we have a chance to do so. 

Then there are the energy, fuel prices, and economy problems that cannot wait while Congress takes an undeserved vacation. If Congress takes any vacations until there are adequate solutions to those problems, the housing problem, and other critical problems, then every single congressperson, democrat or republican, representative or senator, should be booted out of office in the November 2008 elections. (Unfortunately, only one-third of the senators are up for re-election this year. We will have to wait for the 2010 and 2012 to boot the other two-thirds.)

---

17 July 2008 – 03:00 EDT:

Hydroelectric power is perhaps the best, if not the best, alternate source for the production of electricity.

For years the politicians have been talking about the oil, gas, power, and energy problems in the United States -- and in the World too for that matter. But, Congress, the Whitehouse (under both Democratic and Republican occupation), and politicians across this country have done little or nothing to solve our oil and energy problems.

Most of the alternate energy talk today centers around solar power, wind power, and nuclear power. Coal gets thrown in to the discussion as an alternative to oil. But even though coal does not need to be imported, it still is a fossil fuel -- and it is not 100% clean.

Nuclear energy potentially is very hazardous. There is the problem of spent fuel. And although there is a low likelihood of meltdown or radiation release, if such an event happens there would be a tragedy of tremendous proportion -- a catastrophe.

Solar generation does not produce electricity at night and cannot be relied upon to produce much if any electricity on cloudy days. Wind generation is good night or day, as long the wind is blowing. On a calm day there is little or no wind generation. Additionally, some areas of the United States are not conducive to either solar or wind power generation.

On the other hand hydroelectric power is fairly constant -- night or day -- clouds or no clouds -- wind or no wind. Hydroelectric dams help with flood control and waterway flow control -- as well as provide reservoirs to provide water for times of drought. Moreover the lakes created by hydroelectric dams provide homes for fish and other aquatic wildlife, animals, and plants -- and/or recreational activities such as boating and swimming too.

It's likely there is more than enough potential power in this nation's waterways to generate all the electricity we consume now and for many years into the future -- without resorting to solar, wind, coal, or nuclear power.

Nevertheless, we should have a balanced and distributed power generation system in the United States of America, including solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. Nuclear and coal powered generators should be phased out as they are retired in the normal course of decommissioning such power plants.

New hydroelectric dams do not need to be massive projects such as the Hoover dam. Or even as massive as the Niagara Falls project.

Smaller dams likely could be built sooner and have less environmental impact. Moreover, smaller dams would help to distribute power-generating stations throughout the nation, thus locating them closer to the consumers. Additionally, more but smaller dams make it difficult for terrorists to shut down the power grid.

Construction of new hydroelectric dams and plants should be and must be a major part of America's energy plan. And Construction of new hydroelectric dams and plants should be and must be a very high priority.

---

 

23 June 2008 - 12:00 EST:

A major drawback to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is that it easily can be misapplied and/or applied to spy on Americans in violation of the Fourth Amendment protections against searches without warrants. This goes to the fundamental American right to privacy. Even worse, the FISA version up for Congressional approval now gives immunity to people and companies that violate Americans' rights to privacy.

The House, which is controlled by the Democrats, last week passed this version of FISA that gives telecoms, and possibly others, immunity from liability for violating Americans' rights to privacy. Shame on the House Democrats!

The Senate, again controlled by the Democrats but by a very slim margin, is expected to pass what amounts to a Telecom immunity bill this week – perhaps as soon as tomorrow. And Sunday morning news pundits said that Barack Obama is expected to vote for the FISA-Telecom immunity act. Shame on Obama and the Senate Democrats.

Obama and the Democrats claim they should win the Whitehouse and Congress in the 2008 elections because they will bring an end to the Bush administration. And they say a McCain administration merely will be a continuation of the Bush years.

That sounds good, but don't believe it. Even before the 2008 elections, Obama and the Democrats are passing legislation now that will continue the un-American and un-constitutional rule of the Bush administration and what was a Republican controlled congress – until we, the people, took that control of Congress away from the Republicans and gave it to the Democrats in 2004.

In 2004, the Democrats promised the American people they would put an end to the Iraq war and occupation. The Democrats have not done so. They falsely claim they failed to get us out of Iraq because they do not have enough votes to override Bush vetoes.

It's true the Democrats do not have veto-proof majorities in either the House or the Senate. But the Democrats do not need a veto-proof majority to get out of Iraq. The Democrats merely could have, and should have, not passed any Iraq war funding bills, thus forcing Bush to pull out of Iraq. That's another issue and we will get into it further some other time. The point here is that the Democrats promised to get us out of Iraq if we gave them the majority, we gave them the majority, and they did not get us out of Iraq -- a broken promise.

The Democrats also promised to put an end to the Bush policies and laws invading privacy and violating the Constitution. Again, the Democrats have not done so. And again, these failures are not matters of a veto-proof majority. More broken promises.

Now, once again the Democrats are in the process of dishonoring their promises to the American people – by passing the FISA-Telecom immunity bill.

If Obama votes for the FISA-Telcom immunity bill or if it passes, then the American people should not vote for Obama or the Democrats in the November 2008 elections.

To trade freedom, liberty, and democracy for security is cowardice! And fear-mongers such as Bush rely on that cowardice to coerce people into trading freedom, liberty, and democracy for security. And if Barack Obama and the Democrats vote for the FISA-Telecom immunity bill, they are so trading freedom, liberty, and democracy for security – and thus do not deserve to hold public office!

Ever since 9/11, we have watched Republican lawmakers help Mr. Bush shred the Constitution in the name of fighting terrorism. We have seen Democrats acquiesce or retreat in fear. It is time for that to stop. (Spies, Lies and FISA, The New York Times, 14 October 2007) 

On 9 June 2008, some 28 organizations jointly sent a letter opposing the FISA-Telecom immunity bill (Re: Opposition to the FISA Legislation Proposed by Senator Bond). It does a very good job of setting out the case against the FISA-Telecom immunity bill. Please read it.

Some of those 28 organizations include:

• American Library Association
• Association of Research Libraries
• Bill of Rights Defense Committee
• Center for Democracy & Technology
• Center for National Security Studies
• Congressman Bob Barr, Liberty Strategies
• Electronic Frontier Foundation
• League of Women Voters of the United States

For more about FISA and the telecom immunity issues check:

Just Say NO to FISA Telecom and ISP Immunity (American Voice, 18 February 2008)

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, EFF

Senate Votes Down FISA Immunity Amendment, CNNMoney.com, 12 February 2008

Spies, Lies and FISA, The New York Times, 14 October 2006

FISA Reform: The Bad Bill that Beats No Bill, National Review Online, 14 February 2008

AT&T, Verizon Get Immunity For Illegal Wiretaps -- Senate fails to pass immunity-stopping amendment, Broadband Reports, 12 February 2008 

Bush Spy Bill Stance Called Fear-Mongering, CBS News, 14 February 2008 

House Democrats to Bush: No way on telecom immunity, CNET, 14 Februay 2008  (Note: Last week the House flip-flopped and passed what amounts to telecom immunity) 

---

22 May 2008 – 15:00 EDT:

The simple and quick way to bring gas and oil prices down is to cut consumption. Political scams such as a fuel tax holiday are not going to bring down oil and gas prices. (Clinton and McCain Don't Get It – The Great Gas Tax Pander & Scam, The American Voice, 5 May 2008)  However, gas and oil consumption holidays will bring prices down quickly and effectively.

The upcoming Memorial Day holiday is a good place to start cutting gas and fuel use. If enough Americans stayed home Memorial Day, the cut in gas and oil demand would plummet and so would prices at the pump.

So, instead of going somewhere for Memorial Day, just stay home. Have a cookout. Invite your neighbors so they will stay home too. The more people that stay home or close to home Memorial Day weekend, the greater the cuts in gas use and consumption.

If you just can't stand your home, go to a nearby motel or campground for the weekend.  Or go to a state or national park. If you have to see a sight, go to one that is close to your home rather than one that requires serious traveling.

If enough people cut back enough on gas and fuel consumption, the oil and gas demand will plummet. That will bring prices at the pump down.

But perhaps more importantly, it will cause the oil speculators to lose money. If the demand and thus oil price fall enough, it could throw some, or even many, oil speculators into severe losses – maybe even bankruptcy. Wouldn't that be nice? That'll teach 'em.

If we Americans can cut our gas and oil consumption enough to make oil speculation a big loss, that could bring oil down to $60 per barrel and gas down to $2.50 per gallon at the pump.

oil company executives are testifying under oath that oil prices should only be at $60  (Sen. Maria Cantwell, (D) Washington, Issue Number One, 29 April 2008) 

$60 a barrel happens  . . . if for some reason, all of this speculation, all the people buying and selling oil who aren't in the oil business who are just doing it as an investment, get out of the market.  (Ali Velshi, This Week In Politics, 11 May 08) 

$60 a barrel . . .  costs you $2.50 a gallon at the pump,  (Tom Foreman, This Week In Politics 11 May 08) 

Congress and several presidential administrations have had years to do something about gas and oil prices. Yet oil and gas prices have been climbing for years – particularly during the Bush presidency. It is up us, the people, to take the matter into our own hands and put a stop to rising gas and oil prices.

The simple and quick way to bring gas and oil prices down is to cut consumption. Stay home Memorial Day. Make Memorial Day a gas use holiday.

---

18 May 2008 – 12:30 EDT:

How can Hillary Clinton be expected to balance the federal budget when she cannot manage her own campaign budget? Clinton now has her presidential campaign some $20-million in debt. Hillary Clinton cannot control her spending.

“Clinton aides . . . confirm[ed] that she is $20 million in debt”  (Clinton Team Acknowledges $20 Million Debt Washington Post, 12 May 2008.) 

That debt has doubled in just some two months. At the end of March, 2008 Hillary Clinton's campaign was about $10-million in debt. (Clinton Campaign Facing Deepening Debt to Advisers Washington Post, 22 April 2008.) Now it is some $20-million.

All of the $20-million might not be voluntary loans. It's estimated that about $10-million is money that Clinton has loaned to her campaign. But how about the other $10-million or so?

“Hillary Rodham Clinton's cash-strapped presidential campaign has been putting off paying hundreds of bills for months - freeing up cash for critical media buys but also earning the campaign a reputation as something of a deadbeat in some small-business circles.”

“A pair of Ohio companies owed more than $25,000 by Clinton for staging events for her campaign are warning others in the tight-knit event production community - and anyone else who will listen - to get their cash upfront when doing business with her. Her campaign, say representatives of the two companies, has stopped returning phone calls and e-mails seeking payment of outstanding invoices. One even got no response from a certified letter.” (Cash-Strapped Clinton Fails To Pay Bills CBS News, 31 March 2008)

“While debt owed to the firm run by the campaign's recently deposed top strategist, Mark Penn, began to accumulate a year ago, with $277,147 reported last April, his tab grew to $4.6 million by the end of March. Adviser Mandy Grunwald's consulting firm began extending services to Clinton's campaign more than a year ago, and is now owed $528,480, the report shows. The campaign owes MSHC Partners, a mail and microtargeting firm, nearly $1 million. And for three months the campaign owed $240,000 to senior adviser Harold Ickes's database firm, Catalist.”

“Campaign finance experts said yesterday that large extended debts owed to professionals could create legal trouble for the campaign if they remain unaddressed. “

“'Anybody who extends credit to a campaign runs the risk of either losing money or violating the law,' said Jan Baran, a Republican election lawyer who defended a mail house for not collecting debt from a campaign.” (Clinton Campaign Facing Deepening Debt to Advisers, Washington Post, 22 April 2006.)

Of course there is a difference in balancing a federal budget versus balancing a campaign budget. In a political campaign one can cut spending and/or seek (voluntary) contributions.

In balancing the federal budget, one can cut spending and/or increase taxes. However, Clinton does not seem to be able to cut spending. That strongly suggests the only way Hillary Clinton would be able to balance the federal budget would be to increase taxes.

Hillary Clinton is part of the economic and credit problems – Clinton is not the problem solver that she claims to be. Moreover, Hilary Clinton's so-called years of experience as a senator and previously as a president's wife are part of the problem.

Clinton is part of the oil and gas price problems. (Clinton and McCain Don't Get It – The Great Gas Tax Pander & Scam, The American Voice, 5 May 2008) In large part the exorbitant price of oil and gas are a primary cause of today's economic problems in the United States of America.

The giant Exon-Mobil cartel was created under the Clinton administration (ibid). Yet now that she is campaigning for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton is clamoring for more taxes on Exon-Mobil and other oil cartel profits. That sure sounds like a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Moreover, the Iraq war has drained some $500-billion to $800-billion from the American economy. And since the United States of America attacked Iraq, the price of oil has risen from around $20 per barrel to more than $120 per barrel.

In 2002, Hilary Clinton voted for the war in Iraq and to authorize Bush to attack Iraq by voting for the Authorization For Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Of 2002 (Public Law 107–243—Oct. 16, 2002).

Clinton repeatedly has voted to finance the war in, and occupation of, Iraq. And Clinton has repeatedly insisted that the U.S.A. cannot withdraw all its troops from Iraq. (But now, flip-flop, pandering Clinton says she will have the troops “coming home within 60 days of [her] becoming president of the United States.“)

Hillary Clinton's record shows clearly a pattern of spending more money than provided by revenues -- other than going in debt and/or increasing debt to pay for the spending. She repeatedly has shown bad judgment. Hillary Clinton is not the person to take on the job of balancing the federal budget!

---

5 May 2008 - 9:30 EDT:

Clinton and McCain Don't Get It – The Great Gas Tax Pander & Scam

 

Hillary Clinton and John McCain want to take off federal gas and fuel taxes because the prices of gas and diesel fuel are so high. Their plan shows a complete lack of understanding of the gas and fuel prices problem, lack of understanding of the U.S. economic problems, lack of leadership, and pandering of the worst kind. The plans Clinton and McCain are pushing will make the gas and fuel problems, and the economic woes, even worse than they are now.

Moreover, Clinton and McCain are part of the oil price problem. And they are not the solvers.

That's because the current fuel price problem has its origins in Bush's attack upon Iraq and occupation of Iraq. Clinton and McCain both voted for the attack on Iraq – the Senate bill that authorized Bush to invade Iraq. And both Clinton and McCain have repeatedly voted to continue funding the occupation of Iraq.

Because of the Iraq attack and occupation of Iraq that Clinton and McCain voted to authorize, oil has jumped from about $20 per barrel to more than $100 per barrel. Each dollar in the price of a barrel of oil amounts to about $0.238 per gallon of oil. That amounts to a price jump of about  $1.90 per gallon of oil that you can blame on Bush, Clinton, and McCain. Clinton and McCain are part of the oil and gas price problems.

(There is lots more info about oil and gas statistics at the Argonne National Laboratory's Newton.)

In 2002, Hilary Clinton and John McCain voted for the war in Iraq and to authorize Bush to attack Iraq by voting for the Authorization For Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Of 2002 (Public Law 107–243—Oct. 16, 2002).

Clinton and McCain repeatedly have voted to finance the war in, and occupation of, Iraq. And Clinton and McCain have repeatedly insisted that the U.S.A. cannot withdraw all its troops from Iraq.

(But now, flip-flop, pandering Clinton says she will have the troops “coming home within 60 days of [her] becoming president of the United States.“)

A principle pressure on oil, gas, and fuel prices is demand pressure. Another is a limited supply (mainly controlled by OPEC). As the prices of oil, gas, and fuel rise, the demand falls. That's because people can or will pay only so much for gas, oil, and fuel.

Clinton and McCain, in pandering to the gas-guzzlers, promise to artificially decrease the price of gas and diesel oil by suspending the federal fuel taxes. That will hold, if not increase, the consumption, and therefore demand, for oil and gas.

And that will result in continued high, if not further increased, oil and gas prices. Obama is correct on this one and Clinton and McCain are wrong. The Clinton and McCain call for suspension of the federal fuel taxes is a political hoax and scam.

By the way, the Exon-Mobil merger was allowed by the Clinton administration in 1998. Allowing large companies to merge does not improve free-market competition – rather it cuts down on competition and allows the larger, merged companies such as Exon-Mobil to raise prices whenever they like. The Clintons are to blame for the Exon-Mobil merger and thus they are to blame for the high prices of gas and oil today.

Coming up soon on this blog are solutions for immediate and long term solutions to the gas and oil prices problems.

---

23 April 2008 - 12:00 EDT:

ABC and CNN Lie About Pa. Primary Margin – More Media Bias

Since the wee hours of the morning today, ABC and CNN and other media have been reporting that Hillary Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary by 55% for her to 45% of the vote for Obama – a 10% margin. But that is an out and out lie.

We have been following the Pennsylvania Primary vote count since early this morning. According to the Pennsylvania Department of State (PDS), which is the official vote tabulator for Pennsylvania state-wide primaries and general elections, the Clinton v. Obama margin has ranged from about 8.5% to just a bit more than 9%. But we never observed that margin reaching 10%.

At press time the PDS website shows Clinton with 54.6% of the vote and Obama with 45.4%. That is a margin of only 9.2%.

Around 6 a.m. EDT today, Clinton's margin was around 9.3%. By around 8 a.m. EDT that margin was down to 8.5%.

That sort of misreporting fact is unacceptable and un-ethical – and even more so when it involves the process of selecting the next President of the United States of America (POTUS). Shame on ABC and CNN and shame on other media that misreported the Pennsylvania primary margin too.

So, why is the Pennsylvania primary margin important?

Because the campaign analysis and strategy impact of the Pennsylvania primary was not and is not who won – Clinton was expected to win the Pennsylvania primary. 

The campaign analysis and strategy impact of the Pennsylvania primary was and is the margin by which Clinton would and now has won.

Earlier this year, the polls predicted Clinton would win Pennsylvania with a 20% margin over Obama. However, Obama's campaign managed to whittle that down to only a 10% margin for Clinton just a few weeks ago.  Since then and during the past few weeks (and depending on which poll was considered) the Clinton margin over Obama in Pennsylvania was varying from about 5% to 10%.

Meanwhile, Obama has come from behind before the Iowa Causes to now be ahead of Clinton nationally in (a) number of elected delegates, (b) popular vote, and (c) number of states won. Clinton's decreasing margin in Pennsylvania is consistent with Obama's national gains over Clinton.

In the head games that political pundits, strategists, and campaign managers play, in order for Clinton to show she has stopped her losing streak, she would need a large margin in the Pennsylvania primary. Depending on the pundit, strategist, or campaign spokesperson, that cutoff margin ranged from 10% to 20%. Most agree that Clinton needs at least a 10% Pennsylvania primary margin to show she has stopped losing to Obama.

Well, it seems that looking at the official PDS tallies, Clinton does not have at least a 10% margin in the Pennsylvania primary – nor has she had one anytime so far today. So, CNN, ABC, Good Morning America, and WNEP all morning were falsely misreporting that Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary with a 10% margin-- thus making Clinton appear to have gained “momentum” -- which she has not – other than perhaps a false momentum created by the margin-lies spread by CNN, ABC, Good Morning America (ABC), and WNEP (N.E Pa. ABC affiliate) all morning.

Clinton and her campaign can and will use this false momentum built by CNN, ABC, Good Morning America, WNEP, and other media organizations lying about the Pennsylvania primary margin to obtain more contributions, attract super delegates, and so forth.

The final vote count for the Pennsylvania primary is not in yet. The numbers could change. Clinton might possibly end up with a 10% or better margin in Pennsylvania. But so far and all morning, Clinton has less than a 10% margin in Pennsylvania. Clinton did not make the arbitrary cutoff of 10% or better.

Enough for now. We have some posts in the works about the media bias in favor of Clinton and against Obama. We will get them up when we can.

---

 

02 March 2008 - 10:00 EST:

The Clintons were itching for an attack on Iraq long before Hillary Clinton voted for the resolution that gave President George Bush authority to invade Iraq in 2002. In 1998 Bill Clinton had cooked up a scheme to attack Iraq, Operation Desert Thunder/Viper. Please see Clinton's Desert Thunder is a Desert Blunder.

At the last moment, Bill Clinton flip-flopped and called the Iraq attack off. (Source: “Operation Desert Thunder”, Wikipedia)

But for whatever their reasons, the Clintons did not abandon their desires to have the U.S.A. attack Iraq. When President George Bush asked the U. S. Senate to give him authority to invade Iraq, Hillary Clinton jumped on the opportunity and voted to do so.

Now Hillary Clinton claims she wishes she had not voted to invade Iraq. Phooey! The Clintons have wanted to invade Iraq since at least 1998 if not sooner.

Hillary Clinton's only remorse for her vote to invade Iraq is that now that war has become very un-popular -- and that her attack Iraq vote is costing her votes, delegates, and money. Please see our blog entry, Clinton Lies and Flip-Flops on Iraq Withdrawal.

Hillary Clinton has flip-flopped on the Iraq issues. Clinton has flip-flopped on many issues and likely is not done flip-flopping yet.

Remember, for example, the debate where Senator John Edwards caught Hillary Clinton flip-flopping on the driver licenses for illegal aliens within just two minutes. First Clinton said she was in favor of letting illegal aliens have driver licenses and then, within two minutes she changed her position to being against driver licenses for illegal aliens.

So what would be Clinton's 3 a.m. response to a Whitehouse red phone moment? Would it be the flip or the flop? Would Hilary Clinton decide later in the day, week, or month that she had made the wrong decision? A huge problem with Whitehouse red phone situations is that the responses to them are not easily undone.  And maybe they cannot be undone at all.

We agree with Hilary Clinton that the person who is answering the Whitehouse red phone is important. But we also agree with Barack Obama that wisdom and judgment are the important parameters of deciding who should be answering the Whitehouse red phone.

Clinton claims to have the experience, which is not quit so. However, Obama has the advantage of more wisdom and of better judgment. Wisdom and judgment trump experience -- let alone Hilary Clinton's false claim of more presidential experience. (Please see our blog entry, “The Urban Legend of Hillary Clinton's So-Called Presidential Experience.”)

Hillary Clinton clearly is not the person we want to have answering the Whitehouse red phone. Hillary Clinton clearly is not the person we want to have making decisions in response to Whitehouse red phone situations.

In sum, Hilary Clinton is no more experienced and no more ready to be President of the United States of America than any other candidate for that office. Hilary Clinton is not the person who should be answering the Whitehouse red phone -- at 3 a.m., 3 p.m. or any time of the day or night at all!

And if you get right down to it, some of the other candidates have more experience and are more ready to be President than is Hillary Clinton. Moreover, others have demonstrated they have better judgment and more wisdom than does Hilary Clinton -- others such as Barack Obama and John McCain.

---

24 February 2008 - 11:00 EST:

This morning, on Meet the Press (NBC), Ralph Nader announced that he now is a 2008 candidate for President of the United States of America (POTUS).

Here is the gist of the issues Nader believes are important and how he compares himself to Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John McCain on those issues.

Over the past few months, we’ve heard a lot of rhetoric about change, hope, courage and experience from Hillary Clinton, Barak (sic) Obama and John McCain . . .

Of the following Presidential candidates – Ralph Nader, Hillary Clinton, Barak (sic) Obama and John McCain – which one supports a single payer, Canadian style, free choice, Medicare for all health care system?

Answer: Ralph Nader

Which one supports solar energy and would take nuclear power off the table?

Answer: Ralph Nader

Which one would cut the huge bloated wasteful military budget?

Answer: Ralph Nader

Which one would reverse U.S. Middle East policy in Israel/Palestine, Iraq and Iran?

Answer: Ralph Nader

Which one would launch an aggressive crackdown on corporate crime and corporate welfare?

Answer: Again, only Ralph Nader  . . .

What’s off the table for Ralph?

• The empty rhetoric.
  
• The empty gesture.
  
• The empty politics.

What’s on the table?

• Taking these issues seriously – all the way to action.
• Challenging the corporate domination of our democracy.
• Organizing young and old alike, 1,000 in every Congressional district in the country, half a million strong, to take back the country from the corporations.

If Clinton, Obama or McCain and their parties had seriously and effectively addressed these and other necessities vital to the American people, there would be no need for Ralph Nader to run for President.

We would be happily out of business.

But we’ve waited so very long – and still – not a blip on the political radar screen on any of these issues.

So in this pivotal election year, ask yourself this fundamental question: Which side are you on?

The corporate criminals, the big banks, Wall Street, the credit card companies, the nuclear power industry, the war profiteers, the agribusiness giants, the health insurance industry, the polluters, the drug companies, the unionbusters (sic), Big Oil, the corporate Democrats and corporate Republicans?

Or with people fighting back? (Some slight formatting changes added. Source: VoteNader.Org)

If you missed Ralph Nader's announcement on Meet the Press this morning, MSNBC will replay this morning's Meet the Press several times today and tonight. Check your local TV schedule or the Meet the Press Web site for times and channels. (Find ‘Meet the Press’ in your area.) 

This certainly could make for an interesting presidential election. Stay tuned.

---

 

20 February 2008 - 10:00 EST:

The American people are not buying into Hillary Clinton's words that she will solve America's problems. Obama's ten wins in a row show that! Moreover, the win percentages Barack Obama is racking up emphasize that.

Yesterday, Barack Obama decisively won Hawaii 76% to 24%. And Barack Obama decisively won Wisconsin 58% to 41%. (Source: Wikipedia.org)   And those wins are on top of Barack Obama's smashing victory over Clinton in the Potomac primaries just a week ago.

Hillary Clinton does not have a viable or acceptable health care plan. Garnisheeing wages to pay for health insurance is not a solution at all!

Clinton had the opportunity to solve the health care problems when her husband, Bill Clinton, was President of the United States of America. But she failed to solve the health care problems when assigned that task then. There is no reason to believe that she could solve them now.

Moreover, Hillary Clinton has been a U.S. Senator for nearly eight years now. She has had plenty of opportunity there to produce a solution to heath care. She has not done so.

There are better solutions to health care than Clinton's mandatory health care and garnisheeing wages to pay for it. We have a post about that in the works. (Hint: our solution is not mandatory on citizens, it will lower the costs of health care, and it will be available to everyone.)

Hillary Clinton voted for the resolution that gave President George Bush the authority to attack Iraq. And she has consistently voted to continue financing the war in Iraq and the occupation of Iraq -- without that financing, there could be no war/occupation in Iraq. Clinton has not solved the Iraq problem. Instead, Hillary Clinton has been and still is part of the Iraq war and occupation problem.

Hillary Clinton has been part of Congress for nearly eight years now. And we almost all know that Congress has been and is part of the problems we have in America today. Moreover, Congress has failed to solve the problems. Hillary Clinton is part of the problems and not part of the solutions to them. 

The dirty tricks and dishonesty of the Clintons is catching up with them Please see for example our previous blog entries, Clinton Lies and Flip-Flops on Iraq Withdrawal and The Urban Legend of Hillary Clinton's So-Called Presidential Experience.

America finally is getting it. Hillary Clinton is not presidential material! Hillary Clinton is NOT ready to be President now. She will not be ready to be President in January 2009. Nor will Hillary Clinton be ready to be President in 2010, 2011, and 2012.

---

18 February 2008 - 12:00 EST:

One of, if not the most important, basic and fundamental human rights is the Right to Privacy! The United States Constitution protects our Right to Privacy in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

President Bush and his regime have been and perhaps still are violating the basic Right to Privacy and our constitutionally protected Rights to Privacy. Bush's phony justification for this has been and is, security -- in other words, the way Bush does it and to the extent he takes it, it's fear-mongering.

However, to trade freedom, liberty, privacy, and democracy for security is cowardice! And fear-mongers such as Bush rely on that cowardice to coerce people into trading freedom, liberty, and democracy for security.

At issue right now are the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and a related stopgap measure, the Protect America Act. They allow the U.S. Government to spy on electronic communications of foreign spies. However, it appears that FISA has been used illegally to spy on telephone and Internet communications of American citizens -- without warrants and/or under warrants obtained in super-secret courts and court proceedings. That's not right! 

[C]ritics of the new bill accused Mr. Bush of "fear mongering," and of trying to deflect attention from the bill itself. Its most controversial provision would prevent Americans from suing phone companies that helped the administration spy on them since the White House surveillance program was instituted in 2001.

Mr. Bush has made immunity from civil prosecution for the telecoms a must-have element for revamping the nation's surveillance laws, repeatedly saying he would veto any bill that does not exempt telecoms from lawsuits. (Bush Spy Bill Stance Called Fear-Mongering, CBS News, 14 February 2008)

The U.S. Senate, last Thursday, caved-in to Bush and passed a bill that gives telecoms and ISPs such as Verizon and AT&T immunity. Shame on the Senators that voted for that bill and/or failed to vote at all.

Ever since 9/11, we have watched Republican lawmakers help Mr. Bush shred the Constitution in the name of fighting terrorism. We have seen Democrats acquiesce or retreat in fear. It is time for that to stop. Spies, Lies and FISA, The New York Times, 14 October 2007

That's really the most extraordinary aspect of all of this, if one really thinks about it -- it isn't merely that the Democratic Senate failed to investigate or bring about accountability for the clearest and more brazen acts of lawbreaking in the Bush administration, although that is true. Far beyond that, once in power, they are eagerly and aggressively taking affirmative steps -- extraordinary steps -- to protect Bush officials. While still knowing virtually nothing about what they did, they are acting to legalize Bush's illegal spying programs and put an end to all pending investigations and efforts to uncover what happened. (Salon, quoted in Broadband Reports, 12 February 2008

Friday, 15 February 2008, might be the day that House Democrats stop acquiescing and retreating in fear of Bush. So far the Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives have refused to give immunity to the telecoms and to the ISPs. And Friday, they recessed for about two-weeks without approving Bush's telecoms immunity package. Good for them.

Meanwhile, the House Republicans stomped out of the House Chamber Friday, 15 February 2008, in child-like tantrums because the House Democrats chose to protect American freedom, liberty, and democracy. Shame on the House Republicans!

An even bigger test comes when the House reconvenes. Will the House Democrats stick to their guns and refuse to grant immunity to telecoms and ISPs? Or, will the House Democrats cower and cave in to Bush and his fear-mongering again?

We believe the House Democrats should and must stick to their guns and refuse to grant immunity to telecoms and ISPs. Let's hope they do!

For more about FISA and the telecom immunity issues check:: 

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, EFF

Senate Votes Down FISA Immunity Amendment, CNNMoney.com, 12 February 2008

Spies, Lies and FISA, The New York Times, 14 October 2006

FISA Reform: The Bad Bill that Beats No Bill, National Review Online, 14 February 2008

AT&T, Verizon Get Immunity For Illegal Wiretaps -- Senate fails to pass immunity-stopping amendment, Broadband Reports, 12 February 2008 

Bush Spy Bill Stance Called Fear-Mongering, CBS News, 14 February 2008 

House Democrats to Bush: No way on telecom immunity, CNET, 14 Februay 2008 

---

 

13 February 2008 - 16:00 EST:

 

Barack Obama's smashing victories along the Potomac could smash Hillary and Bill Clinton's hopes of her becoming President of the United States of America. Not only did Obama trounce Clinton, he beat her in her demographic strongholds  -- her base. That could signal the end of Hillary's Whitehouse dreams.
 

In the District of Columbia Obama took 75% of the votes compared to Clinton's 24% and 12 delegates compared to Clinton's 3 delegates.
 

Maryland was another Potomac rout for Obama. There he took 60% of the votes compared to Clinton's 36% and 43 delegates compared to Clinton's 27 delegates.
 

Virginia, the largest primary of the Potomac three, gave Obama 64% of the votes compared to Clinton's 35% and 54 delegates compared to Clinton's 29 delegates. Obama grabbed 65% of the Potomac primaries' delegates.
 

All told, Obama garnered 109 delegates along the Potomac on February 12 compared to 59 delegates for Clinton. That gives Obama a 1,267 to 1,227 lead over Clinton in cumulative delegate counts to date. (Source: Wikipedia.org )

Looking at the demographic swing from Clinton to Obama:
 

Obama did well with Democrats across race and gender lines Tuesday night, and seems to be eating away at Clinton's backbone of support: women.

According to exit polls out of Virginia and Maryland, Obama won roughly 60 percent of the female vote -- a demographic that has carried Clinton to success in past primaries. Clinton fared worse among men -- more than two-thirds in both states chose Obama.

Meanwhile, Obama scored his highest percentage of African-American support to date, winning close to 90 percent of that voting bloc in each state.

The two evenly split the white vote in Virginia, while Clinton slightly beat Obama among whites in Maryland.

In most past primaries, Clinton has held an edge among white voters. Tuesday, Obama even beat Clinton among Latino voters, a group that has heavily favored Clinton in most past primaries.

In Virginia and Maryland, Latinos went for Obama over Clinton by 6 points, though their support was not decisive in either contest -- only 5 percent of Democratic primary voters in Virginia and 4 percent in Maryland were Latino.

The only demographic Clinton won was white women, who broke for her over Obama by 10 points in Virginia and 13 points in Maryland.  (Emphasis added. CNN 12 February 2008)

The dirty tricks and dishonesty of the Clintons is catching up with them. Please see for example our previous blog entries, Clinton Lies and Flip-Flops on Iraq Withdrawal and The Urban Legend of Hillary Clinton's So-Called Presidential Experience.
 

America finally is getting it. Hillary Clinton is not presidential material!

---

 

11 February 2008 - 10:00 EST:

 

It's no secret the U.S.A. economy is in horrible shape. It's at least in a recession and might even be heading to a depression. Congress and the President have enacted a $168-billion, pork-barrel, chicken-in-every-pot, scam supposedly to save the American economy. That's not going to do it!
 

The plan, which adds $168 billion to the deficit over two years, is intended to provide cash for people to spend and tax relief for businesses to make new investments _ boosts for an economy battered by a housing downturn and credit crunch. (AP story by Andrew Taylor and Julie Hirschfeld Davis published in The Washington Post, 8 February 2008) 

The economic stimulus bill will put from $300 to $1,200 in many Americans' pockets -- more if they have children. The President and the congressional politicians claim the people that receive this money from the government will spend that money, and spend it quickly. Then the consumers spending all that money supposedly will fix the economy -- that's stupid economics, stupid.
 

People earning less than the poverty level likely will spend their money quickly. People in that category tend to live paycheck to paycheck. However, much of what they spend with their economic stimulus bill money likely will be to purchase products made in China rather than products made in the U.S.A. The so-called economic stimulus bill could end up stimulating the Chinese economy instead of, or more than, the American economy.
 

The people whose earnings are above the poverty level are just as likely to use the economic stimulus money to make payments on loans, mortgages, or credit card payments as they are to buy products and services. Some of the more affluent might even put the money in savings accounts, CDs, or stocks rather than products and services. No economy stimulation there
 

In the long term, the Economic Stimulus bill adds about $168-billion to the national debt. The ever-increasing national debt is one of the reasons the American economy is on the rocks. Increasing the national debt by $168-billion hurts the American economy. Increasing the national debt by $168-billion will not fix the economy -- that's stupid economics, stupid.
 

The reason Congress enacted this stupid economic stimulus package is so that incumbents will be reelected. The senators and representatives who voted for this economic stimulus bill are trying to buy our votes by putting us, the people of the U.S.A., in debt for $168-billion.
 

Interestingly, the only incumbent senator or congressman currently running for President that had the intelligence and sense to understand that this economic stimulus package is bad legislation and the honesty to vote against it is Ron Paul (R. Tx). John McCain (R. Az) voted for it. Additionally, Hillary Clinton (D. NY) and Barack Obama (D. Il) did not even vote on this economic stimulus bill -- not much leadership there.
 

There are things that can be done and should be done (1) to bring immediate relief to the economy problems and (2) to bring long term solutions to the economic woes of this country. They include (1) bringing troops stationed in Europe and other non-combat areas back to the U.S. immediately, (2) use the $168-billion to rebuild our highway and rail systems, (3) build additional lanes for overcrowded highways where traffic jams are common thus reducing fuel waste, (4) provide money for people to buy alternate energy systems such as solar power and wind power, and so forth. That puts American people and factories back to work. That stimulates the economy and helps to fix it too,

That's enough for now. More about the economic problems and how to fix the economy right in our next entry to this blog.

---

 

08 February 2008 - 11:00 EST:

 

Yesterday, CNN played a clip of a Hillary Clinton speech in which she said:
 

[McCain] said recently he could see having American troops in Iraq for 100 years. Well, I want them coming home within 60 days of my becoming president of the United States.   (Anderson Cooper /360 CNN 7 February 2008)
 

However, Clinton repeatedly has said that the first thing she will do in office on day-one, if elected, is to ask the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to prepare a plan for getting out of Iraq -- and to have that plan ready for her in day-one plus sixty days. Even after the said sixty-one days, Clinton might not be ready to accept and/or implement the plan to withdraw from Iraq.

Now, how the heck is Hilary Clinton going to have the troops coming home from Iraq within sixty days of her becoming President of the United States? She will not even have a withdrawal plan until after she has been President for sixty days?
 

Is Hilary Clinton lying again? Or is she just doing some more flip-flopping? Or both?
 

In 2002, Hilary Clinton voted for the war in Iraq and authorizing Bush to attack Iraq by voting for the Authorization For Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Of 2002 (Public Law 107–243—Oct. 16, 2002).
 

Clinton repeatedly has voted to finance the war in, and occupation of, Iraq. And Clinton has repeatedly insisted that the U.S.A. cannot withdraw all its troops from Iraq.
 

But now, Clinton says she will have the troops “coming home within 60 days of [her] becoming president of the United States.“  -- even before the Joint Chiefs of Staff have a plan to withdraw the troops from Iraq.
 

Either Clinton is lying about having the troops “coming home within 60 days of [her] becoming president of the United States.“ or Clinton is going to have the troops coming home without a withdrawal plan.
 

We already have had too many American lives lost and too many seriously injured troops due to lack of adequate planning by Rumsfeld and the Bush administration. We do not need Hilary Clinton's inadequate planning putting more American lives and limbs in harms way the moment she would take office if elected. Nor do we not need a liar and flip-flopper in the Whitehouse.
 

Hillary Clinton is not presidential material!

---

 

04 February 2008 - 20:00 EST:

 

In 2000, the Democrats lost the Whitehouse in part due to Bill Clinton's Oval Office antics and his lies about those antics. And the Clintons engaged in other shameful conduct while in our house, the Whitehouse, too -- for example using the Lincoln Bedroom as a bed and breakfast for rich, corporate, and powerful political contributors who could pay for the visit.

 

In 2004, the Democrats blew a good chance to win back the Presidency of the U.S.A. Dumping Bush should have been a cakewalk. But the Democrats selected the wrong person, John Kerry, for their 2004 presidential nominee.

 

Now, in 2008, after four more years of Bush the Democrats again have an inside track in regaining the Whitehouse. But if they select Hillary Clinton for their nominee, the Democrats run a strong likelihood of blowing it again. Hillary Clinton might be able to win the Democratic nomination -- but she most likely cannot win the election in November 2008.

 

One reason she might win the nomination but lose the election is Hillary Clinton's false or misleading claims about 35-years of experience and her being the only candidate to be ready to be President on day one in office. The 35-year experience claim is not based on being in the Whitehouse for 35 years. It is based on the time since she graduated from law school -- more or less her age.

 

We do not consider graduation from law school to mark the accumulation of experience as a President of the U.S.A. Moreover, if graduation from college starts the counter for presidential experience, then every current candidate for President has lots of presidential experience.  

 

One might just as well consider one's age as years of experience if one goes along with Clinton's fallacious reasoning. Of the current candidates, Clinton comes in fourth in the age-equals-experience contest.

Judgment and wisdom are more important than age or experience. Barack Obama is the youngest of the current candidates but repeatedly shows better judgment and greater wisdom than does Hillary Clinton.

Candidate	Age
Ron Paul	71
John McCain	70
Mitt Romney	60
Hillary Clinton	59
Mike Huckabee	53
Barack Obama	45

 

Hillary Clinton's own words show she is not ready to be President on day one in office. Clinton repeatedly has said that the first thing she will do in office, if elected, is to ask the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to prepare a plan for getting out of Iraq -- and to have that plan ready for her in day-one plus sixty days. Even after the said sixty-one days Clinton might not be ready to accept and/or implement the plan to withdraw from Iraq.

So, how does that make Hillary Clinton any more prepared than any other presidential candidate to act on the Iraq problem? It does not.

Hilary Clinton is not ready to be President on day-one of her term if she gets elected!

Another false or misleading claim about 35-years of experience and being the only candidate to be ready to be President on day-one of being in office centers on Clinton's being a former President's wife. Hillary Clinton was the wife of former President Bill Clinton during his eight years in the White House. However, she was not his Chief of Staff. Nor was she the Vice-President, nor a Cabinet member, nor a member of the National Security Council, nor a member of the Council of Economic advisers, etc., etc., etc.

 

If Hillary Clinton had been married to a surgeon for eight years, would that make her a surgeon? Would you want her to operate on you? I think not!

 

Nevertheless, Hillary Clinton did land a White House job while her husband was President. That job was to push through health insurance reform. And she failed miserably at that. To whatever extent Hillary Clinton had any presidential experience while her husband was President, to-wit reforming health care, she failed. Failure is nothing to brag about on a resume.

 

In sum, Hilary Clinton is no more experienced and no more ready to be President of the United States of America than any other candidate for that office. And if you get right down to it, some of the other candidates have more experience and are more ready to be President than is Hillary Clinton. Moreover, others have demonstrated they have better judgment and more wisdom than does Hilary Clinton.

-- J.J. Publius