Previous Editions
Contact Us
Printable Version (PDF)
Front Page
The American Voice
|
|
||
| About American
Voice Previous Editions Contact Us Printable Version (PDF) Front Page |
The American Voice |
|
| Blog © 31 July 2009 | ||
|
|
||
|
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. -
J.J.
Publius
27 July 2009 - 06:30 EDT Obama's, Pre-Existing Illness, Health Insurance Coverage ScamOn 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. -
J.J.
Publius
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: [T]here's not a liberal America and a
conservative America - there's the United States of America. There's
not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian
America; there's the United States of America. (Keynote Address at the 2004 Democratic
National Convention, July 27, 2004.)
That line and idea pretty much is a copy of a line from Stripes, a 1981 Bill Murray movie. John
Winger: We're all very different people. We're not Watusi. We're not
Spartans. We're Americans, with a capital 'A' " (Stripes, 1981)
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! [T]he
unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of
another author and the representation of them as one's own original
work.
Literary
theft. Plagiarism occurs when a writer duplicates another writer's
language or ideas and then calls the work his or her own.. . . To avoid
the
charge of plagiarism, writers take care to credit those from whom they
borrow and quote.
[Note: Obama never credited Stripes for the words
and/or ideas he plundered from Stripes.]
1621,
from L. plagiarius "kidnapper, seducer, plunderer," used in the sense
of "literary thief" by Martial, from plagium "kidnapping," from plaga
"snare, net," from PIE base *p(e)lag- "flat, spread out."
-
J.J.
Publius
9 February 2009 – 15:00 EST: Say No to Obama Stimulus
Scam -- It's Bloat & Pork!
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. 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. -
J.J.
Publius
2 December 2008 - 06:00 EST: No GM Bailout! GM Must Become CompetitiveIn 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
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:
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. -
J.J.
Publius
24 November 2008 - 12:00 EST: No Bailout for Citibank, an Arab/OPEC Owned BankBush 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) -
J.J.
Publius
7 November 2008 – 11:00 EST: Fix the American Economy
First, Now, Immediately!
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. -
J.J.
Publius
3
November 2008: Four Years of McCain
Democracy Beats the Socialism of Obama,
Biden, Pelosi, and Reid!
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. -
J.J.
Publius
30 October
2008 – 10:00 EDT: Obama Infomercial Unfair.
McCain Should Be Given Equal Time to Respond
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! -
J.J.
Publius
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. -
J.J.
Publius
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) -
J.J.
Publius
1 October
2008 – 11:30 EDT: Wall Street Bailout
Rejected --
Don't Let Them Try Again!
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. 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.) -
J.J.
Publius
28
September 2008
– 02:30 EDT: Recall All
Representatives and Senators that Vote for Wall Street
Bailout
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.
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!”) -
J.J.
Publius
26 September
2008 – 09:00 EDT: When the Going Gets Tough,
McCain Gets Going but Obama Goes Running – The
Economy Crisis
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. -
J.J.
Publius
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: (a)
to bring immediate relief to
the economy problems and
(b) to bring long-term solutions to the economic woes of this country.
(1)
stopping
mortgage foreclosures for at least 90 days,
(2) bailing out the people whose savings might be threatened by banks and financial institutions going belly up, (3) reenacting the usury laws that were ditched* during the Carter administration and limiting credit/debt interest to no more than 5% over the federal funds rate or 10% APR -- whichever is lower, (4) suspending buying or selling stocks and commodities on margin, (5) bringing troops stationed in Europe and other non-combat areas back to the U.S. immediately **, (6) use the $1/2-trillion
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. -
J.J.
Publius
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] -
J.J.
Publius
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.) 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.) -
J.J.
Publius
17
July 2008 – 03:00 EDT: Don't
Forget Hydroelectric Power and Energy
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. -
J.J.
Publius
23 June 2008
- 12:00 EST: Obama and the Democrats are about to betray the American people by giving Telecoms immunity for spying on Americans.Just Say NO to Obama and
the Democrats
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:
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) -
J.J.
Publius
22
May 2008 – 15:00 EDT: Make
Memorial Day a Gas Use Holiday
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. -
J.J.
Publius
18 May 2008
– 12:30 EDT: Clinton Can't Balance
Campaign Budget or National Budget
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.) 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! -
J.J.
Publius
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. -
J.J.
Publius
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. -
J.J.
Publius
02 March 2008 - 10:00 EST: Do
Not Let Clintons Near Whitehouse Red Phone
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. -
J.J.
Publius
24 February 2008 - 11:00 EST: Nader to Run for President
of the United States of America
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?
What’s
on the table?
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.) -
J.J.
Publius
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.
-
J.J.
Publius
Just Say NO to FISA Telecom
and ISP Immunity
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!
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 -
J.J.
Publius
13 February 2008 - 16:00 EST:
Obama's Potomac Victory Could Mark the End
for the Clintons
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! -
J.J.
Publius
11 February 2008 - 10:00 EST:
Economic Stimulus Bill a Multi-$Billion
Pork-Barrel Scam
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. -
J.J.
Publius
08 February 2008 - 11:00 EST:
Clinton Lies and
Flip-Flops on Iraq Withdrawal
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! --
J.J.
Publius
04 February 2008 - 20:00 EST: The
Urban Legend of Hillary Clinton's So-Called Presidential Experience.
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.
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright 2008 by The West End Voice, Brodheadsville, Pa. All rights reserved. Associated Press (AP) members may print this newspaper in its entirety (only) in their print publications. Any person or organization may place a link in their Web site to this page. Otherwise, do not copy, duplicate, or redistribute this newspaper or any parts thereof in any form. Printable Version (PDF - 136-KB) Requires Acrobat Reader 5.0 or better. |
