While I was in the Navy, there was an acronym used often that indicated things were not going to be going as we expected. The acronym was BOHICA which stood for Bend Over Here It Comes Again.
Well America, BOHICA. The Democrats (or should we just call them Progressives) are getting ready to ram one home in the form of "reconciliation" of the heath care bill. Amazing that the Senate bill could not garner enough support to pass in the House previously but now Pelosi figures she can round up enough idiots to pass it now.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Do as I say...
Our fearless leader (Yes, that is a Rocky and Bullwinkle reference) is currently visiting Las Vegas trying to drum up support for Reid's campaign. What I find most ironic about this trip are the past comments by BHO regarding Vegas and spending money there.
Twice since he has taken office, BHO has slammed visiting Vegas as a sign of excess. Here are the quotes:
Now, I will agree that blowing the college tuition on a trip to Vegas may be irresponsible. However, as a private citizen, what I choose to spend my money on is my business. With the second quote, Obama was berating the banking industry for attending a convention in Las Vegas "on the taxpayers dime". Ironic isn't it that BHO is doing the same thing that he took the bankers to task for?
His trip to Vegas is for the sole purpose of trying to stop the bleeding in Reid's campaign. This visit to Vegas also includes BHO informing Nevada of the governmental pork that will be spent in the state. The trip has already negatively impacted tour flights in and around Vegas as tighter security measures were put in place for the visit. (Review Journal article)
Back in 2006, a report was put together for Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA) as he attempted to recoup costs from Bush for campaign travel. The report outlines the costs of flying Air Force One per hour and the cargo plane that accompanies the president on his jaunts around the country.
Here is a breakdown of just what the flight from Washington DC to Vegas is costing the taxpayers based on 2006 costs:
Distance Washington DC to Las Vegas: 2060 miles
Air Force One
Cost per hour: $56,518
Flight time to Vegas: 3.26 hours
Sub total: $184,248.68
Cargo Plane
Cost per hour: $6,609
Flight time to Vegas: 3.97 hours
Sub total: $27,631
Total plane costs for one-way trip Washington DC to Las Vegas: $211,879.68
Round Trip cost (planes only) : $423,759.36
Let us not forget the additional costs associated with the travel of the president. Here is a quick list of expenses that the taxpayers will foot the bill for:
Mr. President, who is paying for your flight on Air Force One, your security details and the other logistics associated with this little family vacation and campaign trip? Is it not the taxpayers? Should you not be held accountable for how you spend my money as well?
Twice since he has taken office, BHO has slammed visiting Vegas as a sign of excess. Here are the quotes:
"When times are tough, you tighten your belts," he told the forum." You don’t go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage. You don’t blow a bunch of cash in Vegas when you’re trying to save for college."
"You can't get corporate jets. You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers' dime. There's got to be some accountability and some responsibility.”
Now, I will agree that blowing the college tuition on a trip to Vegas may be irresponsible. However, as a private citizen, what I choose to spend my money on is my business. With the second quote, Obama was berating the banking industry for attending a convention in Las Vegas "on the taxpayers dime". Ironic isn't it that BHO is doing the same thing that he took the bankers to task for?
His trip to Vegas is for the sole purpose of trying to stop the bleeding in Reid's campaign. This visit to Vegas also includes BHO informing Nevada of the governmental pork that will be spent in the state. The trip has already negatively impacted tour flights in and around Vegas as tighter security measures were put in place for the visit. (Review Journal article)
Back in 2006, a report was put together for Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA) as he attempted to recoup costs from Bush for campaign travel. The report outlines the costs of flying Air Force One per hour and the cargo plane that accompanies the president on his jaunts around the country.
Here is a breakdown of just what the flight from Washington DC to Vegas is costing the taxpayers based on 2006 costs:
Distance Washington DC to Las Vegas: 2060 miles
Air Force One
Cost per hour: $56,518
Flight time to Vegas: 3.26 hours
Sub total: $184,248.68
Cargo Plane
Cost per hour: $6,609
Flight time to Vegas: 3.97 hours
Sub total: $27,631
Total plane costs for one-way trip Washington DC to Las Vegas: $211,879.68
Round Trip cost (planes only) : $423,759.36
Let us not forget the additional costs associated with the travel of the president. Here is a quick list of expenses that the taxpayers will foot the bill for:
- Advance security team (air fare, hotels, food)
- Las Vegas police department (additional security/overtime)
- Entourage and BHO's hotel rooms and meals
- Rental vehicles, etc for transport of the entourage
Mr. President, who is paying for your flight on Air Force One, your security details and the other logistics associated with this little family vacation and campaign trip? Is it not the taxpayers? Should you not be held accountable for how you spend my money as well?
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Global Warming??
OK, I have heard about enough of this bull. I sit here in north Texas, just outside of Dallas and we have almost 6" of snow on the ground and more on the way. The picture below is one of my chickens and Cabrito the goat in the background trying to figure out what this white stuff is all over the ground.
OK, I know those that maintain we are actually warming up this planet have stated that the reason for the snowfall on the eastern seaboard and now here in Texas is a result of the warmer air holding more moisture. So... I may be swayed into believing the "warmers" on the fact that warm air holds more moisture. However, on the local news yesterday, it was stated that our high temperature was 20, yes 20 degrees colder than the normal average for this day each year. Since the high hit a whopping 39 degrees, that means the normal temperature should be in the high 50's and I should be out riding my motorcycle.
Now forgive me if my logic is a bit messy here...but, since we were 20 degrees colder yesterday than normal and now have 6" of snow on the ground, would it not be logical to deduce that if the planet is warming than the temperature would have been higher or at least close to the normal high? Stay with me here... if the temperature is higher AND the air is holding more moisture, then would we not be getting rain instead of snow?
For some reason, this is just not making sense to me. Here in north Texas, the snowfall for today is the most snow in one day for over 30 years. Temperatures are 20 degrees below normal. Now it's looking like I am going to have to go find a snow shovel to make it to the mailbox.
Now, let's take a little trip down memory lane... Being the old curmudgeon that I am, I was in elementary school back in the 70's when the old Pitch In campaign was being force fed to me in public school. We had the joy of sitting through hours of movies on the environment and all of the damage that humans were causing. Back then, the word was if we didn't change our ways, we would experience another ice age because temperatures were falling. Iron Eyes Cody was seen crying on television ads about the sad state of America. How can we forget Woodsy the Owl and the catch phrase "Give a Hoot, Don't Pollute". Now the campaign did have some benefits, we did clean things up somewhat and there is less trash in our waterways and the air is cleaner. However, that ice age cry still sticks with me today as an example of faulty science.
Now the one thing I find strangest about the Pitch In movement of the 70's and the dire predictions of that time are the parallels with the "warmers" of today. The doomsday cries of global climate change for one. In the 70's it was another ice age, now 30 plus years later, it's global warming. Strangely, the 70's campaign has all but disappeared from view today. I have scoured the Internet trying to locate some of the "studies" that were done back then and have had problems finding a real mention of any of them outside of a blurb here and there. Apparently they are no longer relevant, or maybe they just weren't accurate assessments even at that time.
Now let's move forward to today. First we have garbage science that is using articles from environmental activists (spell that nut jobs) from a magazine devoted to climbing and supposition by other "scientists" on the melting of glaciers and representing those as facts. Of course we cannot forget the email scandal with faked information on global warming.
To me, I find it hard to believe much of anything, first we have only been tracking weather on a semi-large scale for about 150 years. Everyone knows that Earth has experienced at least five major ice ages that came and went long before humans were polluting the air and the planet. How can we, with so little actual data, determine that the changes to the environment (if there really are any) are anything more than normal fluctuations? Hell, even the local meteorologist can't get the weather right for three days from now. What warmed the planet back up at the end of the ice ages? Fred Flintsone's car ran on foot power, not fossil fuels.
I'll anxiously await some environmental egghead's response to my questions. Right now, I have to go dig my chicken out of the global warming event before she freezes to death.
Now forgive me if my logic is a bit messy here...but, since we were 20 degrees colder yesterday than normal and now have 6" of snow on the ground, would it not be logical to deduce that if the planet is warming than the temperature would have been higher or at least close to the normal high? Stay with me here... if the temperature is higher AND the air is holding more moisture, then would we not be getting rain instead of snow?
For some reason, this is just not making sense to me. Here in north Texas, the snowfall for today is the most snow in one day for over 30 years. Temperatures are 20 degrees below normal. Now it's looking like I am going to have to go find a snow shovel to make it to the mailbox.
Now, let's take a little trip down memory lane... Being the old curmudgeon that I am, I was in elementary school back in the 70's when the old Pitch In campaign was being force fed to me in public school. We had the joy of sitting through hours of movies on the environment and all of the damage that humans were causing. Back then, the word was if we didn't change our ways, we would experience another ice age because temperatures were falling. Iron Eyes Cody was seen crying on television ads about the sad state of America. How can we forget Woodsy the Owl and the catch phrase "Give a Hoot, Don't Pollute". Now the campaign did have some benefits, we did clean things up somewhat and there is less trash in our waterways and the air is cleaner. However, that ice age cry still sticks with me today as an example of faulty science.
Now the one thing I find strangest about the Pitch In movement of the 70's and the dire predictions of that time are the parallels with the "warmers" of today. The doomsday cries of global climate change for one. In the 70's it was another ice age, now 30 plus years later, it's global warming. Strangely, the 70's campaign has all but disappeared from view today. I have scoured the Internet trying to locate some of the "studies" that were done back then and have had problems finding a real mention of any of them outside of a blurb here and there. Apparently they are no longer relevant, or maybe they just weren't accurate assessments even at that time.
Now let's move forward to today. First we have garbage science that is using articles from environmental activists (spell that nut jobs) from a magazine devoted to climbing and supposition by other "scientists" on the melting of glaciers and representing those as facts. Of course we cannot forget the email scandal with faked information on global warming.
To me, I find it hard to believe much of anything, first we have only been tracking weather on a semi-large scale for about 150 years. Everyone knows that Earth has experienced at least five major ice ages that came and went long before humans were polluting the air and the planet. How can we, with so little actual data, determine that the changes to the environment (if there really are any) are anything more than normal fluctuations? Hell, even the local meteorologist can't get the weather right for three days from now. What warmed the planet back up at the end of the ice ages? Fred Flintsone's car ran on foot power, not fossil fuels.
I'll anxiously await some environmental egghead's response to my questions. Right now, I have to go dig my chicken out of the global warming event before she freezes to death.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
I don't believe it....
Or then again, I guess I do. The picture above is a shot of BHO bowing to yet another "official". The original captions is: President Obama bows to Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio at MacDill Air Force Base on Thursday, Jan. 28, 2010 in Tampa, Fla.
Back in November 2009, BHO decided that the emperor of Japan deserved a bow as well:
This bow was inappropriate according to Japanese customs. According to Wikipedia, "Generally speaking, an inferior bows longer, more deeply and more frequently than a superior. A superior addressing an inferior will generally only nod the head slightly, while some superiors may not bow at all and an inferior will bend forward slightly from the waist". Notice who is in the lower bow? Our dear president.
Now customs aside, it was certainly inappropriate for the leader of the nation that defeated Japan in World War II to be bowing to a representative of that country. How soon we forget our history.
And before we forget, a few months before the Japan bow, BHO was caught bowing to the Saudi King.
Holy crap! What's next? Maybe BHO needs some simple etiquette lessons. Allow me to educate the Harvard grad here... Mr. President, you are the leader of this country, you are also (or at least should be) the leader of the free world. You represent the greatest nation on this planet. Why the hell are you bowing to anyone? Have you no pride in yourself or this country?
The mayor is not royalty, nor clerical, you are not a subject of the Saudi king or the Japanese Emperor . What is wrong with you? Or maybe, this is an example of how you should greet every taxpayer in this country instead, in other words, your employers?
Mr. President, I am available for a groveling session any time your busy schedule permits. I would love to have you bow to me and beg my forgiveness for screwing this country up as bad as you have in the last year.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
The "New" Plan Going Wrong
I watched the State if the Union address the other night and it almost cost me a new television as I was about ready to put my foot through mine. How can one person stand up in front of the nation and do what BHO did? Let me outline a few of my thoughts on this fiasco in no particular order.
BHO chastising the Supreme Court
WOW... it takes some kind of cajones or a complete lack of tact to stand up in front of the world and chastise another branch of our government. Especially when you first, are not accurate in what you are stating and second when that branch deals with the Constitutionality of the laws the other two branches write and pass.
The ruling in question, contrary to BHO's opinion, will not allow foreign countries to influence elections. The law prohibiting foreign influence is not the one that was in question. The law was declared unconstitutional as it stifles the First Amendment right of free speech.
Now Mr. President, I realize that you are not fond of the Constitution and the rights that are mentioned therein. You seem to want to step all over them as often as possible. However, the law was not just and therefore struck down. If you and your cronies want to pass another law, one that does not violate the Constitution, then feel free. I'll be interested to see how many of the other programs this administration is pushing can pass that same Constitutional test.
The Latest Executive Order
Yet another example of the sheer arrogance of our President. The Senate refuses to pass a bill creating yet another government committee and the response is to form said committee by using an Executive Order? A little history here Mr. President... our Founding Fathers created three branches of our government for the sole purpose of ensuring that one branch was not able to create a dictatorship. However, your use of the Executive Orders is doing just that. Under our Constitution (again with that pesky document), the duties of the president are:
"Green" Jobs
I know that the latest Washington buzzword to pull us out of this economic mess is the creation of alternative energy related jobs. In other words, we need to build more solar panels, windmills and other assorted "green" items.
While jobs are certainly an issue, let's look at economics here. If there were money in making those items in this country, someone would be doing it on a grand scale. There has to be a market for the product and the company must be able to produce that product cheaper and/or better than one that is imported.
Let's face it, the U.S. as an industrial might went out the door at the same time the unions came in. Since BHO is currently catering to those same unions, it is highly unlikely that there is going to be a climate that is conducive to new manufacturing jobs anytime in the near future.
So... we all go green and we can buy our solar panels from China and our windmills from Taiwan. More dollars going overseas and none coming back unless it is in the form of another loan to keep us afloat.
More on Jobs
So, now the jobs that BHO is proposing are little more than the Works Progress Administration (WPA) jobs of the Roosevelt years. Let's put the country to work, building bridges, roads and dams then pay those employees from the public monies. While I can see some trickle down into the public sector, how much of this is going to lead to more government spending?
An Open Comment to our President
Yes, the country was in a mess when you started this job a year ago. However, you have taken things from bad to worse. Your administration has focused almost solely on health care reform. Something that is apparently not what the public wants. Maybe if you had spent the last year turning around the economy and focusing on jobs, Massachusetts voters would not have turned their back on the candidate you were campaigning for and your approval ratings would still be high.
Here is a suggestion; create a climate that allows businesses to grow and prosper, loosen the collar of the government and the unions that are holding back growth then watch what happens.
This Blame it on Bush mentality is wearing a bit thin to say the least. Your party has enjoyed a majority in both the House and Senate for a year now and still cannot accomplish a thing. My math tells me that a majority is 51%, not 60%. So then, why isn't anything getting done when your party has enjoyed more than enough votes to pass just about anything?
The capitalistic system works, leave it alone!. Mr. President, if the government decides that taking my hard earned money away from me and then "spread it around" to others, then I have no incentive to work. I can sit on my ass and await my check each month along with the others on the government tit.
Being successful is not a crime and it actually used to be encouraged in this country. If you worked hard, you made money. Make enough money and then you can have others work for you. It is that simple. Let me keep the fruits of my labor and I will decide who deserves to share in it, not the government.
Get off the ass of the banks. Yes, the government stepped in to bail out some of the banks. The same banks that were encouraged to make sub-prime loans. The same banks that the Federal Reserve is supposed to over see. Many of those banks have paid back that money, and in record time. Now leave them alone! Those repaid loans should release the banks from an obligation to the public or the government.
The budget "freeze". Freezing a bloated budget is like telling an obese person that freezing at 10,000 calories a day will help in losing weight. Let's take this a step further, Let's freeze the salaries of all governmental employees. Better yet, let's drop them to the level of their civilian counterparts and factor in all of their benefits. In fact, I'd even take a bit further for our elected officials, turn your entire salaries back in to the treasury for the use of the country. Show me that you are serious about cutting spending then maybe I can sit up and take notice of what you are trying to accomplish.
----
I received the following in an email the other day, and really liked the sentiments. Feel free to forward this to your elected officials:
The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775. You have had 234 years to get it right and it is broke.
Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 74 years to get it right and it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right and it is broke.
The War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44 years to get it right and they are broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 39 years to get it right and it is broke.
The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 32 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.
You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars
AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM??
BHO chastising the Supreme Court
WOW... it takes some kind of cajones or a complete lack of tact to stand up in front of the world and chastise another branch of our government. Especially when you first, are not accurate in what you are stating and second when that branch deals with the Constitutionality of the laws the other two branches write and pass.
The ruling in question, contrary to BHO's opinion, will not allow foreign countries to influence elections. The law prohibiting foreign influence is not the one that was in question. The law was declared unconstitutional as it stifles the First Amendment right of free speech.
Now Mr. President, I realize that you are not fond of the Constitution and the rights that are mentioned therein. You seem to want to step all over them as often as possible. However, the law was not just and therefore struck down. If you and your cronies want to pass another law, one that does not violate the Constitution, then feel free. I'll be interested to see how many of the other programs this administration is pushing can pass that same Constitutional test.
The Latest Executive Order
Yet another example of the sheer arrogance of our President. The Senate refuses to pass a bill creating yet another government committee and the response is to form said committee by using an Executive Order? A little history here Mr. President... our Founding Fathers created three branches of our government for the sole purpose of ensuring that one branch was not able to create a dictatorship. However, your use of the Executive Orders is doing just that. Under our Constitution (again with that pesky document), the duties of the president are:
- To be Commander in Chief of the military
- To conduct foreign affairs
- To negotiate treaties with other nations
- To nominate members of the cabinet, judiciary, etc.
- To review and sign or veto bills
- To administer the laws of the nation
- To issue pardons as he sees fit
- To address the Congress from time to time to assess the state of the nation
"Green" Jobs
I know that the latest Washington buzzword to pull us out of this economic mess is the creation of alternative energy related jobs. In other words, we need to build more solar panels, windmills and other assorted "green" items.
While jobs are certainly an issue, let's look at economics here. If there were money in making those items in this country, someone would be doing it on a grand scale. There has to be a market for the product and the company must be able to produce that product cheaper and/or better than one that is imported.
Let's face it, the U.S. as an industrial might went out the door at the same time the unions came in. Since BHO is currently catering to those same unions, it is highly unlikely that there is going to be a climate that is conducive to new manufacturing jobs anytime in the near future.
So... we all go green and we can buy our solar panels from China and our windmills from Taiwan. More dollars going overseas and none coming back unless it is in the form of another loan to keep us afloat.
More on Jobs
So, now the jobs that BHO is proposing are little more than the Works Progress Administration (WPA) jobs of the Roosevelt years. Let's put the country to work, building bridges, roads and dams then pay those employees from the public monies. While I can see some trickle down into the public sector, how much of this is going to lead to more government spending?
An Open Comment to our President
Yes, the country was in a mess when you started this job a year ago. However, you have taken things from bad to worse. Your administration has focused almost solely on health care reform. Something that is apparently not what the public wants. Maybe if you had spent the last year turning around the economy and focusing on jobs, Massachusetts voters would not have turned their back on the candidate you were campaigning for and your approval ratings would still be high.
Here is a suggestion; create a climate that allows businesses to grow and prosper, loosen the collar of the government and the unions that are holding back growth then watch what happens.
This Blame it on Bush mentality is wearing a bit thin to say the least. Your party has enjoyed a majority in both the House and Senate for a year now and still cannot accomplish a thing. My math tells me that a majority is 51%, not 60%. So then, why isn't anything getting done when your party has enjoyed more than enough votes to pass just about anything?
The capitalistic system works, leave it alone!. Mr. President, if the government decides that taking my hard earned money away from me and then "spread it around" to others, then I have no incentive to work. I can sit on my ass and await my check each month along with the others on the government tit.
Being successful is not a crime and it actually used to be encouraged in this country. If you worked hard, you made money. Make enough money and then you can have others work for you. It is that simple. Let me keep the fruits of my labor and I will decide who deserves to share in it, not the government.
Get off the ass of the banks. Yes, the government stepped in to bail out some of the banks. The same banks that were encouraged to make sub-prime loans. The same banks that the Federal Reserve is supposed to over see. Many of those banks have paid back that money, and in record time. Now leave them alone! Those repaid loans should release the banks from an obligation to the public or the government.
The budget "freeze". Freezing a bloated budget is like telling an obese person that freezing at 10,000 calories a day will help in losing weight. Let's take this a step further, Let's freeze the salaries of all governmental employees. Better yet, let's drop them to the level of their civilian counterparts and factor in all of their benefits. In fact, I'd even take a bit further for our elected officials, turn your entire salaries back in to the treasury for the use of the country. Show me that you are serious about cutting spending then maybe I can sit up and take notice of what you are trying to accomplish.
----
I received the following in an email the other day, and really liked the sentiments. Feel free to forward this to your elected officials:
The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775. You have had 234 years to get it right and it is broke.
Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 74 years to get it right and it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right and it is broke.
The War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44 years to get it right and they are broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 39 years to get it right and it is broke.
The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 32 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.
You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars
AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM??
Monday, January 18, 2010
"Doomsday" Plan
According to the NY Daily News, it appears that the majority party is going to ensure passage of some form of a health care bill come hell or high water in the event that the Massachusetts race goes to the Republican contender.
To me, this race is probably the best indicator of how the general public is looking at our legislators and specifically how the majority party is taking care of business. Massachusetts has long been a stronghold for the Democrat's. While Ted Kennedy was in office, he was a shoe-in every election no matter what. Mitt Romney helped to build the Massachusetts version of Obamacare for the state that failed miserably. Yet they were still re-elected time after time.
Now why would this race for Kennedy's vacated spot be so contested that a Democrat needs to get the POTUS in to campaign on his wife's birthday? Is this maybe a sign that the public, at least in Massachusetts, has realized the error of their ways by putting the Democrats in power? Considering that Massachusetts is a known Democrat stronghold and the race is almost a dead heat it sure seems that way to me.
Now back to the "Doomsday Plan". According to the NY Daily News, the Dems have a plan to rush the Senate version of the bill through the House without the standard meetings and reconciliation steps. This will ensure that there is some form of framework in place before Brown can make it to Washington to slow down the bill by opposing the mess.
What does this all mean to the average person? To put it simplistically, those in the majority party are once again going to sell out the American public for the sole purpose of getting some form of a bill passed. Since the two bills differ and there have been late-night secret meetings with special interest groups to make sure they are satisfied, then why the hell would it be necessary to rush this bill through if it was good legislation?
So here are my predictions:
1. Brown will send Coakley back to the farm come tomorrow by winning the election.
2. A form of the health care bill will be passed immediately upon hitting Obama's desk thus negating his promise that there would be five days for the public to review and comment before he signs any major bill.
3. The 2010 midterm elections will result in the Dems losing their majority in both the House and Senate.
4. Our legislators spend the next two years battling to get rid of junk legislation that caters to special interest groups instead of focusing on re-building the economy.
Let's hope my crystal ball is defective....
To me, this race is probably the best indicator of how the general public is looking at our legislators and specifically how the majority party is taking care of business. Massachusetts has long been a stronghold for the Democrat's. While Ted Kennedy was in office, he was a shoe-in every election no matter what. Mitt Romney helped to build the Massachusetts version of Obamacare for the state that failed miserably. Yet they were still re-elected time after time.
Now why would this race for Kennedy's vacated spot be so contested that a Democrat needs to get the POTUS in to campaign on his wife's birthday? Is this maybe a sign that the public, at least in Massachusetts, has realized the error of their ways by putting the Democrats in power? Considering that Massachusetts is a known Democrat stronghold and the race is almost a dead heat it sure seems that way to me.
Now back to the "Doomsday Plan". According to the NY Daily News, the Dems have a plan to rush the Senate version of the bill through the House without the standard meetings and reconciliation steps. This will ensure that there is some form of framework in place before Brown can make it to Washington to slow down the bill by opposing the mess.
What does this all mean to the average person? To put it simplistically, those in the majority party are once again going to sell out the American public for the sole purpose of getting some form of a bill passed. Since the two bills differ and there have been late-night secret meetings with special interest groups to make sure they are satisfied, then why the hell would it be necessary to rush this bill through if it was good legislation?
So here are my predictions:
1. Brown will send Coakley back to the farm come tomorrow by winning the election.
2. A form of the health care bill will be passed immediately upon hitting Obama's desk thus negating his promise that there would be five days for the public to review and comment before he signs any major bill.
3. The 2010 midterm elections will result in the Dems losing their majority in both the House and Senate.
4. Our legislators spend the next two years battling to get rid of junk legislation that caters to special interest groups instead of focusing on re-building the economy.
Let's hope my crystal ball is defective....
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Is the creation of jobs really a priority?
In the last week I have read article after article that states that BHO and the Democratic leaders are now making the creation of jobs in this country a top priority. With about 1 in 10 Americans out of work, I would say that this should have been the number one priority for the last year. But I digress...
So...now that the creation of jobs is the highest priority for BHO and the majority leaders, let's take a quick look at what they are up to today:
BHO - Campaigning in Massachusetts for Coakley to ensure that his party can shove the health care bill through. Hell, campaigning for Coakley was more important to BHO than spending the day with his wife on her birthday. Hell, if campaigning is more important that your wife's birthday, what chance do the unemployed have of having a job created for them?
Reid - Busy campaigning himself and trying to backtrack over his racist remarks. Oh wait a minute, those remarks would only be considered racist if Reid were not a Democrat and in BHO's back pocket.
Pelosi - No news reports today. However did take the time to slam the health insurance companies for ads opposing the health care reform bill calling it lying to the public. Well Nancy, once you finish your latest botox refill, you may want to review the promises that your party leader made and refuses to uphold. Especially the one about transparency in government. Remember that one? It was the one that you quipped about stating that BHO was "for many things when on the campaign trail".
I see our leaders are hard at work. After all, they surely put in a lot of work in the last few days since they returned from the Christmas break.
So...now that the creation of jobs is the highest priority for BHO and the majority leaders, let's take a quick look at what they are up to today:
BHO - Campaigning in Massachusetts for Coakley to ensure that his party can shove the health care bill through. Hell, campaigning for Coakley was more important to BHO than spending the day with his wife on her birthday. Hell, if campaigning is more important that your wife's birthday, what chance do the unemployed have of having a job created for them?
Reid - Busy campaigning himself and trying to backtrack over his racist remarks. Oh wait a minute, those remarks would only be considered racist if Reid were not a Democrat and in BHO's back pocket.
Pelosi - No news reports today. However did take the time to slam the health insurance companies for ads opposing the health care reform bill calling it lying to the public. Well Nancy, once you finish your latest botox refill, you may want to review the promises that your party leader made and refuses to uphold. Especially the one about transparency in government. Remember that one? It was the one that you quipped about stating that BHO was "for many things when on the campaign trail".
I see our leaders are hard at work. After all, they surely put in a lot of work in the last few days since they returned from the Christmas break.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
