August 20, 2010
Q: Why are Massachusetts drivers called Massholes? A: Because they suck at driving.
Not much time for blogging this week, so instead of breaking it down by day and blogging on what I’m reading, seeing, hearing daily, I’m just going to give you a quick roundup of my thoughts for the week.
I started the week in Boston. They sell liquor on Sundays in the great state of MA (yay for me!) and I was reminded why Massachusetts drivers are called Massholes…it’s because they suck at driving and drive like assholes. With that said, I was pleasantly surprised to hear some radio hosts and callers talking smack about Obama on my ride into the training I was up there for. They were pissed that Obama was, once again, sticking his nose in a local issue he had no business sticking his nose in-the Ground Zero Mosque, or the “Mosque formerly known as the Ground Zero Mosque” as the AP will soon be calling it. Apparently, those Bostonians are still pissed about the whole Barack-calling-the-Cambridge-police-stupid-thing. Oops! I’m sure there aren’t too many happy New Yorkers, and patriotic Americans in general, too psyched about his nonsensical opinion about the GZM.
The Obamas are on vacation, again. Yup. Not much to say on that one. You know how many vacations I have been on since Obama took office? Zero. Glad to see that he’s feeling the same pain we all are in these tough economic times that him and his colleagues keep making tougher with their retarded, power-grabbing, over-reaching, un-constitutional bills. Uh-oh! I said retarded. Am I going to get in trouble now with the political correctness police? Oh well!
The jobs report is out and EXPECTEDLY it’s not good. Foreclosure rates are on the rise, again, too and Obama’s foreclosure program isn’t panning out the way it was supposed to. Wait, did someone just say we are in a recovery? Maybe I’m confused as to what that’s supposed to mean. Can I get the definition to that word? Is someone going to tell Obama and Biden that the word recovery clearly doesn’t mean whatever they think it means?
Anyway, I don’t have much time this week and probably won’t be blogging next week. Your tax dollars need to be spent! So, I’m on my way to Norman, OK. I’ll try to report back as soon as possible.
Comments (3)August 13, 2010
Tom Coburn for President in 2012
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
What is wrong with CT Democrats? I have to wonder. Years ago they voted Joe Lieberman out of their party for anti-war crazy Ned Lamont. Yesterday, they gave the nomination to a proven liar who lied about his service during the Vietnam War. I’m adding this to my list of reasons that I won’t move back to that state.
What is the one major difference between any disgraced Republican and any disgraced Democrat? The Republican Party, as worthless as it has proven to be, will force a fellow Republican under a cloud of suspicion for ethics violations to resign. Democrats? Not only do they not force their ethically challenged colleagues not to resign, but the colleagues under suspicion boast about how they’re not going anywhere. Message to Charlie Rangel: You’re a billion years old! Could you effing retire already?
And, my Democrat-bashing must continue on one more note, on this fabulous Wednesday. The House passed yet another stimulus bill, yesterday, to save union and Democrat politicians’ teacher and police jobs:
Specifically, the bill stipulates that federal funds must supplement, not replace, state spending on education. Also, in each state, next year’s spending on elementary and secondary education as a percentage of total state revenues must be equal to or greater than the previous year’s level.
Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi did the math and figured out his state will be worse off. Mr. Barbour says the bill will force his state “to rewrite its current year [fiscal 2011] budget. Preliminary estimates of the Mississippi Department of Finance and Administration show that we will now have to spend between $50-100 million of state funds—funds that must be taken away from public safety, human services, mental health and other state priorities and given to education—in order for an additional $98 million of federal funds to be granted to education. There is no justification for the federal government hijacking state budgets, but that is exactly what Congress has done.”
For Texas, and only Texas, this funding rule will be in place through 2013. This is a form of punishment because the Beltway crowd believes the Lone Star State didn’t spend enough of its 2009 stimulus money. Apparently Texas politicians have been clinging to the quaint notion that the government should try to live within its means.
Texans also seem to have an old-fashioned appreciation for the rule of law. On Friday, 22 GOP Members of the state’s Congressional delegation sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. “This provision would have Texas violate her own State Constitution,” they wrote. “The Texas Legislature has sole authority to determine State appropriations. Moreover, one Legislature cannot bind a future Legislature. Requiring the State to assure that a future Texas Legislature would commit to spend funds in accordance with these provisions would violate the Texas Constitution.”
Texas Governor Rick Perry is also opposed to this new “assistance” from the federal government. He understands that one-time payments that force permanently higher state obligations are a windfall for government employees. But if given the choice, taxpayers would just say no.
That’s because taxpayers are figuring out that these state bailouts are only making unions more reluctant to share their sacrifice. While Mr. Obama quotes the union figure of 160,000 potential lost teacher jobs, those don’t have to come out of the classroom. According to research by Eric Hanushek of Stanford University, student enrollment grew by 22% from 1990 to 2007, but teacher employment grew by 41%. Since 2000, enrollment has grown by 5% but teacher employment by 10%.
Back to that part about why they really passed this bill:
The unions themselves could have prevented some layoffs had they been willing to adjust their rich benefits. In Milwaukee, for example, nearly all of the 500 teacher layoffs announced earlier this year could have been avoided if the unions had agreed to change health plans that cost $23,000 per teacher per year for family coverage. They could have accepted a still-rich $17,000 plan. The unions chose the layoffs, betting (correctly) that Democrats in Washington would come to their rescue.
Keep in mind that this teacher bailout also amounts to a huge contribution by Democrats to their own election campaigns. The National Right to Work Committee estimates that two of every three teachers belong to unions. The average union dues payment varies, but a reasonable estimate is that between 1% and 1.5% of teacher salaries goes to dues. The National Education Association and other unions will thus get as much as $100 million in additional dues from this bill, much of which will flow immediately to endangered Democratic candidates in competitive House and Senate races this year.
When these people go on recess I wish they would stay on recess and, since they’re so into extending things, why don’t they extend that recess for the next twelve months? I wonder how much money we could save that way. They should spend a year in their districts getting reacquainted with the people they are supposed to represent.
Levi Johnston is such a tremendous loser. I feel sorry for Bristol Palin that she will have to let that tool be a part of her life for the rest of her life, but I guess that’s just one of the negative consequences to having unprotected sex. How does he get a TV show? How is he famous? I love ho he is running for mayor of Wasilla. He should probably concentrate on getting a high school diploma and being a father. Just a thought.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Bruce Walker has a piece over at American Thinker about who should be the Republican presidential nominee in 2012: Tom Coburn (Awesome-O.K.!). Coburn’s book, Breach of Trust: How Washington Turns Outsiders Into Insiders, is an awesome book that everyone should read. I read it while I was in college, in the summer of 2004. It changed the way I viewed all politics. I met Coburn back in 2005. I asked him if he would consider running for president. He said that his wife wouldn’t let him. So, on that note, I say we start appealing to his wife. I’m going to Oklahoma in a couple of weeks. Anyone know her address?
Comments (7)August 6, 2010
D.C. officially stands for “Douche City”
Monday, August 2, 2010
Time has a new piece up about those greedy, fat-cat bankers trying to stick us for our paper by adding new fees to offset the cost of our government overlords “reforming” the industry to save us all from ourselves. These aren’t dirty tricks; they’re basic economics. Get a clue! Are they supposed to give us credit at a loss to their business?
Fatty-fat-fat-fat Meghan McCain published a post last week about Obama’s appearance on The View. Of course, she thinks it’s great he went on there and that it doesn’t denigrate the office of the presidency. That’s bull. Almost all that Obama does denigrates the office of the presidency. She’s also upset because she thinks he squandered the opportunity to bring more people over to his side. Yeah, because that’s exactly what a true Republican would be upset about: the Democrat president being unable to change minds over to his liberal way of thinking. She doesn’t care what’s on Obama’s iPod, either. What she has yet to realize is that no one else cares what’s on her non-existent mind.
Wednesday, August 5, 2010
I was forced to listen to nonsense on the radio this morning. It was a black* morning radio host talking about the ethics charges mounting against Rangel and Waters. He was lamenting how “they,” although who “they” is isn’t clearly identified, are doing this to bring the black race down and it’s time the black race fought back. I wish I knew what the guy’s name was so I could call him out. Yeah, because that’s what these charges are about. It couldn’t possibly be because the two are morally bankrupt, corrupt, criminals/politicians? Nah! It must be a white versus black thing. Brother, please!
*Yes, I refuse to use the politically correct term of “African-American.” Not every person who is black is of African ancestry. How is that term politically correct? Politically motivated? Yeah, I could see that. Politically correct? Who decided that? Plus, we’re all Americans. Cut the bull and stop balkanizing us by our ethnic and racial heritages.
Apparently, a CNN poll found that one in four Americans still question whether or not Obama is Constitutionally qualified to be president based on questions surrounding his birth. They stated:
It’s surely not what the leader of the free world wants for his birthday. But, for a stubborn group of Americans, conspiracy theories about President Obama’s birthplace are the gifts that keep on giving.
The president celebrates his 49th birthday Wednesday. On the same day, a new national poll indicates some Americans continue to doubt the president was born in the United States.
It could be argued that this is exactly what President Obama wants since he is the only one who could clear this up leaving no doubt or speculation, but he chooses not to. I’m not saying I think that he wasn’t born here. I’m just saying that he is the only person that could unequivocally put this issue to rest, yet refuses. If this isn’t what he wants it is in his power to change it.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
The Other McCain is sporting some Rule 5 action, this morning, with a picture Marcela Hoeven in a bikini. Apparently, Dems are trying to take their Republican opponent down by stirring up the “family values” crowd. I don’t know what they’re thinking here. Is it against family values for a girl to wear a bikini? Is it against family values for a girl to look hot in a bikini? It’s not like they released a porno starring the chick. And, even if they did, why should that matter to her father’s campaign? Marcela is 23-years-old. Whatever! They’re just mad that conservative women are hotter than liberal women who pride themselves on looking like men.
Also, Stacy delved into what I would think of getting a job at the New York Observer at the age of 25 and getting a spot on TV. If I worked hard for that and felt that I had earned that position, I would be pretty psyched about it. If I had to go through life wondering if I am where I am because of who my parents are, not on my insight and ability, I would hate it. Stacy said this girl, Chloe Malle, seemed to be doing pretty well and that, after reading an interview she had given, he knew all he needed to know when she said that she would love to have dinner with her parents (her father having died when she was 10).
I realized a long time ago that just because you were born into a life of wealth, privilege and even fame, doesn’t mean that everything is great. Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian, both born into wealth and privilege, became famous for sex tapes and partying. I would prefer my “hard knocks” life to their “privileged” lives any day of the week. Chloe Malle could have used her wealth, privilege and fame in a variety of different ways. She chose to get a good education and work hard to succeed. Does it help that her parents are famous? I’m sure it does. But, that doesn’t mean she’s some idiot who couldn’t have made it on her own, like that idiot Meghan McCain who has no brain and certainly would be a nobody if it weren’t for Stacy’s cousin John.
I would love to write and be published anywhere, if it is earned through my talent and hard work. As for being on TV, I’m not sure fame is my thing. I like my privacy way too much and I don’t need the world knowing who I am and what I look like. Sure, there are ways to find out, but I would have to need a bodyguard or have to worry about who is recognizing me when I’m out on the street. I would hate to be Scott Brown (R-Mass.) who I called a douche-bag on my birthday because I saw him at my local bar. I don’t mind seeing my name in print, but I don’t need the world seeing my face on their TV screens.
Ann Coulter dispels the myth of the 14th Amendment…you know, that part that established citizenship for anchor babies? Apparently, that’s not what they meant when they were drafting, passing, and ratifying it:
The 14th Amendment was added after the Civil War to overrule the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision, which had held that black slaves were not citizens of the United States. The precise purpose of the amendment was to stop sleazy Southern states from denying citizenship rights to newly freed slaves – many of whom had roots in this country longer than a lot of white people.
The amendment guaranteed that freed slaves would have all the privileges of citizenship by providing: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
The drafters of the 14th Amendment had no intention of conferring citizenship on the children of aliens who happened to be born in the U.S. (For my younger readers, back in those days, people cleaned their own houses and raised their own kids.)
Inasmuch as America was not the massive welfare state operating as a magnet for malingerers, frauds and cheats that it is today, it’s amazing the drafters even considered the amendment’s effect on the children of aliens.
But they did.
The very author of the citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, expressly said: “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.”
In the 1884 case Elk v. Wilkins, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not even confer citizenship on Indians – because they were subject to tribal jurisdiction, not U.S. jurisdiction.
For a hundred years, that was how it stood, with only one case adding the caveat that children born to legal permanent residents of the U.S., gainfully employed, and who were not employed by a foreign government would also be deemed citizens under the 14th Amendment (United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 1898).
And then, out of the blue in 1982, Justice Brennan slipped a footnote into his 5-4 opinion in Plyler v. Doe, asserting that “no plausible distinction with respect to 14th Amendment ‘jurisdiction’ can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful.” (Other than the part about one being lawful and the other not.)
Friday, August 6, 2010
- Elena Kagan, pictured above, has been confirmed by the Senate as a Supreme Court Justice
Scuttle has been confirmed to the Supreme Court! See, we are a progressive nation. Not only did we elect a celebrity, but the first bird ever to sit on the highest court in the land. I wonder if Ariel will be singing at the celebration party?
In all seriousness, though, when I heard that some Republicans had voted for her I asked myself, who? First answer: Lindsey Graham (Traitor-S.C.). And, of course, he was one of them. Other rejects to vote for confirmation who should be voted out as soon as possible: Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, Richard Lugar (T-Indiana) and Judd Gregg (T-N.H.). Once again, I see a lot of New England “Republicans” on the wrong side of this vote, their party and the people. At least that douche-bag Scott Brown got this one right. Maybe me calling him a douche-bag and telling him that he sucked really helped, after all. I am now advocating a policy for all to call all traitors douchebags and tell them they suck. Can’t hurt to try, right?
I watched the Desperate Housewives of DC, last night. I know, I’m like a couple of days late. And, it has been confirmed, D.C., formerly known as the “District of Columbia” officially stands for “Douche City.” Shows like that leave me unable to understand this country. Admittedly, I like the Desperate Housewives of New Jersey. Come on, they’re bad ass. Those wives are flipping tables, pulling hair, and acting all mafioso. What are these other chicks doing other than calling each other too skinny and drinking wine? Oh, and showing how douchey DC can really be. No wonder Whoopi wanted to slap a bitch!
Roy Horn, of Siegfried & Roy, has been accused of sexually harassing his male assistants. What is surprising about this, you ask? Um, the National Enquirer finds it shocking. Is anyone really shocked by this? I’m not.
Comments (2)