Tag Archives: liberal media bias

CBS Proves To Be the Corrupt Bastard Station

Bookmark and Share   The drama in Alaska’s election for United States Senate seems to be endless, but the closer we get to Election Day, the more clear the reasons behind the drama becomes.

Republican and TEA movement supported candidate Joe Miller is not a favorite of the liberal lamestream media. He is a conservative and believes in applying that annoying little document called the Constitution to government. His conservative qualities appealed to most Alaska Republican and they denied incumbent Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski renomination as the Republican standard bearer and chose Miller instead. His win over Murkowski was a surprise and it provided him with a rocket-like rise to fame that catapulted him into the targets of the liberal establishment who find all that Joe Miller stands for unacceptable.

This has led to quite a lot of biased reporting of Miller and even attempts to create controversies and scandals that were meant to sabotage his chances of winning the election which he is the frontrunner in.

But now, in one of the most disgraceful and indisputable examples of unethical liberal media activism, a recorded cell phone message made by local CBS staffers proves that CBS is in fact nothing but the Corrupt Bastard Station.

The call was made by CBS to Joe Miller and went to voicemail. After stating what the CBS staffer intended to ask, unbeknownst to the caller he neglected to hanng up the call properly and dicsonnect the connection. Instead the voice mail continued to record a conversation between the CBS staffer who made the call and the other CBS employees covering Joe Miller. In it you can hear these so-called news people plotting on how they would cull through the names of every person who walks into an Miller event in the hopes of finding a “child molester” and then breaking news that Miller is supported by such despicable people.

The conversation even records the intention to concoct situations that would make it possible for CBS to send out Tweets on Twitter that would convey the sense that the Miller campaign is in utter chaos with happenings such as “Miller was punched in the face”.

In a Sunday morning interview with Sarah Palin on Fox News, the former Alaska Governor, a Miller supporter, took the opportunity to claim that these people were “corrupt bastards”.

She was right.

Trying to sabotage the democratic process in America is anything but ethical or American. Trying to create the news instead of reporting the news is disgracefully disingenuous and unacceptable. The malicious and devious intentions of this and other news organizations has been evident for quite some time but this latest episode should be for all Americans, the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.

Let’s face it folks, news is not suppose to be opinion. Real news is not suppose to fabricate events to report on, it is suppose to deliver the facts surrounding the events that have happened. Yet far too many outlets that call themselves true “news” organizations do little to deliver real news and much to create the news stories which they wish to report on and help promote viewers to reach the same biased conclusions that those who create the stories, wish to convey.

CBS just happens to now be the best example of how discredited modern journalism has become.

This recent incident inspires the memory of the CBS scandal that lead to the downfall of Dan Rather who tried to falsify records to create a story that was meant to sabotage the reelection of President George W. Bush in 2004. In that case, Rather and his CBS staff were found to have breached every single code of journalistic integrity that existed. Now CBS has simply reinforced the tactics of Rather and in doing so , they have truly turned what use to be known as the Communist Broadcasting Company into the Corrupt Bastard Company. They have also given Alaskans even more reason to vote for Joe Miller and provided added incentive for a vast number of sincere Americans to come out and vote.

Between the firing of Juan Williams from NPR for practicing free speech, to the New York Times and NBC and CBS, the liberal media elite have been hand feeding us their biases and suppressing opposing views for far too long. It is a symptom of the liberal mentality which has taken hold of the federal government during the last two years and even more reason to take a stand and reject the left on Election Day.

I for one know that when I go to vote on November 2nd, in addition to the issues such as the economy, national security, cap-and-trade, taxes, the government takeover of healthcare, banks and the auto industry, I will also be seeing visions of lowlifes like Keith Olbermann, Chris Mathews, Rachel Maddow, Chuck Scarborough, Candy Crowley, Bill Maher, Joy Behar and others whom are more than happy to offer their opinions but are hypocritically intolerant of any opposing views.

Each of those people may have a time slot on some low rated programs, but as voters we have the final say and what pseudo-news outlets like CBS need to understand is that whether they like it or not, it is our decisions which they are suppose to be covering, not the staged events which they hope to alter history with.

Bookmark and Share
Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Attempt to Rehabilitate Dan Rather’s Reputation Is Dismissed

Bookmark and Share    Dan Rather, the disgraced television journalist and news anchor, just lost the chance to get richer and to rehabilitate his deserved disgraceful reputation.

Dan Rather, Disgraced JournalistAfter trying to fake the facts about President George W. Bush’s record in the National Guard in order to promote his own liberal biases against the former President, Dan Rather was pushed into early retirement. The episode was called memo gate and it was a shameful example of bias and a total lack of journalistic integrity. It involved a decision by Dan Rather to run with falsified reports of the former President’s service record which asserted that George W. Bush failed to fulfill his service commitment to the Air National Guard during the early 70’s.

Dan Rather and his staff aggressively pursued and then ran with the story without ever verifying the legitimacy of the documents which were later found to have been forgeries. Between the lack of standards applied to the research of Rather’s report and the timing of the report during the 2004 presidential elections largely indicated not just a breach of journalistic integrity and decency but as a blatant example of media bias.

The controversy forced CBS, the network which featured Dan Rather, in a difficult spot and by the end of the 2004 election year, Rather was forced into an early retirement as the most respectful way to get rid of the a prominent but discredited newsman.

Animated GIF image comparing what CBS claimed to be a 1973-era typewritten memo with a 2004-era Microsoft Word document made with default settings

Animated GIF image comparing what CBS claimed to be a 1973-era typewritten memo with a 2004-era Microsoft Word document made with default settings

The early exit angered Dan Rather, but few could legitimately defend his illegitimate conduct and actions and so he had no choice but to leave. Disgruntled by the situation and the fact that his controversial career had come to an end on such an auspicious, sour note, Rather tried to sue CBS over the matter and to also redeem his shameful reputation.

Well today the New York Sate Appelate Court concluded that Rather has no leg to stand on and that he is culpable for the entire incident and that CBS bears no unjust penalty for the way in which Dan Rather ended his career with them . Thecourt dismissed his case and his chance for the $70 million in damages that he was suing CBS for.

Not one to give up, Rather’s reach for the rehabilitation of his reputation will continue as he seeks another appeal to this this decision. But hopefully, if there really is any truth in justice, the real facts and documents involved in Rather’s shaky appeal will prevail over the falsified facts and records that Rather has been proven to run with. In the end, hopefully not only he will he not profit from his wrongdoing but maybe he will actually have to suffer the consequences of his deception and forever remain a disgraced and biased member of the lamestream media’s liberal elite.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Wrangling Rangle While Exploring Liberal Hypocrisy and The Democrat-Media Complex

By POLITICS 24/7 guest blogger Michael Duminiak
mikewithdogsBookmark and Share   Oh Charlie, what can’t you do? You’ve told your constituents to shut up and mind their own business on tape when they questioned you. You’ve battled an ethics probe for over a year and still hold the Chairmanship of the powerful Ways and Means Committee. Just tell us you drove your car off a bridge killing a mistress and we’ll canonize you.

There are times when I almost wish I were a Democrat. Ah, the simplicity of the left. If a Republican so much as toasts a hundred year old man, call for his resignation. If, on the other hand, a Democrat calls someone a “nigger” – name something after him. If a Republican has an affair, scream for his resignation or impeachment. If, on the other hand, a Democrat has an affair and lies about it in court committing perjury, attack those who exposed him. If a mikesblogRepublican lies on his tax forms, he should go to prison. If on the other hand, a Democrat lies on his tax forms you can appoint him to Secretary of the Treasury or head of the House Committee in charge of tax law. If a Republican goes to jail for felony crimes, his career is over. If, on the other hand, a Democrat spends seven years in federal prison for felony crimes, he gets an appreciation dinner and support to get back into politics. If I ever decided to be a sleazy, no good, felonious, adulterous racist, I’d join the Democrats where such attributes gain praise.

If it weren’t all true, it would be funny. Instead, it is evidence of a political/media structure so completely deranged that we have good reason to be truly fearful. The subjective and relativistic morality preached by the left is their ‘get out of jail free’ card. They can hold the conservatives to their own standards (and rightly so), but then hold themselves to no concrete standard at all. Instead, Democrats lament the felony convictions of fellow Democrats and talk about all the good that crook had done. It’s like the mothers of murderers who say, “he was such a nice boy”.

Pointing out this serious problem of the Democrat-Media Complex only serves to make whoever points it out into the punching bag of the leftist mobs. Rather than admit to their own problems, they throw the mistakes of Republicans as examples that neither side is clean. They miss the point. Neither side is clean, but at least the Republicans take out their own garbage when they find it. The Democrats try to cover theirs in perfume and flowers and pretend it doesn’t stink.

When the left decides to hold their own crooks to account, maybe then I’ll have some respect for them. Until then, they’re just a bunch of boobs.

posted by mduminiak at 10:29 AM

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Glenn Beck Show Identified By The Use Of Curse Words On T.V. Screens

Bookmark and Share   So there have been claims that the entertainment industry and the media have a liberal bias. The claim is nothing new. It is a charge that has existed for decades and one look at Hollywood, cable or network news or a newspaper and you can understand what has led to this allegation.
Screen shot of how how Optimum identifies the Glenn Beck Show - "Glenif*ck"

Screen shot of how Optimum identifies the Glenn Beck Show - "Glenif*ck"

Once esteemed news outlets such as The Grey Lady of New York, The New York Times has only helped to perpetuate claims of bias. Their recent history is strewn with examples of political favoritism rearing its ugly head in the form of editorialized news stories that deliver more opinion than fact.

But recently a most unorthodox display of bias played itself out on the most unlikely places.

Subscribers to Optimum, a cable television and internet service provider received a little surprise when going through their channel lineup or adjusting their DVR settings.

There among other programs during the same 5:00 pm time slot was the show Glenn Beck. But while other shows like StarGate or Star Trek or the Guiding Light were indicated by their correct spellings and names, the Glenn Beck Show was displayed as “ Glenif*ck “.

Could this be a glitch of some sort? Well maybe but it has to be a pretty selective and stealthy one and it would be a very coincidental one. As of late, Glenn Beck has caught on as one of the largest antagonists of the left to come down the pike since Sean Hanitty went national.

Beck’s defiant demeanor stems from a libertarian, not Republican, streak that infiltrates every school of thought that he present to his viewers and listeners. He has a tendency to throw a monkey wrench into policies that detract from the principles which founded our nation. He uses a rarely referred to document these days, the U.S. Constitution, to point out the problems with contemporary governance in America.

This frustrates many Obama fans and loyalists who disdain any comparisons between President Obama’s liberal socialist policies and actual socialism. So much so that when Glenn Beck became a hit and unattracted an unprecedented number of viewers for his time slot, the liberal media organized itself into a full court press attack on him. At one in April, when Beck’s popularity was first confirmed on the radar, liberal newspapers ran hit pieces on him for weeks.

This was a stark contrast to Lefty media critics who gushed about MSNBC’s boldness at giving a liberal lesbian in Rachel Maddow her own show. For he shallow interviews and lame attempts of humor, the public endured numerous stories of praise in periodicals.

It is clear that while Glenn Beck’s message is being widely received among a general population that is offended by the Gestapo style policies and tactics of the current ruling regime in Washington, the liberal elites have been offended and angered. But despite their disgust with the views expressed by Glenn Beck, none of them can effectively dispute his constitution based opinions and interpretations.

So one must question the legitimacy of his popular program being listed as Glenif*ck.

Will this be explained? Will the doubts about how Glenn Beck got translated into Glenif*ck even be addressed?

A skeptical community of Americans await an answer or at the very least an explanation. Inquiries in to the FCC and Optimum on this incident have yet to be answered but if they are, I’ll be sure to let you know what it may be. I won’t hold my breath waiting for an explanation though.

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment

Filed under politics

GOVERNMENT TAKEOVERS, THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Bookmark and ShareAs Democrats begin to feel their oats, with control of all three branches of government, there has been a renewed interest inantfairnessdoctrine_front1 what liberals smartly, but improperly, call  the Fairness Doctrine.

The Fairness Doctrine seeks to insure that the media allots equal time to both liberal and conservative viewpoints.

That sounds innocent enough on the surface but a cursory look under the surface reveals a twisted and tangled web of deceit and chicanery.

First of all, the Fairness Doctrine is anything but fair.

Is it fair to tell you what you must listen to or see? Is it fair to dictate what a private company sells outside of illegal trade?

Well the so called Fairness Doctrine does just that. It tells privately owned media outlets what they must air.

So if you are a liberal themed radio network, now you must change your format and become both a liberal and conservative network.

Attempts to reinstitute any type of Fairness Doctrine are attempts to undermine free speech, the free market and freedom of choice.

Liberal cries for a new Fairness Doctrine stem from a fear of conservative talk shows dominating the airwaves and over the years, they have become a thorn in the sides of liberal advocates. So much so that left leaning activists have tried and failed at creating their own liberal talk show ventures.

One such progressive station recently closed on February 5th. It was an AM station located at 1260 on the dial and called Obama 1260.

One of the most recent big liberal ventures was Air America. That went over so well that it went bankrupt in 2006.

Yet it seems that every day there is a new conservative oriented radio or television program cropping up. Be it Glenn Beck on t.v. or Mark Levine on WABC am radio, conservative hosts are increasing in popularity. They are getting more time on the air, more listeners and more money. Rush Limbaugh recently signed on to a decades long contract which made him one of radio’s richest hosts in history.

Why is that? Is it because the liberal oriented media moguls like these guys, or is it because they like the money that these guys bring in for them? Do they give these conservative hosts more time because their ratings are slipping or do they give them more time because when these hosts articulate the conservative cause, ratings go up?

The truth is that there are more people in America yearning for a comprehensive, logical, conservative oriented approach to government. Such an approach is not what they always see from their so-called political leaders. Voters are often disappointed by their political leaders who cave in on any number of political issues or votes. Yet conservative talking heads are able to  remain consistent in their views without having to bend to political compromise. So more often than not, conservative hosts are even more popular than some conservative legislators.

This popularity irks the left. They are frustrated by an articulation of conservative ideas that people listen to and want to listen to without having any desire to hear Al Franken, Randi Rhodes or Rachel “madcow’ Madow on Air America.

It is the free market which leads to the preponderance of conservative viewpoints that exists. It is driven by what is popular. Like any other commodity, radio and television is geared to what the people like. Would Milton Bradley keep on producing Monopoly if it didn’t sell? Would it be right for the government to come in and demand that Milton Bradley continue to make it if no one wanted to buy it?

Unless the government intends to confiscate the airwaves and all other forms of media, they have no constitutional right to control programming that does not violate the bounds of legal decency and ethics.

In the former Soviet Union the Fairness Doctrine had a different name. It was called Pravda. It was an official state sponsored radio and television agency which aired only what was approved or written by the government. It was an effective way to help maintain thinking in line with the way that the communists wanted the people to think.

If a Soviet Premier suddenly had a heart attack while having sex with a mistress, no one would ever know. In fact it could be weeks before the government decided to let anyone know that their leader was dead.

For communist Russians, it worked. But this is America. And in America, whether you call it fair or equal or anything else you might, it is not right. It is government control.

Government control seems to be the trend during this era of “spreading the wealth” but just how much government control do we want and where does the Fairness Doctrine draw the line?

Does the Fairness Doctrine eventually apply to the internet? Perhaps it will someday limit the internet to only a certain amount of conservative and liberal comments . Maybe servers such as aol or platforms such as wordpress can only be online at times of parody between Republican and Democrat commentary.

Will the Fairness Doctrine be strictly enforced in schools where every good word said about President Barack Obama is required to be followed by a good word about the Republican Senate Minority leader?

How far do we go?

I do know one thing for sure and that is that whenever government encroaches into new territory, they keep on going. When government creates a new tax that they promise to keep at a certain rate, they inevitably increase it.

When government regulates something, they rarely, if ever stop there. They regulate it more and more.

The saddest part of this whole discussion stems from the fact that the Fairness Doctrine is no where near being a sincere minded effort. It is a politically driven, partisan attempt to make censorship legal. It is an attempt to censor a free market society by the same people who try to claim that conservatives ban and burn books .

It is just another example of liberal hypocrisy.

Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow

Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow

But to add insult to injury let us look at liberal Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow.

Stabenow recently stated that she has begun the push for the Fairness Doctrine and feels that hearings on the matter are in the works.

That is interesting. Particularly in Stabenow’s case.

You see, you wouldn’t know it but Debbie Stabenow is also Mrs. Tom Athans.

Tom Athans is her husband and he is a radio executive.  A failed one but one who is still struggling to make his mark in liberal radio.

Athans is the co-founder of Democracy Radio and after failing as Vice President of Air America he founded another liberal talk show network called TalkUSA Radio.

For the sake of full disclosure I will add that, last year, Tom Athans was also arrested for hiring a prostitute for $150 bucks but that had nothing to do with Stabenow. However; for the the same sake of full disclosure, will Senator Stabenow disqualify herself from participating in measures that would in essence force demand for her husbands networks on to national airwaves and produce a great deal of personal wealth and benefit for the Athans-Stabenow family if those measures are approved?

Senator Stabenow with Husband Tom Athans

Senator Stabenow with Husband Tom Athans

Does anyone else not see the conflict of interest in Stabenow’s rush to push for the so called Fairness Doctrine?

Stabenow’s push to censor conservative talk shows and to call it a Fairness Doctrine is anything but fair or decent. It is censorship and in her case it is also an obvious conflict of interest.

Just as the infidelity of Stabenow’s husband is none of my business neither is radio or television any of Stabenow’s governmental business.

When I watch the Obama network, otherwise known as NBC or MSNBC, I do not believe that the government needs to intervene and needs to control their programming, I just do what most Americans do. I turn off MSNBC.

The same can be done with Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity or any other host or program that someone does not wish to see.

It just so happens that when it comes to liberal radio, few have been able to make a good case for liberalism. Hence the failure of Stabenow’s husband’s liberal programming career. It is a result of the free market. It is a victim of supply and demand. There is very little demand for a great deal of liberal propaganda so there is a limited supply of it coming from a market that is based on profit.

The funniest aspect to this whole hypocritical legislative initiative is that there are few people who will argue with the fact that most of the media already has a liberal bias. Even Hillary Clinton had a hard time containing her disdain for a liberal media that turned on her in favor of an even more liberal Barack Obama. Yet that is not good enough for greedy liberals like Stabenow.

Liberals like Stabenow want to stifle speech and profit from it too.

 

                                                                                                        Bookmark and Share
 
Photobucket

punchline-politics

A capitalist and a socialist are working on the side of a road when a rich fellow drives by in a Cadillac.

The capitalist says, “Someday, I’ll be driving a Cadillac.”

The socialist replies, “Someday, that guy won’t.”

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

THE MESSIAH MODE AND BARACK OBAMA’S POLITICAL MADRASAS

In the Islamic faith a madrasa is a school for the study of the Koran and Islamic thought,. Many madrasas are wrongfully used to teach extremist Islamic views and indoctrinate the young into jihad against what they call, the great Satan, the United States.

When used as a training ground for terrorism, madrasas are dangerous. They perpetuate a corrupted interpretation of a religion and breed violence and hatred all in the name of Allah.

Such schools of propaganda are frowned upon and not only discouraged but fought against. Yet here in the United States a growing number of political madrasas are cropping up in the gymnasiums and classrooms of our own public schools. They have grown in number from California to New York and were inspired by followers of liberal messiah Barack Obama.

Liberals have been blinded by hatred for Republicans and motivated by their jealousy of Republican electoral victories.  That same hatred and jealousy has inspired them to spread their message through the basic educational institutions within the nation’s school systems.

Just a few weeks ago a college level teacher forced students to complete an assignment that ripped apart Sarah Palin’s speech at the Republican National Convention. A contrary approach that would have supported her speech by a student, who agreed with what she said, was unacceptable and did not fulfill the requirements of the assignment.

Shortly after that, low grade elementary school children were gathered together for days of rehearsal as they prepared for a choir performance that sang the virtues of Barack Obama.

Now in Missouri, another teacher was reprimanded for gathering students together for pro-Obama military like drills that shout out adoring chants for Barack. As you can see in the video, it is an eerie display of Nazi like military celebrations for Hitler.

In fact all of these public school activities and the training of children into liberal ideologies before thay have developed sense of personal independent thought are frightening. The biased indoctrination of youth by public school educators is appalling. The single digit aged kids singing in choirs for Obama is reminiscent of communist Chinese school auditoriums paying homage to Mao Tse Tung.

What I find most intriguing is the fact that the educators who are sponsoring these events are the very same people who refuse school prayer or the pledge of allegiance to be conducted in the public domain. They have thrown the ROTC off of campuses and refused to allow it as an option for children.  Yet they are more than happy to train school children to believe that Barack Obama is our savior and that he is the one person we must have faith in.

It is another example of liberal hypocrisy and a prime example of the same type of madrasa-like atmosphere that extremists use to brainwash children and draft them into jihad.

The problem, for me, is that this is still America. The Islamic jihad has not yet converted our population to their cause and the tactics that they use should not be adopted by American schools and educators. It is bad enough that many institutions of higher learning are dominated by liberal radicals like domestic terrorist and Obama buddy Bill Ayers who is now a Chicago professor. But the line must be drawn in our elementary institutions.

Liberals preach the virtues of tolerance and acceptance. They accuse all others who are not liberal of being

Class In Session At An Extremist Madrasa

Class In Session At An Extremist Madrasa

intolerant and prejudiced yet they have no qualms about brainwashing innocent children into promoting their own biases and intolerances. Just like the extremist madrasas promoting their sheep-like flock of terrorists.

All of this is a result of the very real messiah image that Obama has created for himself. An image that he, himself, believes and that his mindless, desperate, bitter, hateful followers agree with. For them Obama can do no wrong even though he has done nothing in his entire political career. For them winning is all that matters and for them no one is immune from their tactics to win, not even innocent children. It is dangerously similar to the bombing tactics of William Ayers or Hezbollah and it is unacceptable in a democracy, especially our American democracy.

It is time for Barack Obama to denounce such tactics and help to stem the prostituting of our youth in an attempt to promote a political agenda. Does he adore and endorse endorses these tactics the same way that Kruschev did when children from all over the former Soviet Union were collected and gathered in Red Square to sing his praises behind a backdrop of the latest military hardware? Or does Barack rejects such spectacles and tactics as an illegitimate and inappropriate parasitizing of children for political purposes? Having the messianic complex that he has of himself I think I know the answer to that question.

 

Here is a free puppy

Barack Obama is running down the street one day, and he sees a little girl who is giving away puppies that her dog just had.

He goes up to the girl and says, “Little girl, I think that it’s wonderful that you’re doing such a good thing.”

The little girl says, “Thank you, Senator Obama. Would you like a puppy? They’re Democrats.”

Barack declines and jogs onward. The next day Barrack jogs past the same girl and decides to talk to her again. “You know what, little girl? I think I’ll take one of those puppies after all, seeing as how they’re Democrats.”

The girl says, “I’m sorry Senator Obama, but they’re not Democrats any more. They’re Republican now.”

Barack says, “They are? How do you know? As a matter of fact, how did you know that they were Democrats at first to begin with?” 

She says, “Well, just after they were born they were Democrats, but now their eyes are open.”
Photobucket

 

2 Comments

Filed under politics

FRANK RALEIGH LAUTENBERG AND NEW JERSEY…PERFECT TOGETHER?

I recently had a conversation with a friend who was quite active in New York politics. He served on many a presidential campaigns and was the campaign voice for several local and statewide officials in New York. He has long since retired and moved away but during this conversation I mentioned Frank Lautenberg’s name and he said “Lautenberg, is he still around?” I chuckled and explained that you wouldn’t know it but he is still there. I really had no obvious evidence to point to his existence but I assured him that Frank was still there and that he was running to stay there.

After that conversation, I got to thinking , why did Frank Lautenberg run again? I mean back in 1982 Lautenberg ran for the United States Senate and he started off as a major force. During his first term he was the impetus behind the raising of the legal drinking age to 21 in all states by linking federal funding for their highways to their raising the legal age. He also revolutionized the airline industry by successfully authoring legislation that eliminated smoking on planes. But since then his, legislative activism and personal leadership has waned, In 2001, after 3 terms in office, he fittingly retired, only to come out of retirement to replace Senator Bob Torricelli on the ballot in his doomed re-election effort. Although state and party laws deny anyone the ability to replace a nomination within days of an election, the New Jersey Supreme court decided that laws do not matter and allowed Torricelli , who was under investigation for criminal conduct, to be taken off the ballot and replaced by someone who had a better chance to win the election. That person was Lautenberg.

Lautenberg didiwon that election, but what did Lautenberg’s return from retirement bring us? Aside from proving that the law did not matter and that he was above it, his six years since then have produced little, very little.

Oh Frank is a reliable liberal vote in Washington. He was counted on to support opposition to the efforts to combat terrorism. He was counted on to vote for any and every tax hike that came out of the collective congressional agenda. But aside from being a reliable vote for the liberal agenda, Frank did little for New Jersey and he did even less when it came to bringing any new energy for new ideas or directions. It seemed that Frank’s only major accomplishments were achieved back in the early 80’s when his once fresh voice led the way to sensible reforms that in some cases saved lives.

Credit must be given when and where credit is due and so, Lautenberg’s two landmark initiatives are to his credit. But after 24 years of legislating in the federal government on behalf of New Jersey, where is the credit that he once deserved to be re-elected for today. Since his 1982 -1988 stint, there is little merit that warrants electing Lautenberg to any of the terms since then.

The only level of increased activity that Lautenberg has demonstrated exists within his staff. It is a staff that has one of the largest numbers and highest payrolls in the senate. His chief of staff earns one of the highest salaries offered on Capitol Hill to any other colleague with the same title and responsibilities. As Lautenberg’s Chief of Staff, Daniel Katz has earned $81,183.59 just between October 2007 and March of 2008. Compared to others this is no measly sum of money. Yet, I do not begrudge Daniel Katz the money. He earns it.

He must work hard to control and motivate the other 52 staffers that account for Lautenberg’s senate activity. Daniel Katz must also work twice hard to make his inactive Senator appear busy and productive. It is a job that cannot be done alone. That is why Lautenberg’s staff includes 12 legislative assistants, aides and directors, who between October of last year and March of this year have been paid a combined total of three and a quarter hundred thousand dollars or to be exact $324,786.75.

Oddly enough along with having state directors and deputy state directors Frank also has a South Jersey Director and two Deputy South Jersey Directors and an assistant to the South Jersey Director. Now we all know that that New Jersey is famous for it’s extraordinarily large size. At 7,418 square miles it ranks as the 46th largest state in the nation. But these South Jersey, patronage, posts reflect less of a legislative need than a political need. Congressman Rob Andrews who challenged Frank for the democrat nomination is from South Jersey and most of the rumblings to replace Lautenberg come out of South Jersey.

These South Jersey directors have earned a combined $58,437.42 during the five months between October ‘07 and March ‘08. Add to this another $99,579.61 which has been paid to state and deputy state directors during the same time period.

The rest of Lautenberg’s staff consists of a rarely used speech writer along with an executive director, press secretaries, schedulers, constituent service directors, specialists, handlers and assistants, legal counselors, legislative directors, assistants and specialists. It also includes a legislative correspondent, director of correspondence, systems administrator, special project coordinators and numerous staff assistants.

In total, Lautenberg’ 53 staffers, and five month, nearly one and a half million dollar payroll ($1,437497.80), must work hard to make a sitting Senator who has little initiative to point to, look active and productive.

Everyday, leading up to his race for the nomination against Andrews, Lautenberg’s staff has produced countless press releases staking a position on an issue. In fact his staff has been responsible for the Herculean task of trying to demonstrate Frank Lautenberg as a constructive part of government in the face of his lack of real initiatives.

Let’s face it. Since Lautenberg’s first term 27 years ago, he has nothing to show for it. His latest claim is that he insured that the federal Homeland Security money provided to New Jersey is doled out on the basis of need. Accept for a press release, Frank did not correct the problem that existed in this area. Republican state legislators brought up a lawsuit against the state after revealing that Homeland security money was being given out only to districts that had Democrat lawmakers representing them. The Corzine administration was allocating money meant to shore up security in our state based on politics, not need. Frank Lautenberg’s press releases did not change this immoral activity, the threatened lawsuit brought about by Republicans did. But I guess if you have little effort or action of your own to point to, your staff must take every opportunity to make their boss look good.

Making Frank look good is a hard job though. In his days since 1982, Frank bitterly clings to his only major accomplishments, raising the drinking age and prohibiting smoking on airplanes.

His subsequent representation of New Jersey since then has not produced much else. In fact due to the democrats representing us in the U.S. Senate, New Jersey continues to be one of the lowest ranked states in terms of our return on the tax dollars that we send to Washington. Together, Lautenberg and Menendez have been unable to get much bang for our buck and through it all they maintain their liberal mantra that helps to continue the crisis of affordability that exists in New Jersey.

Perhaps the greatest shame in all this is not, the lack of initiative or leadership that an 84 year old man has in Washington, DC. but rather that the state of New Jersey does not have the ability to produce a citizen that can provide leadership in D.C.

Republican nominee Dick Zimmer is a worthy candidate. He has a good, proven twelve year record serving in congress as a representative from New Jersey. He has commendable views on policies pertaining to energy and the economy. His views on foreign policy are more attuned to the times and better suited for the times than the liberal, tea with terrorists approach that Lautenberg liberals take. But in New Jersey, none of this matters. The Republican party of this state has yet to get it’s act together and put forth an agenda that offers a clear difference from today’s ruling class liberals.

Even Dick Zimmer, as capable as he is, can not wage a decent campaign against Lautenberg.  The state G.O.P. has been unable to raise sufficient funds for our candidates. Current fund raising records show that Dick Zimmer has raised a few hundred thousand dollars, while the aging, millionaire, founder of one of the nations largest payroll companies, Frank Lautenberg, has a couple of million for his campaign.

It is also a shame that New Jersey operates under such a shroud of hypocrisy. The hypocrisy of a candidate who first took office in 1982 by attacking his opponent, Millicent Fenwick, for her age which at the time was in her low 70’s. The hypocrisy of a man who came out of retirement and was resurrected by breaking laws that switched his name in place of a candidate that was losing. The hypocrisy of a man who is elected to office to do things for New Jersey but has actually accomplished little for New Jersey in over two decades.

It is all a shame but it is a shame that New Jersey deserves. We deserve what we get and in Frank Lautenberg what we get is an aging fat cat, devoid of ideas and drive and propped up by an over million and a half dollar staff that is occupied by patronage posts that are charged with making Lautenberg look productive.

There is one thing New Jersey will accomplish when it keeps Lautenberg on the job for us. It will break a record and make Lautenberg the longest serving United States Senator in New Jersey’s history. That s something but it doesn’t mean much when it comes to the benefits we have gotten out of that long service, or should I say lack of benefit.

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

SARAH CINCHED IT

For over two months I have done all that I can to help influence John McCain’s vice presidential selection.You see, I did not support John McCain for president. I supported Mitt Romney for President. Then Fred Thompson entered the race and I backed him but although I was their for Thompson’s campaign, Thompson didn’t show up to his own campaign. So I went back to Mitt Romney. I felt that Romney offered more of a true adherence to conservative principles than did McCain. I liked his freshness on the national stage, his positions on the issues, his integrity, history of success and his ability to articulate the issues and his positions on them.

However, when the battle for the nomination was over and the dust settled, I knew I would be supporting John McCain’s candidacy for president. For me the starkly different directions that our choices offer made my support unquestionable. I could not ignore the facts and sacrifice the next four years of our nation‘s future by letting Barrack Obama, (or as his running mate calls him, “Barrack America) take hold of the reigns of power.

Although I was convinced of my support, I was leery. Immigration and taxes were my most pressing concerns with McCain and I was not enthusiastic. The one thing I needed for him to do to convince and energize me was to give a sign, a sign that he was willing to embrace the Reagan Republican conservative principles that we need to enforce in government.

For me that sign was in the selection of his vice president. In the first official debate, which was actually more a well done forum and less a debate, McCain said all the right things but I was still not convinced. His first major decision, the one for vice president, was what I really looked to for the assurances that I needed.

As a political consultant I wanted someone that would help him to help republicans win. That type of help would come by having someone selected as running mate that would reinforce McCain’s maverick image as a reformer. Such a quality would help win over those much treasured and important independent voters. I also knew that his choice must be someone that would also energize McCain’s base, the conservative base, people such as myself.

Scanning the political scenery, there was my man Mitt. He would still bring to the table all that we need and was right on the issues. However his wealth would be hung around the neck of our party and he did not have the cross over appeal that McCain needs.

There was Huckabee, an articulate guy with an ability to endear himself to people and a southerner that could help lock up the south. But by all rights, McCain should not have much trouble delivering the south and it’s electoral votes. In my eyes Mike Huckabee was good but still lacking the oomph that McCain needed.

For me, that left Haley Barbour of Mississippi or John Thune of South Dakota. But again both of these deserving men lacked the edge we needed. So with my consulting hat on I tried to look for the illusive “oomph” that we needed combined with the Reaganesque philosophy that I want in a potential president.

In the face of a candidate running on “change” I know we need to highlight one of McCain’s greatest characteristics……his maverick, reform minded image. I also wanted to match the sense of historic value that Obama’s color had running for the Democrats.

As someone who is not just a casual observer of politics, but in fact, an obsessed student of it, all roads led to one person. A governor, a woman governor named Sarah Palin.

I was aware of her activity and her experience. I knew the natural progression of events which led to her ability to turn Alaska politics on it’s ear.

She was a successful Mayor, small town or not. She rooted out corruption on an Alaskan oil commission and the fact that the corruption she saw was being carried out by fellow Republicans did not prevent her from rooting it out. Actually it was the impetus for her being able to take on the powerful, Republican, Alaskan Governor Frank Murkowski and defeat him in a primary election battle for his own seat.

I was aware of the fact that this first term, Alaska, governor championed reform, knew that taxes were a burden that need to be alleviated and not implemented as a solution and I knew that she was the most convincing and strongest voice on an issue of utmost importance in this election…energy.

Combining all this with the fact the she embraces the ideology I want implemented in government along with her record of doing so and the fact that she was a she, well I just knew that this woman was the right woman at the right time. She fit the logistics of this campaign, and of this time, better than anyone else, including Mitt Romney.

Now that I found the right piece of the puzzle I could only hope and pray that John McCain would see how well it fit too. I wanted him to pick Sarah Palin as his running mate and prove to me that he has the judgment that we need and that he was the conservative that he claims to be.

As we all now know, last Friday, John McCain did so and in doing so the hell gates opened and the slander mongers went into overdrive. In subsequent blogs we will get into this but for now let us deal with the fact that our inevitable nominee did the right thing by choosing Sarah Palin and rejoice.

With all the left wing attacks, their double standard, blatant disdain for Republicans and relentless scrutiny of her family, there was just one hurdle to cross….the first impression, her acceptance speech.

Well tonight we heard it and the left, including the drive-by media, got it and got it good.

Sarah Palin lived up to her nickname Sarah Barracuda, and she did so with precision, dignity and conviction. Her acceptance speech allowed me to let out a deep sigh of relief before I jumped to my feet with jubilation, enthusiasm and gratitude. I was relieved that she passed the first major test of her worthiness for the job . I knew that she had the qualities, record and ability for the job but could she convey it all in one speech that would provide for her first national impression.

She did!

And so tonight I am convinced. I am convinced in John McCain and his being a hero that will provide us with a heroic administration of leadership as our president. I am convinced and I am energized.

Hence the creation of this blog.

John McCain has won me over and Sarah Palin has inspired me. So much so that
I vow to not allow these two people or my party to be discredited by the radical left anymore. No longer will I allow the dirty deeds of democrats to go ignored. I shall not fight fire with fire. I will take a lesson from the leader of the next generation entrusted with the conservative agenda, the lady I call Fire and Nice, Sarah Palin, and I will not act like democrats. I will not lie and cheat. I will not distort the facts but I will present the facts. This will be much to the dismay of today’s liberal Democrats because the facts are not kind to them but armed with those facts I can and will tell the truth. I will not need to stoop to the level that the liberal media and party hacks do in their politics pursuits. That does not mean I will not hurt their feelings. It just means that in light of the left wing media and the party they openly make allegiance to, I will speak the truth that they do not.

Leave a comment

Filed under politics