Tag Archives: Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey

IT’S A SAKI ECONOMY FOR THE JAPANESE TOO

Japanese Finance Minister Shoichi Nakagawa

Japanese Finance Minister Shoichi Nakagawa

Bookmark and Share     Proof that the United States is not alone in a struggle for economic leadership was made quite evident today in Japan.

The already unstable government of Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso just took another hit and it is one that does not add to any sense of economic security.

Aso’s Finance Minister, Shoichi Nakagawa resigned today after apologizing for attending a string of seven news conferences while drunk.

A series of scandals and accusations and a plummeting popularity rating ,due to Prime Minister Aso’s mismanagement of the Japanese economy, has brought him and his ruling “Liberal Democratic Party” under fire and to the point of no public confidence.

Oddly, the resignation of Aso’s drunk Finance Minister coincided with a press conference by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who has made Japan the first stop on her first foreign mission.

What a welcome that must have been.

According to some insiders, the resignation could be the straw that breaks the back of the LDP and cause it to crumble. That could also give need for Secretary Clinton to do this trip over again, when she can discuss things with Japanese leaders who will be sober and in control of the Japanese government.

In any event, the fate of disgraced Finance Minister Shoichi Nakagawa is still up in the air. Some have suggested that the drunken antics which have led to his resignation from the Japanese government, might make him a perfectly suitable replacement for ailing Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy when and if he ever retires.

Others have suggested that since he is now available, Nakagawa’s government experience and impeccably clean tax record could make him the perfect person to nominate for the hard to fill, vacant Commerce Secretary spot that still exists in the Obama administration. What a better way to demonstrate our free trade desires than by having an Asian commerce secretary oversee our markets?

However; sources close to WordPress.com believe that although Nakagawa’s future fortune does lie in the United States, it is not in government employment that he will find it.

Apparently, Nakegawa will be signed onto a two year contract with a new American reality television show that will be produced by and aired on C-Span. The show is called Political Rehab and it will feature an array of political leaders, each of which are trying to deal with their political afterlives while coping with various addictions and fetishes.

The show will take place in Washington, D.C.’s trendy Georgetown section where the political rehabilitants will live together for eight weeks in a three story brownstone. Producers of the program say the show will “take us through the lives of everyday politicians who have fallen from grace and out of power and are struggling to find their place in the world while also coping with the problems that brought them down and out of power”

The shows creators promise that Political Rehab will be an emotional journey, jam packed with the intensity and passion of politics along with twists born of the human frailties and addictions that all people bring to the table.

Currently, producers are still negotiating contracts with a list of stars that include former Congresswoman and Green Party presidential nominee Cynthia McKinney , impeached Governor Rod Blagojevich, former Senator Larry Craig as well as former Governors Elliot Spitzer of New York and Jim McGreevey of New Jersey. Word is that former President Bill Clinton has already been signed on but arrangements regarding where Cynthia McKinney can safely sleep without fear of Mr. Clinton are still being worked out.

The show’s producers stated that the addition of Nakagawa and his drinking problem is just what they were looking for in order to round out the other addictions being dealt with on the show such as sex and violence.

So it is nice to know that when one door closes another one can in fact open, and after Nakegawa’s resignation in Japan, it is nice to know that not everything applies to the phrase “only in America”.

Bookmark and Share
Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF ’02 IS KILLING US IN ’09

Bookmark and Share    In 2002, congress created legislation commonly called the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It was designed to respond to the accounting scandals of Enron and other business interests of the time.antsoxdummyThe legislation established new and increased regulations for all American owned and operated public company boards.

At the time, the Sarbanes-Oxley sponsored Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 was considered to contain the most far-reaching reforms of American business practices since the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt.”

Sponsored by Paul Sarbanes, a Maryland Democrat Senator and Ohio Republican Congressman Michael Oxley, the bill passed with bipartisan support and was signed into effect by a Republican President, George W. Bush.  So credit and blame lies in the lap of both major parties but now, almost seven years later, the question is does Sarbanes-Oxley deserve more blame than credit.

The political purpose of the bill was achieved.  It helped to restore public confidence in the securities markets.

In the wake of the accounting scandal that brought down energy giant Enron, its stock prices plummeted from more than $90.00 a share to less than 50 cents a share and investors lost billions and Enron eventually went bankrupt. In response to the shocking demise of Enron, congress tried to act in a way that would restore investors confidence by trying to insure that the scandalous practices of Enron would not be repeated.

So congress responded to the problem which took care of the political objective. They did something about it. But what did they really do about it?

Regretfully, all they actually did was make themselves look good. They made themselves look like responsible legislators responding to our needs but looks are deceiving because seven years later, Sarbanes-Oxley is proving to be more of a hindrance than a help.

There is little evidence proving that the government entity created by Sarbanes-Oxley to oversee the accounting practices of businesses has been effective. In fact, after Democrats refused to pass legislation that would have changed their own accounting practices which led to the need to bailout FannieMac and FreddieMac, there is even more evidence which indicates that government should be the last entity to be counted on for effective oversight. It is government oversight which required banks and loaning entities such as FannieMae and FreddieMac to enter into high risk loans that could not be paid off. All of which helped to usher in the banking crisis that led the way to our current financial crunch.

It is all an example of government overreaching and innefficiency and innaccuracy.

Initially compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was projected to cost businesses, that want to go public, about $91 thousand dollars to do so but the actual figure is over $4 million dollars.

This typical government miscalculation has helped to push the start up time for businesses from five years to twelve years and it is adding to the stagnation of a much needed rate of growth for our economy.

At a time when the federal government has spent over $ 1 billion 200 million in the name of economic stimulus, does it really make sense to leave untouched, excessive legislation which is counterproductive to the goals of all that stimulus spending?

When you come down to it, enforcement of Sarbanes-Oxley costs more than it is worth.

That is not to suggest that Sarbanes-Oxley must be scrapped.   It must be amended.

Of the eleven sections in the bill, some have merit. Specifically, those sections which hold business executives and owners more accountable. However, no responsible legislative stimulus action can exist without addressing the many other detrimental sections of the bill which are having a debilitating effect on economic growth.

To allow the so-called Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 to remain as is, during the economic recovery attempts of 2009, is irresponsible and reckless.

In its current form the bill is destroying new job creation, stifling our entrepreneurial spirit and surrendering entrepreneurial innovation to foreign competitors. None of which adds any value to the hundreds of billions of dollars that are intended to grow our economy.

Without changes to the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation, our government is allowing existing legislation to work against all of their current and future economic recovery measures. Without changes to this bill, we are prolonging the economic downturn we are in and putting our economic future on a course that will put us far behind the burgeoning markets and economies of Asia.

punchline-politics2

U4PREZ

A mathematician, an accountant and an economist apply for the same job.

The interviewer calls in the mathematician and asks “What do two plus two equal?” The mathematician replies “Four.” The interviewer asks “Four, exactly?” The mathematician looks at the interviewer incredulously and says “Yes, four, exactly.”

Then the interviewer calls in the accountant and asks the same question “What do two plus two equal?” The accountant says “On average, four – give or take ten percent, but on average, four.”

Then the interviewer calls in the economist and poses the same question “What do two plus two equal?” The economist gets up, locks the door, closes the shade, sits down next to the interviewer and says, “What do you want it to equal”?

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

NEW JERSEY REPUBLICANS CELEBRATE NEW JERSEY REAGAN DAY

antreaganday1aBookmark and Share    Every February, the month of Ronald Reagan’s birth, citizens of  New Jersey  join together to celebrate New Jersey Reagan Day.  It is a heartfelt, “all-volunteer tribute to the life, leadership, and legacy of President Ronald Reagan“, that was founded by conservative New Jersey Assemblyman Jay Webber.

The event features speeches, displays of classic Reagan memorabilia, video tributes, and even a jelly bean guessing contest to recall Reagan’s favorite snack.

New Jersey Reagan Day has also become a standard stopping point for Republican statewide candidates. As such, this year’s event anticipates appearances by Republican gubernatorial candidates Steve Lonegan, Brian Levine  and Chris Christie.

The featured guest speaker and individual delivering this year’s keynote tribute speech will be President Reagan’s former assistant  for Political and Intergovernmental Affairs and deputy assistant to the President for Public Liaison at the White House, Frank Donatelli.antreaganday

According to the event’s web site, “New Jersey Reagan Day is not about mere nostalgia. What we celebrate most are President Reagan’s great intangible attributes — his forward-looking vision, his deep faith in the essential goodness and wisdom of the American people, and his firm commitment to great ideas and principles. Ronald Reagan saw and appreciated what is best about us. Like a lighthouse beacon reaching every corner of the world, President Reagan projected our nation’s greatness to the rest of the globe“.

Reagan Day creators add “across that globe, in places like Budapest and Warsaw, monuments literally are rising to pay homage to a great man. If former communists in Hungary and Poland can find ways to honor Reagan for his vision and strength in promoting human liberty, then certainly we in New Jersey can do the same”.

So this Wednesday, join us in Mountain Lakes, New Jersey at the Zeris Inn for a celebratory tribute to President Reagan and his accomplishments.

For your invitation click here

or call (201) 602-4468

Bookmark and Share
punchline-politics21

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are:

‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.'”   ~Ronald Reagan

REAGAN JOKES ABOUT THE SOVIET UNION

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

HAPPY VALENTINE’S DAY

There is not much love between Republicans and Democrats and I am sure that none of the potential Republican gubernatorial nominees will be sharing their Valentine’s Day with Democrat Governor Jon Corzine , over a heart shaped box of chocolates, in front of a warm fireplace.

But,  in the spirit of the “spread the wealth” era, POLITICS 24/7  takes this opporunity to spread the love to you and yours……….

Photobucket

AND FROM WASHINGTON…………
threeyearsbarack1
Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

NEW JERSEY AND VIRGINIA; PERFECT TOGETHER

Bookmark and Share     In 2006 Maryland and Virginia elected rising stars in the Democratic party to govern them.

Virginia Governor Tim kaine

Virginia Governor Tim kaine

Tim Kaine took control of Virginia and Martin O’Malley took over Maryland. The two of them are quite alike. They are Catholics with experience as mayors and they both promised to “move” their states “forward”.

They promised to alleviate the congestion problems in their Washington, D.C.suburbs and to improve the quality of life in general. They also ran during elections cycles that were quite good for Democrats.

Now,  two years later, both of these gentlemen are facing a change in plans.

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley

The economic downturn has severely altered their plans for alleviating congestion and improving the quality of life. That is largely because all of their plans were based on more spending and now, states do not have enough money to increase spending.

Of course both of these states could do what New Jersey does. They could raise taxes, tolls and tariffs on everything from gardening to joining a gym. But that might not be the best way for Tim Kaine to win an election in Virginia and this year he is running for reelection.

New Jersey Governor jon Corzine

New Jersey Governor jon Corzine

The truth of the matter is that this year, Tim Kaine shares a lot in common, not only with Maryland’s O’Malley but with New Jersey’s Jon Corzine.

New Jersey and Virginia are the only two states in the nation electing Governor’s and Corzine., like Kaine, faces a derailment of his intended path, paths that were based on increased spending.  Now they both face out of control budgets that rely on help from the federal government.

They are not the only states with such troubles but they are the only two who are governing states that will become electoral battlegrounds.

With the focus on Virginia and New Jersey, every consultant, election lawyer and celebrity will be traveling to New Jersey and Virginia to help pull their respective side across the finish line and into first place.

For Democrats the election could be a reaffirmation of their majority status and their total control in Washington. At this point in time it will not necessarily be a referendum on President Barack Obama or the Democratic party but during the course of the next 7 months, it could easily become one .

President Obama is the titular head of the Democratic party and Tim Kaine is now the Chairman of the party. That means that anything Democrats do nationally could easily be echoed in Virginia and New Jersey voters could easily also use their vote as a form of protest.

We are intertwined and people react to events, regardless of where they happen or who is in question.

Former Denator Bill Bradley

Former Senator Bill Bradley

In 1990 New Jersey’s Bill Bradley was running for reelection to the United States Senate. Republicans nominated a little known county Freeholder named Christie Whitman. Bradley should not have had any problems winning reelection but with a bit more than 1.9 million votes cast, he barely won.

Former NJ Governor & EPA Director Christie whitman

Former NJ Governor & EPA Director Christie whitman

Why?

Well fellow Democrat, New Jersey Governor Jim Florio, had raised state taxes by $2.8 billion. Voters were madder than ever and even though Florio was not on the ballot, they took their anger out on Bradley. Out known and outspent by Bradley, Whitman came within 56,000 votes of unseating Bradley and catapulted herself into the Governor’s mansion when it came time to run against Jim Florio.

The same type of backlash could happen in Virginia and again in New Jersey in this election cycle if Democrats take their tax and spend policies too far.

In New Jersey, Governor Jon Corzine has already gone too far and he simply promises to go even further. His first budget, almost three years ago, raised taxes by nearly $2 billion dollars and like Florio, he invented a few new taxes. And like Tim Kaine, all of Jon Corzine’s promises relied on increased spending.

Former NJ Governor Jim Florio

Former NJ Governor Jim Florio

So Democrats in Virginia and New Jersey are going to have a tough go at it. Corzine more than Kaine, but as the new Chairman of the Democrat National Committee, Tim Kaine could find himself on par with Corzine by the time elections roll around in November.

As for Republicans, their races will not be easy.

At the moment, Democrats have the upper hand in fundraising and organization. They also have a President with a clean slate and if the President maintains his current popularity he could be an asset to them and he will surely be one of those “celebrities” shuttling back and forth between D.C, Virginia and New Jersey.

But Republicans have the most at stake.

antsteele_rnc_blog_fwa_20090130173241

RNC Chairman Mike Steele

The RNC’s new national Chairman, Mike Steele promises to make New Jersey and Virginia priorities in the coming months and losing in these two states will only deepen the rut we are in.

Victories in these two states will go along way in proving that the G.O.P. may be down but they are not out and it could set the stage for their resurgence.

Perhaps the best way to boost their fortunes will be by highlighting the common bond that exists not only between Virginia’s Tim Kaine and Maryland’s O’Malley or Tim Kaine and New Jersey’s Jon Corzine …..Spending.

All of these people promised to spend our way into happiness and they promised to do so with taxpayers money. But now that we do not have any money to spare, their promises are broken and the only way they can try to stay on their promised courses is by taxing us even more.

Republicans need to point out that Democrat leadership , from Obama to Kaine, Corzine, O’Malley and every liberal in between, is based on taxing and spending and after all their government spending is said and done, all they have left to show for it is the need to raise taxes and spend some more.

Pointing out the wrongness of liberal policy alone is not enough though.

New Jersey and Virginia Republicans will need to nominate conservative oriented candidates for governor. They can not put forward nominees that are wishy-washy and afraid to go out on a limb and stand against initiatives designed at “spreading the wealth”.

And then they must offer solutions. Solutions that do not require government spending or loony tune government mandates like the low income housing mandates initiated by New Jersey’s Council On Affordable Housing.

If Republicans in New Jersey and Virginia can recapture their inherent conservative oriented ideology, they just might be able to reclaim some territory that is currently controlled by vulnerable liberals.

Either way, brace yourself. Whether you live in these battleground states or not, the 2009 election cycle will be intense.

Bookmark and Share
punchline-politics
A young man’s parents were trying to figure out what their son’s future career would be so they decided to give him a test.

They took a twenty dollar bill, a Bible, and a bottle of whiskey, and put them on the front hall table. Then they hid, hoping he would think they weren’t at home. The father told the mother, “If he takes the money he will be a businessman, if he takes the Bible he will be a clergyman but if he takes the bottle of whiskey, I’m afraid our son will be a drunkard.”

So the parents took their place in the nearby closet and waited nervously. Peeping through the keyhole they saw their son arrive home. He saw the note they had left, saying they’d be home later. Then, he took the twenty dollar bill, looked at it against the light, and slid it in his pocket. After that, he took the Bible, flicked through it, and took it also. Finally, he grabbed the bottle, opened it, and took a whiff to be assured of the quality. Then he left for his room, carrying all the three items.

The father slapped his forehead and said, “Darn, it’s even worse than I could ever have imagined…”

“What do you mean?” his wife asked.

“Our son is going to be a politician!” replied the very unhappy father.

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

JUDD GREGG WITHDRAWS NOMINATION FROM OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

antgreggBookmark and Share    Earlier today, the previous post in fact, POLITICS 24/7  suggested that if Presdient Obama does not have faith in Senator Judd Gregg’s ability to properly carry out all of the responsibilities of the Commerce Secretary, than he should withdraw Gregg’s nomination for the job.

The controversy swirled around President Obama’s attempt to take responsibilities for the census out of the hands of the Commerce Department because Gregg is a Republican.

President Obama’s call to put the census in the hands of the White House and under the direction of his partisan chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, did not exactly assure people that the census would be anymore non-partisan under him than Senator Gregg.

Well in what is becoming a norm for the administration, another cabinet nominee has declined the nomination.

Senator Gregg claims that ideological differences over the stimulus package make it clear that he is not in sync with the administration and that he was apprehensive over the President’s attempt to take responsibility away from the department. White House officials have yet to respond.

Either way, the move is good one.

It was apparent that President Obama did not have confidence in Senator Gregg and that there would be too much second guessing of him if he were to actually become Secretary of Commerce.

This is the second nominee for Commerce Secretary to withdraw their nomination.

Governor Richardson of New Mexico withdraw weeks ago after it was disclosed that he was under investigation for selling state contracts in turn for campaign donations.

As it stands now, commerce seems to be a problem for the administration.

Hopefully they can get their act together and find someone who they can trust to do the job without taking the department’s responsibilites away  in order to serve partisan political agendas.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

KARL ROVE IN CHARGE OF THE CENSUS?

Bookmark and Share    If that were true, liberals would be jumping out of their shoes and throwing them at the White House with a sense of fury unparalleled in political history. antcensus_bureau_sealIf it were true that a partisan Republican architect of political strategy were to be put in charge of a process that much of our government will be based on for a decade, people would be calling for investigations, hearings and heads on a plate.

Well that is what people are beginning to do. But not because Karl Rove is implementing some sort of partisan designs on the census but because Rahm Emanuele is being called upon to do so.

Rahm Emanuele is an undeniable partisan politician who first came to fame as a member of the Clinton administration.

He rose through the political ranks as a fundraiser for Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and as a diehard, Chicago, clubhouse, Democrat, Emanuele never had a problem in insuring that all things political went his way. Such is why when he became a Chicago congressman, the Democrat party turned to Emanuele and made him the Majority Whip, the guy that whipped Democrat votes into line.

So partisan is Emanuele that a few years back he mailed a dead fish to pollster who published poll results that Emanuele did not like because they failed to show his Democrat candidate ahead by as much as he wanted.

Rahm Emanuele is so driven by partisanship that one night, shortly after Bill Clinton was elected President, during a dinner, Emanuelle started rattling off a list of names which he considered to be political enemies and to punctuate his intentions he stabbed the table with a steak knife each time , as he said “Nat Landow! Dead! Cliff Obama TransitionJackson! Dead!” etc…..

This is the man who President Obama wants to hold sway over the non-partisan and non-political census process.

The census takes place every ten years and it determines just about every statistic regarding the American population and government funding to that population. Based upon population shifts, it also determines how new congressional district lines are drawn and that dictates influence of everything from who your representatives are to how much sway your state has in electing a president.

Until now, responsibility for how the census is conducted and how census figures are determined was under the responsibility of the Commerce Department. However now that President Obama has nominated Judd Gregg, a Republican Senator, to be Commerce Secretary, liberals have yelled at President Obama and protested a Republican being involved in the census process.

In response to their cries, President Obama stated that the White House will supervise the census.

That means that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuele will be in charge of it and that brings up quite a few problems.

First of all, it demonstrates a lack faith in President Obama’s choice for Secretary of Commerce.

By taking responsibility for the census away from the Commerce Secretary, President Obama is in essence claiming that he does not trust Senator Gregg’s ability to do the job properly. If that is the case, why did he choose Judd Gregg for the job? Was this another example of the bad job of the Obama administration’s vetting process?

If it is not an indication of Gregg’s inability to do the job right than it is a blatant attempt to put the non-partisan census process in the hands of  diehard partisan operative Rahm Emanuele.

Either way this another dent in the creation of what is suppose to be the most ethical administration in history.

The census process has not even begun to get off the ground and already the Obama administration is tainting it. The President has made it clear that he is going to make the census a top priority and now he is making it obvious that he will try to make it a political process that favors Democrats.

It is a slick move on behalf of President Obama. After all, under the Commerce Department, everything that they do to establish census procedures needs to be approved by congress. Not so in the White House though.  The White House staff can operate secretly and does not require congressional approval. That means that under the direction of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuele, census figures can be established any old way.

After seeing five different administration nominees already get caught up in scandal, it is not very comforting to see the new administration actively participate in political slights of hand that taint a process that we will have to live with for a decade.

Bookmark and Share

punchline-politics

CENSUS MAKERS ARE FOOLS

A famous Norwegian explorer returned home from a voyage and found his name missing from the town register.

His wife insisted on complaining to the local civic official who apologized profusely saying,

I must have taken Leif off my census“.

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

STIMULUS DOLLARS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

6aantillegalstimulusBookmark and Share     Prior to the senate’s passage of the most expensive spending package in history, there was a great deal of debate on exactly what the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 should include and what guidelines should be created regarding how money in the bill would be spent. 

A bill of such historic size and scope has a lot of strings attached and well it should. That is why Republicans in the Senate tried to insure that one of the greatest concerns in this bill, jobs, be addressed properly. So Alabama’s Republican Senator, Jeff Sessions, tried to offer amendment SA 239. It was an amendment that required all businesses that received any troubled asset relief money or that would get any other federal funds or tax breaks be required to implement use of the electonic verification data base that currently operates under the direction of the Department of Homeland Security.

The E-Verify system vets the immigration status of workers and helps to prevent the hiring of undocumented immigrants.

The measure would have been an added level of security to help insure that the stimulus package did its job for the American people. It was meant to insure that money aimed at increasing jobs for Americans did just that and created jobs for Americans and not foreign citizens living here illegally.

But despite attempts to make this spending bill a more meaningful recovery package, Democrat Senator Max Baucus of Montana objected to the measure.

Immediately following the objection, Nebraska Democrat Senator Ben Nelson made a motion to conclude debate on the entire stimulus package and with a vote of 61 to 36 debate was ended and the stimulus package was scheduled to be voted on without any assurances that any stimulus created jobs will go only to American citizens.

Had debate not ended and the amendment been approved, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and New Jersey Senator Robert antillimmMenendez pledged that they would have used their veto power, under special procedures, to have blocked the E-Verify amendment from being included the final bill.

By denying inclusion of the E-Verify amendment, Democrats have slapped unemployed Americans in the face and Senators Reid, Menendez, Baucus and Nelson have gone out of their way to put the employment opportunities of illegal immigrants on par with hard working, law abiding, American workers. Some reports suggest that their refusal to approve the measure could account for as much as 10 or 11 percent of the money in this stimulus package going towards the hiring of illegal immigrants.

With billions of dollars of questionable spending already included in this so-called recovery package, it is a travesty to see lawmakers go out of their way to willfully waste more by insuring that illegal immigrants have a fair shot at taking jobs away from needy Americans.

Sadly, this is just one example of the American Recovery and Investment Act’s wasteful spending and misappropriation of funds.

Even sadder is the apparent loyalty that Democrats have to the underground culture of illegal immigration.

Bookmark and Share 

punchline-politics2

STIMULUS PACKAGE JOKE

These are the insightful words of humorist and columnist Dave Barry:

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Only a smidgen.

Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy

Q. But isn’t that stimulating the economy of China?
A. Shut up.

Leave a 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

A REAL ECONOMIC RECOVERY PACKAGE DOESN’T ROB US BLIND

anteconomicstim

Bookmark and Share     As the senate discusses how to construct a package that will get enough support from congress to become law, the Republican National Committee’s newly elected Chairman, Mike Steele, took to the airwaves to discuss options.

Taking Republicans back to their economic roots, Steele reminds us that the fastest way to stimulate the economy is to empower the people and take less money away from the people in the first place.

Although Republicans should not object to a package geared at stimulating the economy, they are right to object to a bill that is designed to spend money simply for the sake of spending and that is exactly what the bill in question has become, a free for all, spending bill.  Republicans are right to deny support for a bill that is directed at filling the pockets of special interests while emptying the pockets of taxpayers.

One example of the questionable spending in this so-called stimulus package,  raised by Chairman Steele, is an amount of $45 million dollars for the creation of trails for all terrain vehicles.

It is just one of many spending inclusions that help to bring this bill, intended for economic recovery, to its staggering final total.

Although wasteful spending is not what ushered in the credit crunch that led to the financial crisis we are in, it does not help matters.  Wasteful spending only exacerbates matters.  It leads to more taxes which in turn leads to less spending and less spending does not help to stimulate the economy.  Less spending and less economic growth does not increase employment and none of it boosts our economy.

PhotobucketAll of this indicates that an economic stimulus package packed with wasteful spending is not an answer to our problems.  Such a package can only make matters worse and prolong the economic downturn we are experiencing.

That is not to say that the government cannot help.  It can.  Our government needs to create a package that is aimed at one goal and one goal only. Stimulate the economy.

Currently, under the guise of recovery, legislators are throwing in spending suggestions that are designed more at gaining favor from special interest groups in their home districts than at assisting the American people at large. 

Instead of helping to secure our national economic future, many of them are trying to secure a substantial financial donation from special interest groups for their reelection.

That is why much of the spending in this bill does little if anything to “stimulate” the economy at anytime within the immediate future.

A more rational approach to a stimulus package could result in a far less expensive spending bill.  A more rational anteconomic-stim1approach to the stimulus package would contain more and larger, immediate, short term tax cuts that allow people to keep and spend more of their own money, while the government enters into some cost saving measures of its own.

In fact the first line of a stimulus package that intends to to spend money should start off with a repeal of the 2.8 percent, automatic pay raise that congress has accepted.

Without a repeal of that measure, the House of Representatives and the Senate can not be taken seriously.

Without their willingness to accept the fact that we are living through tough economic times and that they too must share in a collective national sacrifice, they can not be counted on or trusted to take up solutions to our problems seriously.

Many of the spending measures in the current package have no right to be considered in an omnibus bill like this one.  Many of the proposed spending measures in this bill should stand alone and be voted on separately and in their own right.

What should be included in an omnibus stimulus package are those measures which will

  1. reduce the cost to operate government
  2. free up credit in the free market place
  3. enhance public infrastructure, transportation and energy needs.

The purpose of the third aspect to any serious stimulus package directly helps the economy in both the short and the long term and spending in each of the three categories mentioned, infrastructure, transportation and energy, will directly relate to increased employment in the United States.

Barring cost saving measures, freeing up credit and limiting spending to public energy, transportation and infrastructure initiatives, the economic stimulus package need not include extras for hobbyists, lobbyists and other special interests.

PhotobucketUnder the liberal leadership of the liberal controlled federal government, we are witnessing the construction of a bill that takes advantage of economic trouble rather than eases the economic crisis.

Since 2004 Republicans have slowly but surely lost their roots of fiscal responsibility. 

Since 2006 voters have been cleaning house and ridding us of those Republicans who have gone astray and now in, 2009, remaining Republican lawmakers are faced with a defining moment.

Will they rollover and participate in a reckless, historic bill that takes advantage of our problems or will they stand firm and put forth an alternative solution that harkens back to our original principles and beliefs that demonstrate that  government is not the solution but rather the problem? 

Either way, the first step starts with a bill that repeals the pay raise that they have so willingly accepted.

Bookmark and Share

Click below to hear Mike Steele’s weekly radio address:

Mike Steele’s response To the Stimulus Package

Photobucket

antcap1234

Photobucket

punchline-politics

Photobucket

WANTED: ONE ARMED ECONOMIST

“Give me a one-armed economist!” demanded President Harry S. Truman.

 President Truman was the first president to appoint a council of economic advisers. Unlike some later presidents, he actually liked to listen to his policy advisers.

However, he preferred a clear recommendation, not a long discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of a particular course of action.

He quickly grew tired of economist who gave a good recommendation, and then began, “On the other hand. . .”

Leave a comment

Filed under politics