Tag Archives: mayor syteve Lonegan for Governor

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.

Advertisements

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

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

98 YEARS AGO TODAY, RONALD REAGAN WAS BORN

antreaganBookmark and ShareOn this day, 98 years ago, Ronald Wilson Reagan was born.

From the beginning days of his life and throughout his Hollywood career  no one would have imagined Ronald Reagan to be a future President. But fate is much like the American spirit.  It is surprising.

Our spirit is endless and it is the thing stories are made of. Our great American spirit keeps us going and keeps us moving forward despite any and all obstacles.

The American spirit was what gave birth to Ronald Reagan’s presidency.

Down and out economically, with double digit inflation and unemployment rates, our nation was in the doldrums. Domestically our financial situation was dire and in an ever declining downward spiral..

Internationally we were in the midst of a Cold War game riddled with Soviet deceit and imperialism. Cuba was in the midst of the Marielle boat lift and Castro was casting tens of thousands of his island nation’s  worst criminals and criminally insane citizenry to our shores.

In the Middle East, fellow American citizens were held hostage as Islamic extremists took control of oil rich Iran and overran our embassy.

We were a people struggling to stay above water while losing jobs, losing money and losing our ability to secure freedom and defend it from communism. We were in disarray and each time we tried to pull ourselves out of the misery index we were in, things got worse. Unemployment would rise a bit more, production would go down and taxes would go up. It seemed hopeless and then on April 24th, 1980 we woke up to the horrific news of a botched attempt at getting our hostages out of Iraq.

In a covert operation, above the sands of the Middle East , helicopters being used in the rescue mission crashed, wounding four American servicemen and killing eight. The mission was aborted and it seemed that America was doomed to depression and failure.

As the year progressed, so did the election for President.  A weak and tarnished President Carter even found himself in a rare challenge for re-nomination by his own Democrat party.

Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy tried to take Carter to task but by the time the Democrat’s national convention took place, it was clear that President Carter would be running for election as their standard bearer.

Republicans had their own race and in it was Ronald Reagan.

Four years earlier Ronald Reagan gave another sitting President a run for the nomination when he challenged President Gerald Ford for the Republican presidential nomination.  Although it started off competitive, Ford did prevail but it set the stage for Ronald Reagan in 1980.

Although George Herbert Walker Bush initially took the wind out of Ronald Reagan’s sails, Reagan ultimately captured the G.O.P. nomination.

Along the way he also captured the attention and imagination of the nation.

At a time when we were down and seemingly out, Ronald Reagan spoke of an America that stood up for itself and stood up to our enemies. He spoke about an America that was once the greatest force for freedom the world ever knew but was now relegated to being held hostage to the whims of the rest of the world and vulnerable to an expansion of communism.

He spoke as to how it should and could be different. He made Americans realize that our people were not doomed, we were simply held back. Held back by of all things, government. Our government, a government consumed by misguided thinking, and a misguided philosophy.

Through debates and speeches and the poor results of Jimmy Carter’s liberal leadership, Ronald Reagan convinced people that they were not the problem, their government was. He convinced them that it was our government’s lack of will to stand up to Soviet aggression which was responsibile for its spread into places like Afghanistan.

He convinced people that it was government’s demonstrated lack of backbone which made our citizens susceptible to Mid East hostage taking.

Throughout the campaign Ronald Reagan allowed people to see that it was our governments overregulation of us antreagan-campwhich killed job markets, reduced income, raised prices, denied effective educations to our children and perpetuated policies of urban decay. He made people understand that it was government which was in our way and that with government out of the way, the American people, and our inherent entrepreneurial spirit, would lift us out of the days of malaise and into a better America, a more secure America, an America that we all knew we could be.

At a time when our spirits were down, like a cheerleader doing cartwheels with the band blaring and the crowd cheering , Ronald Reagan lifted our spirits and out of the lifting of our spirits was born his presidency.

On Election Day Jimmy Carter won the District of Columbia, and the states of Minnesota, West Virginia, Rhode Island, Maryland and Hawaii.  His homestate of Georgia, which he once governed, even turned its back on Carter

Ronald Reagan won the 45 remaining states in the union including the state he once governed, California.

With 489 electoral votes, to Jimmy Carter‘s 49 electoral votes, Ronald Wilson Reagan became the 4oth President of the United States and so began the “Reagan Era” With its beginning came an immediate sense that things were going to get better.

As I watched President-Elect Reagan raise his right hand to take the oath of office, the television network had placed a ticking clock on the lower right hand of the screen. As Reagan began to utter the words to his oath of office, the clock ticked away and just after Reagan was sworn in as President, the clock passed 12 P.M. and it was official. Our Americans hostages were out of Iranian airspace and beginning their journey home. The fear of what a forceful President might do to those involved in holding our citizens hostage was enough to end the standoff.

444 days after having their freedom taken away, it was restored and just like those hostages, America was about to embark upon a journey that would rekindle our spirits, raise our hopes and restore our standing in the world.

It was not easy. Liberals chastised Ronald Reagan every step of the way. They called him a war monger and said he was old and out of touch. They even equated him to the devil.

Some claimed that he was the devil.

They said that his name, Ronald Wilson Reagan, was proof , because just like the numbers representing the devil, 6 6 6, each of the three monikers used in Reagan’s full name were comprised of 6 letters.

The outlandish charges, and innuendoes never dampened the spirit of Reagan.

In regards to criticism of his age, he replied “Thomas Jefferson once said, ‘We should never judge a president by his age, only by his works.’ And ever since he told me that, I stopped worrying.”

When it came to his aggressive stance against the Soviet Union and the arms build up that he stood for, Reagan said “Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.”

antreagancongr

President Reagan signing the historic Tax Reform Act of 1986 with members of Congress and White House staff present on the south lawn. 10/22/86

Time and time again Reagan knew what to say, how to say it and when to say it.

When his message didn’t persuade Congress his way, he took his case to the people, won them over and called them into action to win their representatives over.

When Reagan took to the airwaves his message created a political army of active citizens who in turn influenced their representatives. It was a process that crossed party lines and even involved Democrat voters. The tens of millions of Democrats involved in this political army became known as Reagan Democrats and Reagan Democrats were everywhere from New York to Michigan and Florida to Texas, Minnesota, California and everywhere in between.

As the Reagan revolution took hold, our economy steadied and grew, inflation dropped, our military was rebuilt, our influence increased and our spirit was restored.  America became a hopeful place once again.

It was not immune from darkness but we knew that no matter what came our way, we could endure and that our best days were still ahead of us.

We also knew that we could not just simply expect everything to come up roses.

Ronald Reagan made us understand that we had to stand up to aggression and that we could not sit idly by and let the enemies of freedom run amuck.  Nor could we let the Soviet Union’s actions go unanswered.

It wasn’t always easy.

In 1983 America deployed peace keeping forces to help stabilize a war torn Lebanon.

After being expelled fromantreaganleb Jordan, members of the Palestinian Liberation Organization took refuge there. What ensued was a constant clash of Christian and Muslim militias.

In 1982 Israel tried to eliminate the PLO and invaded Lebanon to take them on. A cease fire was eventually agreed to and part of that agreement included a peace keeping force involving Italy, France Great Britain and the United States.

For our involvement, today section 59 of Arlington National Cemetery  is lined with 21 of the bodies of the 241 U.S. service members who were killed in their barracks by a suicide bomber.

On the 23rd day of October, 1983 we shed the blood of some of America’s first victims of middle east terrorism.

It was a day that would never be forgotten by the administration and it set in motion a posture that would not allow terrorist action against America to go unanswered.

In 1986 ,after a terrorist bomb in a Berlin nightclub killed two American soldiers was traced back to Libya, President Reagan ordered the bombing of Libya’s capital, Tripoli and the Libyan city of Benghazi.

On the Soviet front, President Reagan brought communism to it’s knees.

His aggressive arms build up forced the “evil empire” into escalating the Cold War to a level that they could not sustain. While this tit for tat game raged on, a rapid succession of deaths at the Kremlin saw the Soviets first lose long serving Communist leader Leonid Breznev in 1982.

Then, two years later Yuri Andropov suddenly died.

Less than one year after Andrpov dropped off, his successor, Constantine Chernenko kicked the bucket.

Following Chernenko’s demise, the old guard decided to turn to someone from a younger generation. Someone who might be able to hold on to life and office for more than a matter of months.

antreagan-gorbyThey turned to Mikhail Gorbachev.

Gorbachev knew his nation could no longer sustain itself by trying to keep up with Ronald Reagan’s arms build up. So he began to enter into meaningful negotiations, which along with Gorbachev’s national reforms of perestroika and glasnost, led to an end of Cold War hostilities and ultimately the collapse of the Soviet Union as we once knew it.

Through it all Ronald Reagan reinvigorated America, put it back on track, spared us from a possible apocalyptic clash between superpowers and helped bring about the end of the Cold War and defeat the evil empire .

But his legacy goes beyond victory over a nemesis. His legacy included a rethinking of the way nations had to confront war.

During his second term Reagan made a request that would revolutionize our approach to nuclear threats. It also was a major factor in the Soviet”s inability to keep pace with the U.S. in the Cold war.

He said “I call upon the scientific community in our country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace: to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete.”

That statement led to SDI, the strategic defense initiative. Some came to ridicule it by calling it star wars because, at the time, it seemed unrealistic to shoot down missiles before they hit us.

Back then, it may have seemed unrealistic but what once was Ronald Reagan’s thought, is quickly becoming today’s reality.

President Reagan speaking at a White House ceremony for Medical Students from St. George's School of Medicine in Grenada on south lawn. 11/7/83.

President Reagan speaking at a White House ceremony for Medical Students from St. George's School of Medicine in Grenada on south lawn. 11/7/83.

There were several other enduring aspects to the Reagan years.

For instance the Reagan Doctrine.

That ideological policy eliminated the isolationist thinking which prohibited the United States from taking an active roll in eliminating communism.  As we did in Grenada, under Reagan.  

He understood that we need to challenge our enemies before our enemies become too strong for us to stop.

That is a lesson we learned back then but seem to have a problem accepting today.

There were more long lasting, positive effects such as Reagan’s military build up which gave us the ability to properly defend ourselves and to deter aggression aimed at us. But the greatest legacy of Ronald Reagan is probably the lesson he taught us when he made it clear that the American people were not the problem, government was the problem.

He once said “Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.”

antreagan-berlinReagan knew that government had a purpose, and he knew that a government that goes beyond its purpose is a government that is destined to fail its people. And although he did restore our faith in government and the presidency after Jimmy Carter, he helped to restore our faith in something even more important than that, ourselves and our great American spirit.

From his surviving an assasin’s bullets to his speech calling for Mr. Gorbachev to “tear down this wall” at the foot of the Berlin Wall, Ronald Reagan was a true world leader and he was ours.  He was an American original and he has helped to keep America strong in so many different ways.

His ability to  restore America to its greatness and to leave us with a blueprint for future success is a gift almost as great as freedom itself and just as a fine wine improves with age, so too will his legacy as history unfolds.

Bookmark and Share

punchline-politics

“Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.”

~Ronald Reagan

1 Comment

Filed under politics

CHRISTIE MAKES IT OFFICIAL

CHRIS CHRISTIE

Bookmark and Share

Chris Christie  made it official on Wednesday. He stated that he “enthusiastically” seeks the office of Governor of New Jersey.

That makes it official and it seemingly completes the Republican field in the race for the Republican nomination for Governor.

Chris Christie is seen by some as a knight in shining armor of sorts.

As one of the most corrupt states in the nation, being the former U.S. attorney  for New Jersey, Chris Christie was quite busy. Many of his prosecutions, over the past eight years, involved political corruption. So many that it made Washington, D.C. look more like a sleepy town in Utah than the cauldron of corruption that it is.

With 132 convictions and zero acquittals, Christie was a success at his job. While Trenton politicians were double dipping and ripping off constituents, Chris Christie was cleaning their messes up.

So it is only logical that Chris Christie run a campaign that highlights the restoration of  faith in government. We need a restoration of faith in the process, a process that New Jersey politician have been abusing and using to increase the size of their own pockets at the expense of taxpayers.

As one who has rooted out wrongdoing, Chris Christie understands how politicians corrupt the process. He knows the type of advantages that they try to take and that knowledge will help to make Christie an effective reformer. He knows what needs to be changed in order to limit the opportunity for political corruption. He also understands the need for transparency in government.

In his announcement he called this election “a moment of challenge and opportunity” and indeed it is.

The challenge for Christie will be convincing people that not only is he the “good government candidate” but that he is the small and effective government candidate.

I do not think any of the other three candidates running against Christie will challenge Christie’s crime busting credentials but they will challenge his ability to reform government and the extent to which he will reform it.

That is where a great deal of the momentum in this campaign will lie.

New Jersey has seen some of the nation’s highest taxes in most every category possible. For it, we have only accumulated debt. And with that debt there has been no improvements of services or education. There has been no great leaps in transportation capabilities or the quality of life we have. All we have seen is an increase in the size and scope of government.

In addition to that we have seen state mandates such as the mandatory low income housing units that municipalities will be required to construct under the orders of the Council on Affordable Housing.

Reform of government is needed.

Right now, under Democrat rule, all we have is a burdensome bureaucracy that raises taxes and uses those raised taxes to legislate new social engineering programs. And through it all, people and businesses are fleeing New Jersey.

The hemorrhaging must stop but not only do we need a tourniquet, we need a transfusion. We need more than a band aid, we need a totally different approach.

So Chris Christie can only run so far on a campaign against the “culture of corruption .”  He must show us that he is a candidate for change.

In his announcement for Governor, one of the most interesting things I heard from Christie was his promise that he “will not worry about a second term.”

That is a good start. One should not worry about reelection before they have won an election. But I do like the message he intended to send with that statement.

New Jersey needs a leader who is more concerned about their state’s citizens than their next election. We need someone who, despite the sticks and stones that may be thrown at them by legislators, they are willing to stand up to them at any cost, even if it means making any number of them opponents.

Christie promises to “restore trust and faith in the idea that government can work”. He now has the opportunity to convince us that he is the man to do that. But he cannot do so as a one issue candidate.

Corruption is only part of our problem. The other part of the problem is an out of control govenrment and innefectual legislature.

Christie promises to spend every day from now till the June primaries  and beyond, defining his positions on the issues.

I look forward to that.

It has taken him quite some time for him to get to this point so I can only assume that he is fully prepared and I know that I am ready to be won over by the right Republican.

Bookmark and Share
punchline-politics
The Manager of a small business that employs 80 people, resigned himself to the fact that Barrack Obama is our President, and that our taxes and government fees will increase in a BIG way.

To compensate for the tax increases he figured his customers will have to see a price increase of about 8%, but due to the dismal state of our economy he can’t increase prices right now, so he decided that he has to lay off 7 of his employees instead.

This problem was really eating at him because he sees his employees as family and he just didn’t know how to choose who will have to go.

So this is what he did…

He walked through the company parking lot and found 7 Obama ‘08 bumper stickers on his employees’ cars, and decided that those employees would be the first to be laid off.

Says the small business owner………”I can’t think of a more fair way to approach this problem. These folks wanted change, so I gave it to them.”

Photobucket

 

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

STATE SENATOR TRIES TO PULL THE WOOL OVER OUR EYES

STATE SENATOR NICK "I don't want to run for office so much" SCUTARI

STATE SENATOR NICK "I don't want to run for office so often" SCUTARI

Bookmark and Share

Right now New Jersey state senators run for two consecutive four year terms followed by a two year term. That two year term is designed to compensate for newly created district lines every ten years.

 But recently State Senator Nicholas Scutari has proposed that the senate terms be lengthened to 5 year terms.

Scutari claims that the move would help to take some money out of politics by requiring state senators to have to pander to special interests a little less.

The claim is one of the most ludicrous excuses for unethical conduct since Jim McGreevey tried to blame his political shenanigans on his being a “gay-American”.

I must admit that Scutari has guts. He actually had the guts to tell people that instead of trying to change the negative aspects of politics,he wants to  institutionalize them and reward the negative aspects by giving politicians longer terms in office. Instead of trying to elect people who do not pander to politics, accept political pandering and give the panderers a longer amount of time in office.

I called that guts but what it actually is is nerve.

It takes a lot of nerve for someone to come out and say “hey it costs me a lot of money to run for reelection and I don’t think I should have to pander for money from the people and ask them if I am doing a good job so often. So extend the length of time in my term”.

Nicholas Scutari truly is political scum.

As a a state senator he has been one of only three legislators to serve while under a subpoena during a federal investigation for accepting state budget grants that provided personal benefits.  The questionable conduct of Scutari stems from the fact that his wife works for a non-profit organization that has received state funds.

On top of that Nick Scuatri himself, is a double dipper.Photobucket

Not only does this guy get a taxpayer funded salary for his legislative schemes, he also gets paid by taxpayers as a municipal prosecutor for the town of Linden in his senate district.  So Scuatari lives off of the people he legislates.  So much so, that he has been investigated.   Yet his primary concern is how expensive it is for him to run for reelection.  If that is the case he should do us a favor and not seek reelection. He is obviously overly concerned by that and not half as concerned as he should be with how expensive it has become for his constituents to live in New Jersey.

Furthermore; if money and costs are his concern, when it comes to elections, how about offering incentives for municipalities to hold elections on what we call Election Day.  At times it would seem as though everyday is Election Day in New Jersey.

Be it municipal elections, for council or fire inspectors or school boards, the proliferation of different days of voting for different offices costs a great deal of money. It costs money to pay election workers and to move voting booths around. It costs money to print and mail ballots and to maintain the added manpower that an election requires.

Why not use the day set aside for elections to hold elections?

Instead of incurring costs for four or five different elections, incur one cost for one Election Day or at least fewer Election Days?

Such a move would also help to increase turnout for those scarcely voted on school board elections or lesser offices.

That is a money saving option worth looking at. But as for Scutari’s proposal. I can only offer a one finger salute and it is not a thumbs up.

If there is a change in the length of any state legislative term it should be a shortening of senate terms to every two years, not an increase in the term of office.

In New Jersey there is no reason for state senators to have a longer term than assembly members. Unlike places like New York, New Jersey State Senators have the same district as their counterparts in the assembly. In New York there are fewer state senators then assemblymen because their senate districts are twice the size of assembly districts. Here there is no difference. It is not as though New Jersey state senators have more ground to cover or constituents to address. They run in the same district as the assembly members do and they answer to the same number of constituents.

There is absolutely no need for state senators to have a five year term in office.

In Virginia, the Governor only has a two year term and I don’t think a New Jersey state senator needs more than twice as long a time in office than a Governor needs, in order to accomplish some good.

What Scutari neglected to mention was that the five year term in office would only help to make state senators less responsive to the needs of their districts and allow them more time to pander to special interests and raise even more money for their less frequent elections.

I do give Scutari some credit.

Even though it is very early in the year, he has already won the prize for the best legislative scheme put forth in Trenton this year.

Thank goodness for people like Senator Jennifer Beck who, although she is an incumbent state senator, she opposes this scam and she does so quite vocally. She does not support this blatant attempt to consolidate power and limit the will of the people. She has also proposed legislative reforms to prohibit people like Scutari from abusing the system.  One such bill of Beck’s was just unanimously passed by the senate state government committee.  The bill will not allow government officials to collect health care benefits from more than one publicly financed health insurance plan.

Hopefully there are enough legislators who think that way and will be able to put this proposal out of its misery. And hopefully the people of Scutari’s district will realize that they have a sneaky, little, schemer representing them and when the time comes, hopefully they will say “not only do we not want you to have a five year term, we don’t even want you to have another single term in office”.

In the mean time I have just one suggestion for Nick Scutari………………………..
Photobucket

Bookmark and Share
punchline-politics

A high-priced call girl brings a customer to her fancy apartment. He admires the fancy furnishings and the art and asks how she was able to amass such splendor. She replies that those really were her father’s, that he was a politician for forty years.

He said, “How come you didn’t follow in his footsteps instead of choosing this way of life?”

She sighed and said, “Oh, just lucky I guess. Besides, I had my moral standards to uphold.”

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

NOT ALL OF THE ESTABLISMENT IS BEHIND CHRISTIE

Bookmark and Share    Former Assembly Republican leader Paul DiGaetano will be endorsing Steve Lonegan for the Republican nomination for Governor.
PAUL DiGAETANO
PAUL DiGAETANO

The announcement is to take place on Wednesday, February 4th and although it may not change the race to any drastic degree, it is significant.

As a former assemblyman and leader of the assembly, Paul DiGaetano has been there and done that. He has been a part of the establishment and he has fought the establishment. He knows where the bodies are buried and who buried them and he knows what it takes to be a Governor.

DiGaetano ran against Lonegan for the Republican gubernatorial nomination in 2005 yet the past rivalry has apparently not left DiGaetano with any ill will. Instead , the formal rivals will be joining forces.

Although he does not currently hold elected office, DiGaetano‘s endorsement is significant.

While much of the New Jersey Republican establishment is lining up behind Christie, much like they did with Rudy Giuliani for president, the more established names that Lonegan has on his side, the better.

Right now, it is easy to come out and declare your support for Chris Christie. He has some name I.D. and an established reputation for crime busting. He looks like a winner but he is still untested and a clean slate as far as where he stands on the issues. The groundswell of establishment support for Christie before he even made his candidacy official has been embarrassing and could be detrimental to our chances of winning in November.

POLITICS 24/7 has consistently suggested that we allow the candidates for the Republican nomination for Governor to earn the nomination and to state their cases and prove who will be best to carry our banner in November.

Yet despite the unknown issue positions of former federal prosecutor Chris Christie, incumbent Republican elected officials are rushing to endorse him.

Chris Christie just might be the right man for the job. I don’t know. What I do know is that I have heard a lot more about Steve Lonegan’s positions on the issues and I know a lot more about his thinking than I do about Christie’s.

So all things considered, even though it may be early to endorse any candidate for the nomination, I can easily understand why someone would come out to endorse Steve Lonegan at this point in the game.

Lonegan has made it clear that he is a candidate of change. A candidate who will get government back on track and back to basics. He has also made it clear that he is not afraid of the conservative label and conservative solutions to our problems.

Chris Christie has yet to let us know if he stands for change and he has yet to demonstrate whether or not he intends to water down a conservative approach to government.

So we can understand Paul DiGaetano’s early endorsement of Steve Lonegan for Governor.

Lonegan is not a blank slate and he has already put forth a plan that people can get behind. Christie has a long way to go before the same can be said of him.

The DiGaetano endorsement of Lonegan is a surprise and it could be the beginning of an upset in the making.

antlonegan1
STEVE LONEGAN

In 2008, New Jersey Republican county chairs and elected officials began lining up behind the candidacy of Rudy Giuliani for President. That helped to essentially make our earlier than normal presidential primary inconsequential. Their solid support for Rudy, combined with the high cost of running statewide in New Jersey and the winner take all delegate rules that they created, made New Jersey a state that would not have been worth the time and investment of any of the other candidates.

It just so happened that the establishments early support for Rudy didn’t matter anyway. By the time the New Jersey presidential primary rolled around, Rudy was out of the race.

Perhaps the Republican establishment should learn a lesson from that little experience and let the candidates work for our support rather than have us kiss their rings and give away the ranch.

Perhaps they should take a lesson from Paul DiGaetano and give their support to someone who has been giving us a reason to support him.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

DASH DASCHLE’S DUPLICITY

Bookmark and Share     When Tom Daschle served as the Democrats senate leader he was not very cooperative when it came to presidential appointments. In fact in 2004 Daschle prevented up-and-down votes on ten of President Bush’s nominees to federal courts of appeals.
TOM DASCHLE

TOM DASCHLE

Back then Tom Daschle believed that there were issues and factors that surpassed the judgment of the President and that President’s constitutionally guaranteed right to appoint individuals to positions that they saw fit.

Little more than four years later Tom Daschle now believes that the President has the right to appoint him to a position despite ethical breaches.

Tom Daschle is,was, and will always be a liberal and as such he always possesses a level of hypocrisy that is astounding.

In 2004 he felt that because the Presidents judicial appointments were conservative, the President should be denied them. Daschle simply disagreed with the President. Those ten judges did not conduct any moral, ethical or legal breaches of conduct or activity. They just weren’t liberal. So for that Daschle, held up the courts and denied the President his judicial appointments.

Now in 2009 Tom Daschle wants us to ignore his own unethical conduct and allow him to be appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services simply because the President wants him.

For his part President Obama wants us to accept his appointment of Tom Daschle to the HHS position because he believes that Tom Daschle is the best person for the job.

Never mind that President Obama made a big deal about constructing the most open, honest and ethical administration in history. Never mind the fact that President Obama stated that he wants his administration to be above reproach.

None of that is suppose to matter when it comes to giving President Obama a stamp of approval. Regardless of his supposedly pristine approach to government we should overlook the ethical breaches of those who he wants to work with.

Despite the fact that Tom Daschle collected over two hundred thousand dollars from the very health care industry that he wants to reform, we should simply approve of the move and give Tom Daschle a thumbs up.

We should approve of President Obama’s choice of Tom Dascle for HHS Secretary despite the fact that he is a tax cheat who claims that he simply saw the year or more of the use of a car and chauffer as an ordinary gift from a friend.

We are to believe that a one hundred and forty thousand dollar gift from a political patron was normal and that it really has no bearing on anything.

Well you know what?. I don’t buy it.

I do not believe that a man who has been given two hundred thousand dollars by an industry can effectively reform and police that industry for the American people.

I do not believe that a man who neglects to pay taxes on services amounting to one hundred and forty thousand dollars demonstrates the ethical sincerity that we need in government.

Tell me, do you think the taxes on that “gift” would have ever been paid had Tom Daschle not been thrust back into the spotlight?

No. He promises to pay the taxes due on those services because he was going to get caught.

As for President Obama, well I have been giving him the benefit of the doubt. He is my President and he has one heck of job to do. He has only been in office for a matter of weeks and he deserves to at least get his footing before anyone tries to knock him off balance. So I have shied away from any harsh criticism, but the inherent hypocrisy of liberal thinking is building to a crescendo and I can not sit idly by and say, sure go ahead, do what you want, ethics do not matter.

The Obama administration is not off to a good start.

The most ethical administration in history didn’t even take office before one cabinet member-designate , New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, had to withdraw his nomination as Commerce Secretary because he is being investigated for selling legislative favors in turn for substantial campaign donations.

Right there it became obvious that the Obama vetting process was faulty.

But then, during confirmation hearings, it became clear that Obama’s choice for Secretary of the Treasury was a tax cheat. That appointment claimed that he didn’t understand the tax code.

Now that’s encouraging, isn’t it. The man in charge of our treasury doesn’t even understand the tax codes he will rule over. Yet despite his lack of familiarity with his job and his ethical breaches, the senate overlooked it all because President Obama felt he was the best man for the job.

Now this.

Tom Daschle takes money from the industry he will monitor and neglects to pay his taxes.

Is this anyway to gain our confidence in this administration or its sincerity?

Is this anyway for the most ethical administration in history to begin?

I for one do not accept the ethical breaches and illegal conduct of these individuals. I believe that the Obama administration better start saying what it means. Either they are above reproach or they are not.

Right now they are not.

Right now they are making so many exceptions to their own rules of conduct that they cannot be believed.

The only thing that would anger me more than what the Obama administration is doing to ethics would be for any Republican to vote in the affirmative when it comes to confirming Tom Daschle’s nomination.

Any Republican that can approve of Daschle is simply playing the game and voting for Tom Daschle because he is a former member of their exclusive club….the senate.

Republicans need to be the loyal opposition here. They need to keep President Obama to his word and realize that Tom Daschle is far from meeting the standards set by the President.

And if that isn’t enough I have ten other reasons for denying President Obama his first choice for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Those ten reasons are the ten judges, whose appointments to the bench, Tom Daschle denied, simply because he didn’t like them.

Bookmark and Share
punchline-politics

NASA was celebrating, they had just made the scientific breakthrough of a lifetime.

As they were uncorking a bottle of champagne, the head scientist at NASA, asked everyone to be quiet as he had received a congratulatory phone call from the President of the United States.

He picked up a special red phone, and spoke into it.

Mr. President,” he said, grinning broadly, “after fifteen years of hard research costing billions of dollars, we have finally found intelligent life on Mars.”

He listened for a second, and his smile gradually disappeared, replaced by a frown.

He said, “But that’s impossible … we could never do it. … yes Mr. President,” and hung up the phone. He addressed the crowd of scientists staring at him curiously.

“I have some bad news,” he said, “the President said that now that we’ve found intelligent life on Mars … he wants us to try to find it in Congress.”

Leave a comment

Filed under politics