Post #177
Subject: Why $700 Billion?
Where did that figure come from? Why does Wall Street need $700 billion? Why not $500 billion? Or $100 billion? Or $10?
The cynic in me says that George W. Bush – who has presided over the biggest expansion of government since World War II – asked for almost as much as the Iraq War has cost so far. He probably figured that Congress would open the wallet.... again. And he is probably correct.
Until somebody can explain to me, in plain English, the bad consequences for me if the bailout fails, I refuse to be scared by the doomsday rhetoric. The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. The last thing we need is a President who runs around like a chicken with his head cut off, like John W. McCain.
If Wall Street is having trouble brought on by greed, waste, fraud and lazy government oversight, well, so? Let them eat cake! Maybe it is time for new financial markets.
And, Goodness, let’s remember those who supported this
Friday, September 26, 2008
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Post #176
Subject: The Gall of John W. McCain
I received a letter from John W. McCain asking for money. Here is my reply:
* * *
Are you kidding me!?!
You want $1000, $500, $100 or even $25 from me – as tho my $10 does not matter. That’s on top of the $2000 bill you plan to stick me with for the bailout of your Wall Street buddies. I don’t “play the market” and don’t care to bailout those who do. Bailout Main Street instead.
I guess $2000 is not much to you – only one month’s worth of that Social Security you snort from big government. * oink, oink * That’s five month’s worth of my Grandma’s Social Security – and that IS her income. No Senate salary, no disability pension from the military, no spouse worth $100 million. What is she supposed to do? Not eat for five months!?!
And that is to say nothing of your never-ending war. Didn’t the experience of the Soviet Union teach you anything?
Sorry, you won’t be getting my money, Mr. McCain, or my vote. I can’t afford you.
Of course, I can’t afford Obama either, but at least his heart is in the right place.
Subject: The Gall of John W. McCain
I received a letter from John W. McCain asking for money. Here is my reply:
* * *
Are you kidding me!?!
You want $1000, $500, $100 or even $25 from me – as tho my $10 does not matter. That’s on top of the $2000 bill you plan to stick me with for the bailout of your Wall Street buddies. I don’t “play the market” and don’t care to bailout those who do. Bailout Main Street instead.
I guess $2000 is not much to you – only one month’s worth of that Social Security you snort from big government. * oink, oink * That’s five month’s worth of my Grandma’s Social Security – and that IS her income. No Senate salary, no disability pension from the military, no spouse worth $100 million. What is she supposed to do? Not eat for five months!?!
And that is to say nothing of your never-ending war. Didn’t the experience of the Soviet Union teach you anything?
Sorry, you won’t be getting my money, Mr. McCain, or my vote. I can’t afford you.
Of course, I can’t afford Obama either, but at least his heart is in the right place.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Post #175
Subject: 9/11, revisited, Pt. II
Every time I think about forgiving George W. Bush for 9/11, I read my Post #104 – which follows. It is a Damning indictment of the Weasel’s ineptitude and doesn’t even include some of the most obvious examples – Condi Rice’s July ’01 meeting with George Tenet or the August ’01 Presidential Daily Briefing. Nor did I mention Bush’s opposition to the/11 Commission or his refusal to give a formal interview.
The most depressing thing I saw on TV yesterday during MSNBC’s replay of the coverage of that morning was, before 12 noon, Tom Brokaw identified the prime suspect, Osama bin Laden, and cited a speech he had given in London the month before in which he threatened the United States.
Why wasn’t Bush all over this?
* * *
Post #104
Subject: 9/11, revisited
President George W. Bush stood atop the rubble of the World Trade Center, wrapped his arm around a firefighter and said, “These terrorists shall hear from us. But, if we can’t get ‘em, we will invade a country that did not attack us and does not threaten us.”
Wait – was that a dream or a nightmare?
Richard Clarke, former counterterrorism czar, had a meeting with the deputies of Cabinet Secretaries in April of 2001, when, he says, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz insisted the real terrorism threat was not al Qaeda but Iraq
Why a meeting with the deputies and not the Secretaries? Bush had downgraded counterterrorism from a cabinet-level job, so Clarke now dealt instead with deputy secretaries. As Clarke told the 9/11 Commission, “It slowed it down enormously, by months. First of all, the deputies’ committee didn’t meet urgently in January or February.”
The Secretaries’ first meeting on al Qaeda was not until after Labor Day, on September 4, 2001.
On January 25, 2001, five days after Bush took office, Clarke sent Condoleezza Rice a memo, attaching to it a document entitled “Strategy for Eliminating the Threat of al Qaeda” It was, Clarke wrote, “developed by the last administration to give to you, incorporating diplomatic, economic, military, public diplomacy, and intelligence tools.”
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, January 17, 2001)
SANDY BERGER, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: With survivors of the U.S.S. Cole reinforced the reality that America is in a deadly struggle with a new breed of anti-Western jihadists. Nothing less than a war, I think, is fair to describe this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
As Senator Carl Levin said, “I’m concerned that we may not be putting enough emphasis on countering the most likely threats to our national security and to the security of our forces deployed around the world, those asymmetric threats, like terrorist attacks on the U.S.S. Cole on our barracks and our embassies around the world, on the World Trade Center.”
And where was Bush?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, February 27, 2001)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Taliban in Afghanistan, they have offered that they are ready to hand over Osama bin Laden to Saudi Arabia if the United States drops its sanctions, and they have a kind of deal that they want to make with the United States. Do you have any comments?
ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Let me take that and get back to you on that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Ari never did.
On February 26, 2001, Paul Bremer said of the administration, “What they will do is stagger along until there’s a major incident, and then suddenly say, Oh, my God, shouldn’t we be organized to deal with this?”
And they gave us Iraq instead….
Subject: 9/11, revisited, Pt. II
Every time I think about forgiving George W. Bush for 9/11, I read my Post #104 – which follows. It is a Damning indictment of the Weasel’s ineptitude and doesn’t even include some of the most obvious examples – Condi Rice’s July ’01 meeting with George Tenet or the August ’01 Presidential Daily Briefing. Nor did I mention Bush’s opposition to the/11 Commission or his refusal to give a formal interview.
The most depressing thing I saw on TV yesterday during MSNBC’s replay of the coverage of that morning was, before 12 noon, Tom Brokaw identified the prime suspect, Osama bin Laden, and cited a speech he had given in London the month before in which he threatened the United States.
Why wasn’t Bush all over this?
* * *
Post #104
Subject: 9/11, revisited
President George W. Bush stood atop the rubble of the World Trade Center, wrapped his arm around a firefighter and said, “These terrorists shall hear from us. But, if we can’t get ‘em, we will invade a country that did not attack us and does not threaten us.”
Wait – was that a dream or a nightmare?
Richard Clarke, former counterterrorism czar, had a meeting with the deputies of Cabinet Secretaries in April of 2001, when, he says, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz insisted the real terrorism threat was not al Qaeda but Iraq
Why a meeting with the deputies and not the Secretaries? Bush had downgraded counterterrorism from a cabinet-level job, so Clarke now dealt instead with deputy secretaries. As Clarke told the 9/11 Commission, “It slowed it down enormously, by months. First of all, the deputies’ committee didn’t meet urgently in January or February.”
The Secretaries’ first meeting on al Qaeda was not until after Labor Day, on September 4, 2001.
On January 25, 2001, five days after Bush took office, Clarke sent Condoleezza Rice a memo, attaching to it a document entitled “Strategy for Eliminating the Threat of al Qaeda” It was, Clarke wrote, “developed by the last administration to give to you, incorporating diplomatic, economic, military, public diplomacy, and intelligence tools.”
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, January 17, 2001)
SANDY BERGER, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: With survivors of the U.S.S. Cole reinforced the reality that America is in a deadly struggle with a new breed of anti-Western jihadists. Nothing less than a war, I think, is fair to describe this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
As Senator Carl Levin said, “I’m concerned that we may not be putting enough emphasis on countering the most likely threats to our national security and to the security of our forces deployed around the world, those asymmetric threats, like terrorist attacks on the U.S.S. Cole on our barracks and our embassies around the world, on the World Trade Center.”
And where was Bush?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, February 27, 2001)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Taliban in Afghanistan, they have offered that they are ready to hand over Osama bin Laden to Saudi Arabia if the United States drops its sanctions, and they have a kind of deal that they want to make with the United States. Do you have any comments?
ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Let me take that and get back to you on that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Ari never did.
On February 26, 2001, Paul Bremer said of the administration, “What they will do is stagger along until there’s a major incident, and then suddenly say, Oh, my God, shouldn’t we be organized to deal with this?”
And they gave us Iraq instead….
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Post #174
Subject: 545 People
545 People, by Charlie Reese.
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices -- 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the Speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility; I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ .
If they do not receive Social Security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way .
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
* * *
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
Subject: 545 People
545 People, by Charlie Reese.
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices -- 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the Speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility; I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ .
If they do not receive Social Security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way .
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
* * *
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
Friday, September 05, 2008
Post #173
Subject: John W. McCain Rushes to Judgment... Again!
Why did John W. McCain pick Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate?
It's been reported that McCain didn't seriously consider Palin until a week before. She rose to the top of his list only after influential conservatives strenuously objected – threatened a floor flight at the RNC – if McCain picked either Senator Joe Lieberman or former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, who both favor abortion rights.
Palin, of course, is opposed to all abortions. I heard on TV a couple of nights ago that she was now OK with abortion if the life of the mother was in danger. I heard on TV yesterday that she was now OK with abortion in cases of rape and incest. What’s next? “Roe V. Wade is the law of the land, and we must respect that.” :p
When Palin was announced as McCain's running mate -- no one had been sent to Wasilla, Alaska, to look through the archives of Palin's hometown newspaper, the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman. And, according to one source, no extensive research into the city council records from her 10 years on the council and then as mayor of Wasilla has been completed. Aides were sent to pour over that newspaper AFTER Palin was picked.
A Republican close to the campaign. “This was really kind of rushed at the end, because John didn’t get what he wanted. He wanted to do Joe or Ridge.”
Palin employed a lobbying firm to secure almost $27 million in federal earmarks for a town residents while she was its mayor, according to an analysis by an independent government watchdog group. Earmarks? Isn’t MCain opposed to those?
The Republican president of Alaska’s state Senate, a woman who hails from Palin’s hometown, rushed to tell the press, “She’s not prepared to be governor; how can she be prepared to be vice president or president?”
But she’s got more executive experience than Obama, say the Republicans, as tho McCain’s experience in the Senate doesn’t matter
It looks as if the vetters were so focused on Palin's appeal to Republicans' conservative base as an opponent of abortion and gun control, for instance, that they stopped asking questions about her background too soon. Indeed, from another blog, “McCain made an impetuous decision in order to prove his fealty the Republican right while demonstrating that he will do anything to get elected. Is that the kind of president the rest of us want?”
“John W. McCain – the selection of Sarah Palin is all about you and your judgment.” A President McCain will choose leaders such as Cabinet members and Supreme Court jurists – a McCain who is hostage to Right-wing Nuts!
By the way, the McCains with their $100 million did not buy me a new computer – I pulled myself up by my own bootstraps and fixed this one. Ya know, my taxes are supporting McCain’s snout in the trough of big government,… and that is a disgrace!
Subject: John W. McCain Rushes to Judgment... Again!
Why did John W. McCain pick Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate?
It's been reported that McCain didn't seriously consider Palin until a week before. She rose to the top of his list only after influential conservatives strenuously objected – threatened a floor flight at the RNC – if McCain picked either Senator Joe Lieberman or former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, who both favor abortion rights.
Palin, of course, is opposed to all abortions. I heard on TV a couple of nights ago that she was now OK with abortion if the life of the mother was in danger. I heard on TV yesterday that she was now OK with abortion in cases of rape and incest. What’s next? “Roe V. Wade is the law of the land, and we must respect that.” :p
When Palin was announced as McCain's running mate -- no one had been sent to Wasilla, Alaska, to look through the archives of Palin's hometown newspaper, the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman. And, according to one source, no extensive research into the city council records from her 10 years on the council and then as mayor of Wasilla has been completed. Aides were sent to pour over that newspaper AFTER Palin was picked.
A Republican close to the campaign. “This was really kind of rushed at the end, because John didn’t get what he wanted. He wanted to do Joe or Ridge.”
Palin employed a lobbying firm to secure almost $27 million in federal earmarks for a town residents while she was its mayor, according to an analysis by an independent government watchdog group. Earmarks? Isn’t MCain opposed to those?
The Republican president of Alaska’s state Senate, a woman who hails from Palin’s hometown, rushed to tell the press, “She’s not prepared to be governor; how can she be prepared to be vice president or president?”
But she’s got more executive experience than Obama, say the Republicans, as tho McCain’s experience in the Senate doesn’t matter
It looks as if the vetters were so focused on Palin's appeal to Republicans' conservative base as an opponent of abortion and gun control, for instance, that they stopped asking questions about her background too soon. Indeed, from another blog, “McCain made an impetuous decision in order to prove his fealty the Republican right while demonstrating that he will do anything to get elected. Is that the kind of president the rest of us want?”
“John W. McCain – the selection of Sarah Palin is all about you and your judgment.” A President McCain will choose leaders such as Cabinet members and Supreme Court jurists – a McCain who is hostage to Right-wing Nuts!
By the way, the McCains with their $100 million did not buy me a new computer – I pulled myself up by my own bootstraps and fixed this one. Ya know, my taxes are supporting McCain’s snout in the trough of big government,… and that is a disgrace!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)