The imaginary and real Obama Administration
Well I’m still looking for the jobs that the Obama Administration claimed to have “saved or created” since the Democrat-led Congress passed the $787 billion Economic Stimulus Plan early this year. You do recall that plan right?
Yes, President Obama was on a bandwagon then. Telling the nation how well his economic policies have been helping the average American. A soapbox that he jumped off of just in time to switch to trying to pass his healthcare plan. You might wonder why he has switched gears. The answer is the following data just out.
Does that sound like a plan that is working? Does it in any way sound like the average worker is more secure now or less so? Are you willing to spend more money in this economic environment or less?
In fact, these numbers place my observation about how the Obama Stimulus money is hurting some families right now as severely under-estimated.
Keep in mind that IF you are RECEIVING a paycheck you are getting the stimulus money right now. No check from the Government, but an extra $25 off of your taxes. So the stimulus is in effect right now. And you can see how this is improving the nation. With forecasts from even the most lenient economists stating that the unemployment levels will hit at least 10%, perhaps as high as 11%, going into 2010. So it will only get worse for many people across the nation, not better.
But President Obama PROMISED that his plans for the economy and budget would save jobs – some 3 million of them. He also promised that immediate action upon passing the Stimulus package – which won’t mostly go into effect until the 2nd quarter or so of 2010. Lightning fast.
I bring all this up because President Obama has hustled the nation from one economic crisis to another, with Congress cheerleading the whole way. There was the $410 billion to keep the Government funded, and the $3.5 trillion for his budget - all separate and not including the $787 billion stimulus package. These included over 9,000 earmarks – something President Obama PROMISED to remove if elected. This included the situation that PREVENTS families from getting food stamps to feed their families. This includes social changes like the Government now owning 2 auto companies (costing over $50 billion dollars and losing around 100,000 jobs conservatively), and the desire for the Government to dictate employee pay and hiring. Not to mention the ability of the Government to violate contract law, invalidate bondholder rights, and potentially to take over any private business it wishes.
But now the President has moved on to healthcare. Again we are being told that this is an immediate need. That this is our sole option. That this will help the nation. At a cost conservatively around $1.5 trillion, an amount greater than all the taxes collected by the Government (around $1.3 trillion a year). None of this counts the interest we must pay on all the borrowed money.
Plus there is the promise that President Obama seems to be on track for.
But wait, there is more. Don’t forget that there is also the Cap and Trade idea of the Obama Administration floating around. A plan that promises to increase the cost of gas and energy. A plan that will FORCE the public to conserve energy because of the higher prices. And by the way, some in Congress (House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for one) will benefit hugely and directly because of this.
And this says nothing of Representative Barney Frank’s attempt to create another housing crisis in the future by lowering the requirements for mortgages again – this time in the Condo market. A brilliant move by the person directly responsible for telling the nation, on national television, that anyone warning the public about problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was lying for political gain – 2 weeks before they failed under his direct oversight.
So to sum up, looking at the Obama Presidency to date, where are the benefits? For all the calls of change and improvement, where are they? What is better now than before? I bet they are with those jobs that have been “saved or created” that no one can find.
Can Whites be discriminated against? Was Judge Sotomayor wrong? part 2
And this says nothing of the mortgage loans and any other financial product. It is a fact that mortgages (all of them) tend to be significantly higher for a person of color than Whites, regardless of credit score, financial background, and any other factor. This is also true of car loans and purchases, and other loans. It is similar in most other types of big ticket purchases.
Even IQ tests are skewed, having a bias built into the system that will cause some people of color to score lower than is accurate. Hell even getting a cab in most major cities is a massive problem if you are a person of color.
So there is a direct, real, daily benefit to being White that cannot be corrected by laws or the legal system. And laws were created to adjust for some of these factors. Whether you agree with these laws or not does not change the reason why the laws were created or the fact they exist.
But is it fair for a less qualified person of color to attain a position instead of a more qualified White person? I think not, in most cases.
With respect to the firemen, this is a position that requires certain exact minimums, thus there cannot (or at least should not) be a lower standard. To have such a standard is to be endangering the lives of the public. And this was not a mere question of a point or 2 on a standardized test. Creating a grade curve as in college grading does not resolve the direct difference in the scores this case is about. The White scores were thrown out. That is wrong, especially as lives potentially depend on this.
But some will want to take this and apply it to other areas that are not the same. College admissions is one example. They say that to alter the requirements of an admission is discrimination. They say this is the same as the firemen.
That is untrue because of several factors. One is the fact that the major bias of the nation is toward Whites. There are multiple institutions that will accept these same students, in general they have better finances to fund their college, they have less resistance in getting a job after or before college, and they were provided (on average) better educations to enable them to have better admission scores. Additionally the admittence to college will not endanger the lives of the public. Not to mention that for the person of color on average, the only factor restricting them was the failure of the education system to provide them the opportunity to excel.
So yes, Whites can be discriminated against. Generally that might happen in an isolated individual basis, like not being welcomed into a nightclub or restaurant. But looking at the nation, Whites are incredibly more leveraged to have an advantage in almost every aspect of life in this nation.
The day when White women don’t fear being in an elevator with a person of color, where public schools in cities no longer have schoolbooks older than the students, where police do not rampage against an innocent citizen solely for the color of their skin, where all media fairly depict crowds and casts (ie there are no people of color in any episode of friends in the crowds of New York, and only 1 character ever that I recall) and news reports, then we can say that discrimination is gone.
But until that day, laws will exist to try to balance a few of the most obvious problems. And those laws will likely be bent and abused by the personal outlooks of judges from time to time.
So in summation, do I think the Supreme Court was right? Yes I do. Do I think that Judge Sotomayor and the others that reviewed this case were wrong? Completely. Is this proof of Judge Sotomayor being biased and unworthy of a seat at the Supreme Court? Not exactly. Though my reasons for her disqualification have nothing to do with this case, and yet are bound by the equality that the Supreme Court is meant to uphold.
Can Whites be discriminated against? Was Judge Sotomayor wrong?
Since almost the moment that Judge Sotomayor had been named as a Supreme Court nominee, I have been asked my thoughts on the 19 firemen in the “reverse discrimination” case. Now that the Supreme Court has responded, I will further clarify my thoughts.
First, let me explain my thoughts on “reverse discrimination”. It does not exist. There is no such thing as reverse discrimination, it’s a made up term.
Discrimination is defined as
the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently, and prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment.
Thus the term reverse discrimination cannot exist. Least of all as it is used by the political circles. Discrimination against anyone is just that. It is not limited to nor exclusive for people of color.
So the question becomes, can Whites be discriminated against? The answer is yes, of course.
But the bigger question no one asks is - How can a White person be discriminated against in America? That is much more difficult and likely to inflame many. But I will try to provide a view.
In America, right now, to be White is an absolute advantage. While there have been many strides forward in race relations, the fact is that there is an obvious distinction made to people of color everyday. Most of these acts are subliminal and so ingrained in the populace that we don’t notice it, but that is not the same as its lack of existence.
Look at any television channel, cable or broadcast. I’ve spoken about this often, the fact that consistently throughout my lifetime of 41 years the number of people in front of cameras has never reflected the actual proportion of African Americans or people of color in the nation. Television has always maintained a view of the nation that more reflects the 1940’s or 50’s than the 21st century. In fact looking at all television programs, and movies, we see that all people of color – in front and behind the cameras combined, account for some 5 – 8% of all the people involved. A far cry from the 30% we actually comprise in this nation.
Stepping to the news media, there is a consistent emphasis to sensationalize any crime that is even believed to be committed by a person of color. At the same time crimes by Whites are more often marginalized. Take for example the Duke Rape case where the reported victim was the target of media attacks and the White lacrosse team were envisioned as saintly by comparison. Which ignored their actual activities on Duke campus and the events of the night the now rejected rape took place. And this says nothing about cases completely ignored like the Megan Williams case in West Virginia.
Or look at how police officers acting in a manner more akin to gangs against people of color are reported. We have the case of 15 officers in Philadelphia beating down 3 Black men that were innocent because the police were upset. There is the case of Sean Bell were he and 2 companions were shot over 50 times for no apparent reason beyond the suspicion of an officer. We can look at numerous other cases across the nation, perhaps no more famous than Rodney King. But all these cases have a similar trend. The White officers are presumed innocent and justified while the person of color is framed as being guilty and thus inciting the incidents.
There is the fact that many cases of police violence is completely ignored by the media. Just this year, Oscar Grant’s murder, the shooting of Robbie Tolan, and the murder of Adolph Grimes have all been under-reported. I doubt many have heard of any of these cases unless they have read my blogs, or those of other bloggers, as the national media refuses to discuss them. In fact, in Oakland, the Grant murder sparked riots – which the riots were the only news discussed by the national media and not the cause.
Looking at a different aspect of law, there is the legal system. It is biased system, few with clear thoughts will dispute this. The bias is that those who are poorer will be less likely to win a charge. With higher proportions of people of color being less wealthy, there is that bias. Add to that the fact that a person of color convicted of a crime will receive a penalty that is 2 – 3x as severe as a White person convicted of the same crime brings in another level of discrimination. Like the boy (the name escapes me this second but he was 17 at the time, and is Black) who was convicted to 10 years for having consentual oral sex with a minor (who was 14 at the time, and was White as I recall) that actively and publicly pursued him at a party.
Obvious facts in teen health study
Do you ever read an article, about some scientific study about this or that, and you just say to yourself – “Scientists are just so stupid. I knew that.”
Of course scientists aren’t stupid. But some of the studies they do have to make you wonder. Like a recent study on 20,000 young kids. The study sought to see how kids feel about surviving. Were they optimistic or not about living to 35, and what choices did they make based on that outlook.
Scientists are shocked that some 15% of those interviewed over 7 years believed they’d never live to 35. I’m shocked they didn’t realize how common a thought that was. I mean I was very sure that I probably wouldn’t make it past 25. And that’s considering I was a far better than average student, not into drugs, ghettofabulous did not exist, I never joined a gang, plus I was working since I was a young teen.
Today I can see even more reasons that a person of color in their late teens might think they won’t make it to 35. Gangs are worse, drugs are rampant across the nation, music videos and rap music directly state they should be violent, addicted, criminals. Fewer kids are getting the educations they deserve, and more sources in society are telling them to give up on higher learning. I mean there is a huge societal influence that says a person of color should only hope to be ghettofabulous. All of that is separate of the fact that if you are a criminal, or just a person of color, there are seriously great odds [comparatively] that a police officer will abuse and/or kill you.
Is there any surprise then that this study came out and “revealed” the obvious thought among people of color that they won’t make it to 35. Personally I think the shock is that White kids are also feeling these same thoughts of impending death, most from the same sources as those for the kids of color.
Back when crack hit the streets in the 80’s, I recall the lack of concern by police and elected officials. No one was bothering to do anything about that drug or the addicts initially. Not until White kids started to get addicted and drop dead. A couple of elected officials kids got hooked, and overnight there was news of the epidemic of crack. Just about 5 years after the fact.
In a similar manner this report is the same thing to me. 20+ years ago I understood that the chances of me dying before 25 was 1 in 4. In fact about 25% of my friends from elementary school didn’t make it to 25. At that time 2 decades ago I understood that the chances of me going to jail were also about 1 in 4. Again, at least that many of the kids I grew up with were in or had been in jail. That was the reality in the Bronx, and a decent neighborhood of the Bronx.
Given the failures of elected officials and the campaigns to keep kids off of drugs – Nancy Regan saying no and a guy making breakfast vs. a criminal rapper on MTV surrounded by women, drugs, and money, guess which makes more of an impact to a teen – the growth of negative influences, and the promotion by the major media and entertainment industry of the “Ghettofabulous” and “Thug life”, I’m surprised the numbers are not worse.
If the scientists doing this study want to move things along, for a mere contribution to my site, I will give them my insight.
These are just a few ideas. But each is effective in its own way. Far more so than a study of the obvious or elected officials polispeak.
Remembering Michael Jackson
I was speaking with friends yesterday and today about the sudden death of Michael Jackson and we recalled many things. I want to take a moment to share some of those thoughts with you.
I can recall being a very young child and hearing ABC 123 from the Jackson 5. To this day just thinking of the title of that song instantly brings up the memory of that song, hearing MJ’s voice in my mind, and the summer in the 70’s. It’s a good memory.
That’s something that I think most of us can say. Hearing some of our favorite songs by Michael Jackson brings us back to memories of our youth, or even more recent days, that are pleasant and fun. Not every singer can do that, not every song. But he did it many times.
I remember that I bought the Ben album back in the days. It was the second album I ever bought. The first was Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five. I recall that album to this day. It was sweet and melodic. It really just touched a cord.
I also recall being pissed at him during the 80’s. I had a girlfriend that was absolutely in love with him. Even more than me at the time. I’m sure other men had a similar competition. One that MJ never knew of, and one that none of us mere men could ever win.
My friends and I noticed something while watching all the news on Michael Jackson’s death. Videos from across his life were being shown split-screen as commentators spoke. And with no delay, with complete agreement, we were able to place every single song the videos were showing. That’s without any sound. No matter how old the video clip or music video.
Imagine the impact he has made that people of multiple generations can sit and see a visual snippet and know the exact song, and generally the year, without ever hearing a word. Something we didn’t even realize we knew until that moment.
Another friend noted that Michael Jackson is the progression of the great singers. There was Elvis, then the Beatles, and now MJ. Looking forward, there is no one yet that comes close to the talent, showmanship, and longevity Jackson had. And I can’t imagine, in a world of throw-away entertainers and American Idol, if anyone like this will come again.
The entire industry of music videos needs to celebrate Michael Jackson. I expect nothing less than a full run of every video and music clip of Jackson singing since his first televised appearance in the Jackson 5 on MTV. They owe him that.
Were it not for the foresight of Jackson, and his commitment to providing fans a complete entertainment experience, music videos of today would not exist. Jackson made mini-movies. He extended the length of time a video could be, he raised the bar on quality, on the production itself. Thriller was not a music video, it was a story. Billie Jean was a story. Remember The Time was a short film.
Before Jackson was making music videos, they were jumbles of catchy imagery that may have had nothing to do with anything. Once he got involved, we got an art form. And MTV was smart enough to break the color barrier they had for every single video he ever did.
Another friend noticed the incredible impact of Michael Jackson. Thinking back through the years of coverage, did you notice that ANYTHING he did was news. If he wore a new piece of clothing it was news. The sparkled socks (which respectfully Donnie Osmond did first – but Jackson did it bigger), the single glove, his hair, the outfits he wore (on stage or off). Hell, MJ just leaving Neverland was good enough to get 30 seconds of news airtime. No one is that big, just him.
When you think of the career of Jackson you have to think big. He started trends in fashion – basically all the clothes of the 80’s. He broke racial barriers world wide – there was no where he could not appear, and people of every description sold-out stadiums to see him. He broke industry standards – almost always having the biggest contracts, Grammy Awards, limits on music video lengths, 750 million records sold, 13 top 100 hits for a single artist, and on and on. He created dance crazes – though he was inspired by James Brown, he had the world trying to imitate his moves and Moonwalk – even to this day.
His music is so ingrained in the world that he is one of the top sampled artists ever. People of all ages have at least one favorite song from throughout his career. Every entertainer since the 80’s has tried to imitate some if not all of his artistry. Every entertainer that is a person of color has dreamed of matching even part of his success, and use his career as a guide path for their own.
All of this came at a high price though. He never grew up, at least not properly. He was reportedly shy. He was reclusive. He was likely a pedophile. He was beyond eccentric (though parts of his tabloid eccentricity may have been his own manipulation to gain greater press coverage). He hated his own face, and possibly race (the multiple cosmetic surgeries and rumored skin bleaching). He was a man with many demons, possibly addictions, and he couldn’t hide for all his trying. I doubt he lived a day without pressure and stress since he was in his teens.
All these things and more are Michael Jackson. He was by definition an icon, a figure too large to be merely like everyone else. He was as gifted as he was troubled. I think he may have been the loneliest person that everyone in the world knew and wanted to be near.
For all his faults and issues, for all the real and imagined deviations and eccentricity, for all the grandeur and splendor he craved and provided to fans, one thing will always be true.
Michael Jackson walked the Earth for 50 years, his footprint has been left on billions of people, and he made the planet overall better in the ways only he could. Such a legacy, such memories, such an inspiration are all things we can be glad of and hope to attain in a small way. I can think of few things better to say of any human being, past or present.
Obama Stimulus costs or keeps $38 million from 344,000 Americans
Interesting headline isn’t it? The best part is that I can back it up. At least as well as the Obama Administration can back up the jobs they have “created or saved” with the Stimulus package. In fact I can provide better proof. The worst part though is that the money is being lost by the poor and the unemployed.
The problem stems from the very $787 billion stimulus package that the Democrat-led Congress and President Obama shoved down the throats of the American public. In the rush to capitalize on the popularity of the President, with the cries of absolute depression emanating from every Liberal politician and pundit in the background, the stimulus package was passed without ANYONE reading what was in the 400 pages. Thus an extra $25 a week was ensured for 4 months to every American that GETS a paycheck.
But that’s also the problem. Because the extra $100 a month was never factored into any other Government program. Which means that if you happen to be getting unemployment as 6.8 million Americans (and more each month) are, and you happen to need food stamps as well to feed say your family, you may have a problem.
This is happening right now. According to the Associated Press (hardly a conservative arm of the media) there are cases in Iowa and Georgia, and other States, already. People are finding out that because of the extra $25 they cannot decline, calculations made including this money is placing Americans over the Government limits for food stamps and other forms of aid. The range of the loss is unknown (and likely to remain so), but the AP provided an example – costing a family $300 in food stamps they now cannot receive. The average for food stamps as stated in the AP article is $111.
So using a bit of math that President Obama and his entire Administration cannot do for his claim of “creating or saving” jobs with the stimulus package I will now present you with how much Democrats have cost the poor and unemployed in this nation. Conservatively.
Since there are no less than 6.8 million people on unemployment right now, I will take 5% of that total as people potentially being affected by the extra money. That comes to 344,000. A really small number of people. It’s 1/10th the number of people in the nation. It’s about the number of people that lost their jobs in March alone.
Now taking the average provided by the AP on food stamps, and not the actual example provided that is about 3x as high, and you get 344,000 x $111 = $38,184,000. That’s $38 million being lost or prevented from helping people feed their families in this nation right now. And that figure is monthly. So to be really honest, for the life of the stimulus package (at least the part that the public actually gets as a stimulus) the poorest and most needy in this nation will lose of be prevented from having $152,736,000 in food.
I bet Democrats across the nation are feeling really proud now. I can see Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid giddy in Congress. Rep. Barney Frank must be searching the political map for someone else to blame this oversight on. And I can imagine that the Obama Administration is taping Vice President Biden’s mouth shut lest he reveal how much is being taken from the poor INSTEAD of the rich as Democrats promised would happen.
Yes, there is nothing like an unfettered Democrat-led Congress to rush serious and profoundly important legislation through all the hoops, passed in votes without a single concern for the American people or a glance at the actual wording and thus effects.
So I say again, the stimulus plan was idiocy. It was a bad idea created by people who think the Government is smarter than the average person. Yet they prove consistently that there is virtually no part of the Government, or its programs, they can’t screw up. And the bonus is they are growing the size of the Government so they can do even more.
Only another year and 5 more months before we can elect a new Congress. 3 years and 5 months till we can see if President Obama gets re-elected. Don’t you just feel confident.
California: home of towns that are an insult to the U.S. military
The more I hear of the laws and issues promoted in towns across California, the more I wonder what happened to their gene pool out there. Actually that might not be fair, as Southern California seems to have its head on its shoulders as opposed to stuck up an orifice, most of the time.
The issue at hand this time are laws passed to restrict military recruiters. 2 towns, Eureka and Arcata, voted to restrict recruiters from speaking with those under the age of 17. There was nothing preventing the minors from contacting the recruiters first though. Of course the federal law is that no one can join the military under the age of 18, except those 17 with parental permission. And theAppeals Court have just shot these laws down as unconstitutional.
But my point is that why would anyone attack the military in such a manner. As if it is a terrible thing to defend one’s country. To voluntarily step up and support the Freedoms and Rights the majority of Americans take for granted every day. In passing these laws these towns had made joining the military seem as if it were akin to joining a gang or an illegal activity, or somehow shameful.
And it’s not as if the laws regarding military recruitment have changed in the past 30 years of so. Thus I am led to believe that the people in these towns are cowards, disrespectful, and ungrateful. This is a political action, pure and simple. It’s a statement directed at the wrong people for the wrong reason.
It’s no surprise that this happened in California. A State where in the Northern half Marines returning home from Iraq are asked not to enter the public ways of the airport. Where the Navy is asked to not allow any leave when coming into port. Where institutions proposing to offer higher learning describe Marines as “unwelcome intruders”.
They make me almost wish that an enemy army were to attack them, because you know they would be screaming for the very same military they do not support or respect to come to their rescue.
I’m sure Nancy Pelosi is proud of these insulting actions by her fellow Northern Californians. They reflect the views and actions she and Sen. Harry Reid have shoved onto the American people via their control of the Congress, and now White House. Too bad that North Korea and Iran agree with their views as well. Thus their nuclear weapons programs are going full tilt.
I wonder how unwelcome Marines would be if North Korea shoves a missile up San Francisco’s ass.
But to the point at hand. Maybe it’s the veggie burgers, or the health fanatics. It could be the liberal use of drugs (since the 60’s through to today with medical marijuana). Or it could be all that sunshine and earthquakes alternately baking and then shaking the brains of those in California. Whatever it might be, they are an affront to those that make the choice, especially in these difficult times, to offer to defend this nation with their lives.
I wonder if Obama’s Stimulus package can be used to provide Eureka and Arcata with one-way tickets to Venezuala so they can live under Hugo Chavez. That at least would be worth the money.
I remember the words of Vice-President Biden
Do you recall what Vice-President Biden said back on the campaign trail? It was October 2008. And he asked every American to mark his words. I did.
“He’s gonna have to make some really tough - I don’t know what the decision’s gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it’s gonna happen.”
I recall that at the time I stated
“…Will Obama try to sit down and talk with a leader of a nation that hates America as say crude oil shipments are held hostage? Or perhaps North Korea will openly renew efforts to build a nuclear weapon…”
Well I called that right.
But over the past several months, North Korea has made every effort to challenge the Obama Administration. They have openly restarted developing nuclear weapons, they have launched multiple missiles – each with further range than the last. They have insisted that the Korean War restart, and just today have threatened the U.S. with 1000-fold retaliation for any act that displeases the isolated nation.
A time for tough decisions indeed. Yet the response has been anything but decisive or remarkable. We allowed the missile launches. We chided North Korea verbally and at the U.N. We are awaiting a strong rebuke from China and/or Russia to North Korea. Essentially we are doing nothing.
Is that the equivalent of President Kennedy that Vice President Biden was referring to? Somehow I don’t see the actions of the Obama Administration being the equal, or even in the same ballpark, as that of President Kennedy. Without surprise, the results have been just as incomparable.
I posed this question at the time
“So the question should be, do we want a President that will be challenged internationally at a time when we are still reeling from monetary instability, engaged in 2 warfronts, and headed by an Administration that is internally conflicted?”
The answer seems to have been yes. President Obama was elected, though the promise of Vice President Biden was downplayed and ignored in the media. But now, 6 months into the Presidency, I am remembering the words of Biden – as he asked all Americans to do.
President Obama is in the middle of running 2 auto companies and several banking institutions. He is embarking on a crippling budget – even by the estimates of his own reports. The nation is continuing to experience rising unemployment, and the Obama Administration is cutting Defense projects while increasing the national debt. We are still engaged, and will be for an unknown amount of time to come, in 2 warfronts. We are confused in dealing with the detainees in Guantanamo Bay, even as the President has mandated their removal from the base. And for all the apologies and posturing to nations across the globe, we have gained no greater support than what we had a year ago.
So what will come of this growing crisis? Vice President Biden gave no answer. He had no solution. He gave no sign of hope or positive outcome. Which to me means he had no confidence.
But now that we are stuck in this Presidency, what can we expect? Vice President Biden is no longer allowed to discuss his thoughts on this. And all indications are that President Obama will allow North Korea to move ahead with their plans unfettered.
Not quite the symbol of President Kennedy is it? But at least we can chalk up 1 more of the few campaign promises that were kept by Obama-Biden. Don’t you feel warm and fuzzy, maybe a tingle going up your leg, just like in October?
President Obama apparently protects supporter, fires Inspector General
Let’s say that a President was elected with a majority of votes. Let’s say that this President has a number of supporters, some of whom run organizations that receive money from the U.S. Government. Let’s say that one of those supporters got into trouble with their business, due to an appointee that the Government hired. What do you do?
I’m sure some are thinking this is referring to President Bush, and the massive non-scandal that was created when he fired lawyers that served “at the pleasure of the President”. That would be a mistake.
I am in fact referring to President Obama. The organization is in fact St. HOPE Academy, which runs AmeriCorp, and received hundreds of thousands of Government money. The supporter is Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who runs St. HOPE Academy. The problem and the man who found it was that perhaps millions were misspent and misused as the investigation of IG Gerald Walpin determined.
What is the problem here? Well according to President Obama
Of course IG Walpin found
“The IG found that Johnson, a former all-star point guard for the Phoenix Suns, had used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car.”
In fact Johnson and the nonprofit agreed to repay some $850,000 that were received in Government money. Which sounds like Walpin did his job. He found people wasting our money, and got at least some of it back. The fact that this happened to be an Obama supporter really shouldn’t matter.
But it does matter. Because it appears that doing your job, protecting the money of the public and identifying those responsible, is only useful if they are not President Obama supporters. I mean what else would make you not confident in a person responsible for recovering almost $1 million dollars of taxpayer money?
But here is the part I’m really interested in. How much notice will this get in the major news media? How many commentators, Senators, and watchdog groups will say something? Will this be swept under the rug, or will there be an outcry like for President Bush?
From what I can see this is a blatant political smackdown. It’s the President protecting his people over the protection of the American people. There needs to be more of a reason given than a loss of confidence for someone doing their job.
But will the majorly liberal media step up? Will a Democrat-led Congress raise an eyebrow? Will anyone even pause to question the “annointed one”?
IF there isn’t a big stink on this, then it will be more than sad. It will be a further breakdown of the Government. It will be another example of politics overshadowing the reasons elected officials are in office for.
We deserve a better reason than “loss of confidence”. The President must always be above petty acts of favoritism. People doing their jobs well should be commended and promoted, not fired. If the news media fails to question this, we need to wonder what will they ever question. And how many Rights will we lose by that time?
David Letterman, Judge Sotomayor, Speaker Pelosi - all examples of liberal bias
You know, I find it interesting how liberals get away with outrageous comments. The media just ignores any comment by a liberal entertainer/celebrity/commentator/politician, no matter how insulting or rude. But dare a Conservative or Republican say an even questionable remark – well the floodgates just get sent wide open.
Obviously there are the remarks of Judge Sotomayor. Every Liberal and Democrat in politics has defended her now famous quote. A quote that virtually any man, especially a White man, would likely lose their career over. But Judge Sotomayor is a Liberal, somewhat activist, Latina Democrat Judge. Which means that no matter how racially biased her words, she can keep her seat on the bench if not get a promotion to the highest Court in the nation.
There are the consistent words of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Her most recent debacle being her questionable knowledge, or lack thereof, about waterboarding and torture of terrorists. She has gone from absolute statements that she is against these acts, to denials of being informed and allowing them, to outright claims of being lied to by the Government.
Throughout this window into the poll watching, opportunistic view of Speaker Pelosi we have seen time and again proof that she knew of waterboarding for YEARS. That she, if not directly approved, implicitly condoned the enhanced interrogation techniques. That she never once, from several years ago right up to this moment as I write this, has filed a complaint or memo to hold any Government agency responsible for misinforming her and thus the public. Yet she has wasted no time to publicly make such claims, defending her position and power.
Not a single Democrat chided her. Not a single media publication (that has any liberal or Democrat leanings) took her to task for her faulty memory, inability to act decisively, and her actions that seem more akin to pandering and a popularity race on American Idol than the actions of a Speaker of the House.
And the most recent is of course David Letterman. Without a blink of an eye, Letterman insulted minors and women. He degraded a young woman on national television, and in doing so insulted working mothers across the nation as well. Yet I have not noted a liberal backlash.
His response to this was an unsympathetic apology. Which was turned into yet another round of bashing women and added insults to yet another profession. All of this, because he does not like the political ideals of one woman.
Yet I have not heard about N.O.W. or any other women’s rights group insisting on a boycott of the Letterman show. I have not heard demands for a sincere apology. I have not seen the blogs eviscerating Letterman’s actions. In general (as I believe there must be some criticism occurring in the liberal media somewhere) the media, like Democrats, have turned their heads as if they never heard about this.
But imagine a Conservative saying these kinds of things about First Lady Michelle Obama. Or perhaps the Obama children. Do you think that the media would be silent? Do you think that Democrats would act as if it never happened?
And that’s the problem. The Liberal Democrat mantra has become
“You can say anything… As long as we agree with it.”
That’s not freedom. That’s not a free society. That’s an authoritative stance, which seeks to wipe out or minimize any view except what is approved. That’s 1984, it’s China, it’s UN-American.
David Letterman, like Judge Sotomayor and Speaker Pelosi, has the Right to say what he wishes. With the limitations we place on all celebrities, politicians, and entertainers as a matter of decorum. If he wants to spend his time creating a McCarthy-esque list of Conservatives and Republicans that he dislikes, he can do so. If he wants to debate politics and promote a specific liberal Democrat view, more power to him.
But only a fool and a weak coward, in my opinion, chooses to attack minors. Especially when that child and/or young adult is not in public life and has never once said so much as boo to or about Letterman in public. I find it to be no different than a man who abuses a woman, because his warped view of life says that this is ok. It’s the same kind of action that those that abuse children do. It’s ok, because Letterman is more popular, has more political support, and the media will absolve his bad behavior. That’s a bitter and twisted view.
Suffice to say that if the comments of Letterman, or any of the others I have mentioned, cannot be said by ANY Conservative, Republican, Man, Woman, Race, Religion, and so on without instant and massive criticism, Liberal Democrats should not be summarily excused either. They are no better, nor more saintly or correct than anyone else.
David Letterman should be ashamed. House Speaker Pelosi should be investigated and castigated. Judge Sotomayor should never be approved for the Supreme Court. If they all were treated by the media the same as non-liberals and non-Democrats, there would be no issue. But they aren’t, and the repercussions of this biased favoritism will affect our politics, entertainment, and Rights for years to come.
Will there ever be justice for Oscar Grant?
This is a repost from Black Entertainment USA, where I have been covering the Oscar Grant III murder case since January 2009.
Oh my god. Could it actually be that Justice will be served in a case where a police officer shot, and killed, and unarmed young Black male?
The end of the preliminary trial for ex-BART officer Johannes Mehserle has ended in Oakland, still without the media coverage that such a case deserves to have. This is especially true given the fact that video evidence exists for this case from multiple sources. Add to that the blatant and extreme nature of a police cover-up. Then finally include an astounding revelation from one of the key officers involved with the murder of Oscar Grant
The facts of this case are so blatant that the Judge presiding over the prelim made the following statement after ruling to allow this case to go forward to trial
Yes, it’s so obvious that a Judge was willing to say that publicly. Of course this will likely cause the trial to be moved. And I’m willing to bet that the new location for the trial will be the equivalent of Simi Valley. And we all know how impartial that kind of jury pool can be.
Since I first learned of this case in January 2009, days after the murder of Grant, I have seen no reason to doubt the guilt of Mehserle. I have followed this case while the major news media has actively ignored it at every turn. I have questioned what has been done to cover-up the situation, and speculate about the cause of news media disintrest.
So far we have learned that ex-officer Mehserle initially excused his murder of Grant with a claim of an unseen, non-existent gun. Later, after time with a new lawyer and the quick cover story speculated by the Oakland Police Chief, the story became the accidental use of deadly force.
We have learned that every officer involved has (in my opinion) perjured themselves with lies of chaos and impending doom. Accusations of angry mobs rushing forward, attacks against officers, and resisting arrest have all been soundly debunked by witnesses and multiple videos of the event.
How this case has not been subject to a quick plea bargain leads me to one thought. Mehserle believes he can get off scot free.
This is even more likely if the venue is moved. It is backed up by precedence of officers across the nation being absolved of the murders of, and/or violence against, unarmed, innocent, young Black males. It is supported by a news media that has tried to actively maintain doubt, in the most of the few times the case has ever been mentioned. It is reinforced with the persistence of criminals covering their crimes with accusation of imaginary Black assailants that are readily accepted as fact by the media and most of the nation (most recently by a Pennsylvanian woman who was in Disney at the time).
That is gut-wrenching sickening. That a defendant can be guilty as sin, with more than ample proof, and the odds of gaining justice or even a semblance of punishment are maybe 60 - 40 against is unacceptable in the least. And I still get people advocating the innocence of Mehserle. I still have people that wonder and debate why African Americans across the nation fear and shun police officers. I still hear people deny the imbalance of the legal system and misrepresentation of Justice in America.
In my opinion, Mehserle is guilty of murder. Yet I still cannot be assured that he will be convicted of this obvious and insanely vicious crime. Because in the end, it was just another young innocent defenseless Black male. And in America that is the same as a deadly weapon in the hands of Osama Bin Laden. Lady Justice is weeping.
Gambling - New York State’s answer to fiscal irresponsibility
There are a few things you can always count on in life as I have observed. The Government always gets bigger over time. People always drink when the economy is good, and 2x as much when it is bad. And any sales pitch offering free money will make the salesman rich.
Taking the last thought as an example, I am reminded of a conversation with a colleague. In New York State there are several racinos. These are horse racing tracks that also offer other betting opportunities. Currently you can go to one, say Tioga Downs, and bet on horse races, video poker, lotteries, and video slots. Card games are not allowed, yet.
It’s not Las Vegas. You really can’t even compare it to Atlantic City. It’s just slightly better than a bingo hall. But these racinos get filled daily. Because the lure of free money is addictive. This is why more and more States are licensing these venues each year.
The concept is that this is not hardcore gambling. It’s recreational. It’s a fun pastime. Except they are in the business of free money. And the Government gets a huge slice of the profits. Just like Lotto.
Any time you can see a huge payout on any bet, you can be assured you have a better chance of being struck by lightning than winning. A $200 million lottery prize means that the state will likely clear $400 million in bets. Even if a dozen people do win, each of them are more likely to have been struck by lightning – even if they each had a dozen tickets each. Thus the tens of thousands of people, if not more, are doing only 1 thing – making the lottery rich. Honestly the best bet is always a single lottery for a buck.
But the State Government knows a good thing when it has it. Lotto worked wonders. Then came the racinos (in an attempt to gains some of the money that was being lost to the Indian casinos) with video gambling. But that was when the economy was decent.
Right now New York State is in such dire need that a purchase of soda is going to have multiple taxes added to it. If the State could tax breathing and get away with it, I think they would try it. Because the wanton spending of the likes of Gov. Patterson and those before him are finally catching up with them. They have so embraced the “tax the rich” concept that either the rich don’t exist as they did, or they have moved to a State with far more fair tax codes.
Thus the racinos are now about to get a new trick pony. Video gaming tables, likely followed by actual card games. Which to me spells the death knell for the State budget. It is an act of desperation. It is preying upon the foolish and the sick (gambling addicts) in the hope of continuing on the current path of irresponsibility.
The addition of video gaming tables is expected to add some $150 million to State revenues. These tables are a neat loophole in current laws by the way. It is a large touchscreen table. You can sit at the table and play poker, electronically and without a dealer, as if it were video poker. Except you are actually playing against other people. But since the deck and dealer are electronic this bypasses the laws that would restrict these games.
Not that a few laws matter. Not in the face of a budget deficit similar to that of California. Thus the push for real card tables is underway. Expect that to change in 2010.
The net effect is that the State is acting like a crack dealer. They are pushing an addiction for money. An addiction that inevitably destroys the addicts. Thus the only way to keep up this ponzi-like scheme is to always get more people hooked.
Look I like gambling like everyone else. I’ll play poker with the guys (and a few ladies too). I’ll buy a Lotto ticket for a buck on occasion. I love to play craps at the casinos. But moderation and the lack of opportunity are critical. As is my understanding that the odds are rarely ever better than my chance of being struck by a meteorite.
Most people don’t understand how outrageously bad the odds are against winning any bet made. They have even less of a concept of this when the State Government is behind the bet. The State is supposed to help and protect the citizens, thus implying a fairness and opportunity that does not exist. It’s the same reason some people will spend $100 or more on Lotto, thinking they have increased their odds substantially – which in fact has made almost no realist effect.
I don’t like it when a State is acting more like a drug dealer than a proponent of the people. Especially when the motivating factor is the idiocy of the politicians in charge. Video gaming tables are a bad idea. It’s the worst substitute for efficient policies and fiscal responsibility. They are a suckers bet, and are a means to feed the State’s habit (spending money like an alcoholic drinks) while violating the public trust.
6 months of President Obama - what do we have to show?
On May 27th, President Obama stated that his $787 billion stimulus plan “saved or created” 150,000 jobs. On that same day, the expectations of a GM bankruptcy ensured that at least 20,000 jobs would be lost imminently. Which said nothing of the at least 50,000 jobs that were lost immediately due to the Chrylser bankruptcy. Since February over 1.6 million jobs have been conservatively lost, over $50 billion dollars of borrowed public money has been spent only to be lost in bankruptcy, and the economy has failed to improve.
In fact, the number of mortgages in bad standing (late at least 1 month) has grown to 12%, the highest level yet. At least 50% of all subprime mortgages are late at this moment. And unemployment rates are expected to continue to grow until mid-2010 – by the conservative estimates.
Which all stands in the face of the continued statements of the White House that 600,000 jobs will be “created or saved” this summer. Numbers that are impossible to verify, and like the 150,000 quote balk in the face of reality.
Still, there is the fact that a mere $44 billion of the $787 billion that the public is paying interest on has been spent so far. Which questions why so much money, that was promised as necessary and immediate, was allocated yet remains unused. It implies that the need was both not immediate and not as enormous as was done. Or in more crude terms, the White House and the Democrat-led Congress lied to the public.
But why was this done? What might be behind all this action for inaction? Well perhaps the answer can be found in the other things the Obama Administration has done, with the Democrat-led Congress acting as a cheerleading squad at every turn.
Congress passed a $410 billion spending bill to keep the Government running. That bill included specific legislation to guarantee the bonuses of AIG executives as they stood pre-bailout. The bonus packages could have been rewritten, but instead were actively protected by Senator Chris Dodd. Which gave Congress the following:
- A chance to blame Wall Street for excessive pay
- A chance to enact retro-active laws that effectively stole the legally paid executives. This violated contract law, and the Constitution.
- A chance to give the Secretary of the Treasury the power to absorb ANY company deemed significant to the economy. Significant was never defined.
- A chance for the Treasury to dictate the salary of private business employees, whether or not the company involved was deemed significant as abovementioned.
- A chance to create several “czar” positions. These positions enable the Government to be directly involved, and controlling, the actions of private businesses.
So far, President Obama has taken control of more businesses than he has ever worked at in his life. So far the Government has more control over industries than President Obama has degrees. And this is all while President Obama promises that he does not want Government in the private sector.
I take the protests of President Obama much like he kept his promise about removing 100% of all earmarks. He passed the $410 billion spending bill (which like the stimulus is not included in his $3.5 trillion budget) with 9,000 earmarks. He stated that he would work on the earmarks he promised to remove at some point in the future. Which is when I will believe that the actions of the Obama Administration and Congress are not well thought out plans that are socializing the country.
6 months into the Presidency and we have seen massive changes to the legal system, our foundation of law, the concept and ability to enact private business, and the size of an ever-growing Government. In the near future we will look forward to a Supreme Court Justice that epitomizes racial bias, spending millions to try detainees from Gitmo, hundreds of thousands on jailing said detainees, increased food costs as the ethanol glut increases almost exponentially, inflation, and a nuclear Iran. Oh, I left out the fact that North Korea is more than ready to resume a 50 year old war.
I just wonder how many people who heard President Obama promise change thought this would be the result? But just wait. There is still another 3 ½ years to go. Imagine what will change next.
Liberals blame Bill O’Reilly for Tiller death
Bill O’Reilly. The name alone is enough to send some liberals screaming. Though just as often the same liberals have never heard a word the man actually has said. The most recent outbreak of liberal fever has come in the form of the death of Dr. George Tiller.
Dr. George Tiller is noted for having been one of 3 late-term abortion doctors in the entire U.S. And so as to not to confuse the question, late term means after 21 weeks - or the period of time in which virtually everyone agrees is viable for the child. However you feel about that, Dr. Tiller did this for years and reaped huge profits for it.
Bill O’Reilly was one of a large number of people that felt this type of abortion, at least, was inhumane. The fact that these fetuses could survive outside the womb made this act akin to murder in many of their eyes. There is no question that this form of abortion is the most debated, and the least common in the nation.
Dr. Tiller was killed on Sunday, in his place of worship. The killer is a maniacal fanatic. That is how I define anyone who would kill another with the only justification being their warped understanding of their religion. There is little difference in this killer’s reasoning, and that of Al Quida when they killed thousands on 9/11.
Bill O’Reilly had made Dr. Tiller the subject of his focus 29 times over 3 years. Not once in that time did he advocate violence against the man. Not once did he encourage harm against Tiller. While O’Reilly disliked the practice of the doctor, he never gave impetus for anything but the end of his ability to continue these late-term abortions.
But if you look across the major media, and definitely across the majority of the internet, you will find no end to those blaming O’Reilly and Fox news for this murder. Which is blatantly stupid.
A fanatic is not motivated by television, they follow their warped beliefs. Which is besides the fact that there was no motivation from television. Bill O’Reilly is not a religious leader. Dr. Tiller was known for years because of his profession among anti-abortion fanatics and organizations. Bill O’Reilly did not suddenly catapult him to fame.
This idiocy among the liberal media is way over the top. It is beyond reason. But when has that ever stopped them?
So the extreme liberals are hopping mad. About something only a lunatic can justify. And connections that do not exist are being drawn. Often by people that have never watched a single O’Reilly Factor telecast. Does that not sound like fools chasing greater fools?
No matter how you feel about abortion, murder is not the answer. In fact the very religion many of these fanatics advocate insists on avoiding murder. But to blame this on a person, or group, that merely voices an opinion is just as wrong in my opinion. For some it’s a cheap attempt at gaining fame and ratings.
I’m not sure what is more sick. The motivations of the killer, or the grandstanding and attempt to profit of some in the media like Olbermann.
Either way, the ultimate result is the same. A man was murdered for no reason. Another man is being blamed for it. And liberals are mad.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor - the wrong woman for the Supreme Court
Without doubt, I know that this will piss off many fellow Hispanics and Latinos, but it has to be said. Judge Sonia Sotomayor should not become a Supreme Court Justice.
It’s really simple. The reason is blatant and hated by most liberals and Democrats. But we are speaking about the Law, and the ultimate judicial court. Sometimes the simple things are the most important.
Judge Sotomayor stated, as has been quoted often,
That was in 2001, and part of a 4000 word comment. But it is these 32 words that are vital. Because if a Conservative, a Republican, a White male, or god forbid, all of the above made this same statement any hope of remaining a judge would evaporate – to say nothing of losing the Supreme Court.
That is the honest truth. ‘A wise White Man, with the richness of his experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina Woman who hasn’t lived that life’, is enough of a statement to inflame every Liberal, Democrat, and Hispanic/Latino in the nation. The person uttering that essentially same statement would be called a racist, a bigot, and a disgrace to the legal profession. Every newspaper with even the least liberal bent would be citing this on the front page of the newspaper. Pundits would have nothing else to speak about for a week or more.
So why is it any different for a Latina woman? Especially when we are talking about the Law which is not based on inference but empirical standards. Why is it different when the basis of acceptance is supposed to be the same for every member of the highest court in the nation?
I do not agree with discrimination, in either direction. I do not agree with preferential treatment for anyone. I do not question the abilities of Sotomayor, her upbringing, or her qualifications. There are judges with better resumes, and others with worse. Some made it to the Supreme Court, most have not.
But there is not a single Supreme Court Justice I am aware of that has ever uttered even close to this kind of statement. Because the standard of acceptance will not allow it. Thus Judge Sotomayor should not break that standard.
There are many judges that are qualified, Latino/a, and have never made such a statement. Some might even be female. Why not select them? Because having a Justice that implies racial bias of any degree, further destroys the already broken legal system. And that could be a break beyond repair.
A Supreme Court Justice should be beyond reproach, or as close to it as is possible. There should never be the hint of racial or any other bias. Judge Sotomayor does not pass this hurdle.
Liberals will scream, as if that will nullify the truth of what I have said. Some will curse my name. Others will hate that I am blocking a first for the Court. But I stand by this simple reasoning. Which is no different than what I said about President Obama during the election.
“It’s not enough for a President to be Black. It must be the right man for the position, and if they happen to be Black as well, then it’s a bonus. Because the Office is more important than a historical record.”
I believe that. I said it often through the election cycle. I believe and say it now about the Supreme Court. If the next Justice must be Hispanic, if they must be a woman, then they had better be the right Hispanic woman. Because the wrong one is too much of a danger to be allowed to have the position.
President Obama - king of the auto industry
Well it has happened. It only took $50 billion dollars and 7 months. Yes I mean the bankruptcy of General Motors.
When I spoke about the auto industry bailouts in 2008 (November to be exact) I stated
The fact is that the U.S. automakers need to fail. Let several go bankrupt. It won’t be the end of the world. It will actually be the best thing that could happen.”
Well since that time, the Government has partially funded the auto companies. Just enough to ensure that the Governement owns significant, if not primary, ownership in these companies. Because President Obama does not want to run a car company.
Like hell he doesn’t.
In November 2008, the Obama Administration and the Democrat-led Congress were well into their plans to economically restructure the Government. It is a fact that President Obama stepped forward and ensured the direction that the Congress would take on this issue and most all policy. It was the first time that a President-elect was so involved BEFORE they had taken the oath. The reason why now becomes apparent.
IF the Government had no intention of owning the car industry, we would have given them all the money they asked for. A mere $50 billion dollars at the time meant nothing after spending a trillion dollars in a year. It meant almost nothing when 2 months later the Government spent $1.2 trillion dollars more. But instead Congress postured as if they were being responsible, and gave the auto industry just enough money to ensure failure.
That enabled a “car czar” to be put in place. It created the opportunity for President Obama to structure Government ownership of the auto makers. It gave President Obama the ability to reject restructuring plans, fire private business leaders, initiate guidelines of Government approval of salaries, and dictate what can and cannot be made. Which leads us to today.
With the failure of GM, we now have Government Motors. A company owned 70% by the Government, which will ‘better manage the ownership stake on behalf of the American people’. Right. Because the Government is so smart it can’t even run a checkbook in my lifetime, even though I do it every month.
Right now, tens of thousands of employees are being fired (so much for last week’s announcement that the Obama Administration has saved or created 150,000 jobs since Febrary). Several million IRA and 401K accounts have become worthless, removing the retirement options of those that need the money. Unemployment will be even higher in the coming months, and the recession will continue longer.
But, in wonderful polispeak, the Democrats will claim that more jobs were saved because of the stimulus plan and the bailouts. The future of the car industry will be more green. And one day, in the undetermined future under plans that have yet to be even considered, the “investments” in GM and Chrysler will turn a profit (not including the interest on the money borrowed to make the investment) and that will be given back to the public. Or it will be used by the Government for programs that will help us all (or so we will be told), because the Government is smarter than us as individual citizens.
The reality is that we will never see a dime of this money. Just in the same way that the Government has ensured that banks can’t repay the bailout funds they gave received. And those that just lost their investments are out of luck, while banks and high–end investors are covered. And the Government has now politicized one of the largest industries tied to GDP.
Think about it. The Government will mandate green cars. Not that there is a consensus on what type of green car is best, or most feasible. The Government will pick one and GM will make it. Thus some other country will likely figure out a better idea (like ethanol from sawgrass instead of food staple corn), and the GM cars will not sell.
Another point is that since politicians are now in charge, costs will go up. No elected official wants to have their constituents get fired because of cost over-runs. IE Senator whomever will ensure that a plant in his/her state will stay open even if it is the least cost effective, because they want to be re-elected. Another Representative will release a bill (or earmark) mandating that parts are made and/or assembled in their State, for the same reason, regardless of the higher cost or lower workmanship.
Add to this the fact that the new GM employees are now Government workers. The last time you were at the Post Office, how involved or efficient were the workers there? That’s the new GM employees to come.
But President Obama does not want to run a car company. No, he just ensured that the Government would run the auto industry. And the banking industry. Plus the potential to enter the newspapers as well – if rumors of bailouts for that industry come true too.
There isn’t a single positive in the news of a GM bankruptcy. Not now or in the future. The stock market will react as was expected, because there was plenty of forewarning and time to absorb the news. In addition, most of the major investors are protected. But for the average citizen, this is the worst outcome we could have witnessed.
The polispeak will rage for days. This will be spun as if it were manna from heaven. But the fact is that this could have happened 7 months ago, it could have not cost over $65 biullion dollars of our money, and the Government that can’t run a single Department efficiently in my lifetime would not have been involved.
Yet, think of this. We have just started the 6th month of an Obama Administration. Aren’t you just anticipating what America will look like, and function as, by the end of 3 ½ more years?
President Obama polispeak about 150,000 jobs
I love the way the Government, and by that I mean the Obama Administration, throws numbers at the public without any regard for accuracy or accountability. Let’s look at the claim by the Obama Administration that the $787 billion stimulus package has already created or saved 150,000 jobs.
First of all that’s just complete polispeak. There isn’t a solid fact in that statement beyond the fact that the Government is spending $787 billion. And the Government knows it.
The Government does not have any data on a single job saved. In fact there is no system in existence ever to determine that a job has been saved. You could just as easily have stated that the sun rose yesterday and that saved millions of jobs. The means of proof is exactly the same, because I said so.
As for jobs created, well that is just as dubious a statement. The Obama Administration may like the idea of being a part of private business, but so far it is not a part of every company out there. Thus it has no idea how many jobs have been directly created from the money allocated so far. In fact the Government has no idea what projects have been started, or how wisely the money given to States has been spent.
According to one source, a grand total of 50 jobs have been created directly from the stimulus package in New York State, with a whopping 1 in Massachusetts. These are the confirmed reports to date. So much for just saying so.
Of course one indication of jobs being created or saved would be the unemployment numbers. They come out each month and directly reflect jobs lost. In February, when the colossal waste of money was approved by the Democrat-led Congress, there were 133,682,000 unemployed. At the end of March the number stood at 133,019,000. That’s a net loss of 663,000. According to my own interpretation of the Dept of Labor numbers some 1,309,000 people lost their jobs since the stimulus bill was passed – from February thru April.
The official numbers from Labor on May won’t be out for another 2 weeks, but for the Obama Administration and Democrats to be correct a net of no less than 813,000 jobs must be noted as gained. That will show a net gain as President Obama states (though that will still be short on the data I directly collected, but I’m giving the benefit of doubt that my math was wrong). Otherwise it means that no jobs were net created and the stimulus package is a failure that is losing jobs – which I will prove to be true.
Of course the Obama Administration has an answer for that
“It doesn’t mean that employment has risen by 150,000,” Thomas E. Gavin of the White House budget office said in an e-mail. “Rather, it means that employment is 150,000 jobs better than it otherwise would have been.”
Don’t you feel better now? Feel more secure in your job? Well here is that proof I mentioned.
Keep in mind that since the bonfire otherwise known as a stimulus plan passed, Chrysler has declared bankruptcy. And along with it went $10 billion, and more than 60,000 jobs (just from the over 1800 dealerships that were closed nationwide, averaging 35 people per dealership conservatively). The Obama stimulus didn’t save a single one. In fact it can be argued that the Obama Administration helped to force Chrysler into bankruptcy.
Let’s not forget that GM is about to follow suit. That will have wasted some $15 billion and will cause another likely tens of thousands of job losses. Which will INCREASE the unemployment of the nation. If the GM bankruptcy cost only a similar number of job losses that’s over 120,000 jobs lost (just from car dealerships alone). Where exactly did the job increases, or saved jobs, President Obama quotes come from? If you know, I think the White House Budget office would like to know.
But to admit these facts is hardly politically advantageous. It will not help guarantee the further plans of wanton spending that President Obama and the Democrats want. It might even cost the President more of his slowly eroding popularity.
Once again Democrats have proven that a smile, polispeak, and a bunch of numbers pulled out of thin air are far more valuable than asking a politician to do the job they were elected to.
BART officers protect the Blue Wall, insult justice, at Mehserle hearing
The hearing for ex-officer Mehserle continued today with more of the expected. Police officers are holding up the Blue Wall, and the major news media is backing them up to an extent. Justice continues to look far away.
In the latest insult, officer Marysol Domenici under cross-examination by Deputy District Attorney David Stein, described a scene of
However, surveillance video of the platform shows only 2-3 people comi