The Short History of Money in Politics

Posted on October 20, 2014. Filed under: Politics | Tags: , |

I recently posted a photo of Clint Eastwood on my Facebook page that says “I believe in limited government. I believe in fiscal responsibility and all those things that maybe Republicans used to believe in, but don’t anymore”.

It’s a sentiment that I deeply believe in.

What was interesting was that a friend of mine, who is a Democrat, commented that “Republicans will get their party back when they pry it from the cold, dead hands of the Tea Party and the oligarchs”.

Ah, yes. The two favorite boogeymen of the Democrat Party.

Honestly, they sound like a broken record.

“Tea Party!”

“Koch brothers!”

The latest round of America bashing revolves around our “democracy” actually being an “oligarchy”, specifically, the GOP being an oligarchy, funded single handedly by the Koch brothers. Or is that double handedly?

Before I go any further, let’s define what an oligarchy is.

According to, oligarchy means:

noun, plural oligarchies.
  1. a form of government in which all power is vested in few persons or in a dominant class or clique; government by the few.
  2. a state or organization so ruled.
  3. the persons or class so ruling.

It surprises me that journalists have just realized that our form of government, our “democracy”, is in reality, an oligarchy, but not that it has been one all along. We change the clowns every now and again, but the agenda and the results stay the same. The same small group of people stay in charge.

If the American system were based on “democracy”, then we, the American people, would have a say in every single decision the government makes; but we don’t.

We elect representatives and give them the power to make laws to send to the president for approval.

Is that not an oligarchy by definition?

Honestly, I think my friend meant plutocrats, but oligarch has such a, well, Republican ring to it!

Plutocrat: A member of a plutocracy.

noun, plural plutocracies.
  1. the rule or power of wealth or of the wealthy.
  2. a government or state in which the wealthy class rules.
  3. a class or group ruling, or exercising power or influence,by virtue of its wealth.

One of the disparaging claims made against Mitt Romney was that he was a plutocrat, with a net worth a paltry sum of $250 million dollars.

Compare this to “philanthropist” Bill Gates who is worth a mere $82 billion.

Or how about major Democrat donor Tom Steyer?

$1.62 billion.

The Koch brothers? $40 billion combined. That’s about $20 billion each.

Democrat Warren Buffet? $44 billion

Populist Democrat Elizabeth Warren: $14.5 million (2011)

President Barack Obama: $12.2 million. (As an aside, this figure came from, which describes Obama as a “POLITICIAN, LAWYER, WRITER, AUTHOR, LAW PROFESSOR, ACTOR” . That last one certainly explains a lot.)

Secretary of State John Kerry: $750 million.

Average net worth of the House of Representatives: $1 million (7 out of the 10 richest representatives are Democrats)

Average net worth of the US Senate: $13 million.

Finally, George Soros: $23 billion.

This nation has a long history of not just oligarchs, but plutocrats as well, only they were called aristocrats back in the day.

Let’s jump back to the Founding Fathers.

The men who founded this nation were landowners, and some were slaveholders. Two such examples:

George Washington was worth $525 million (about $13 billion by today’s standards).

James Madison: $101 million ($2.5 billion).

Thomas Jefferson (3rd President): $212 million ($5.3 billion).

According to Forbes Magazine, John Hancock was worth $19.3 billion, and Benjamin Franklin was worth $10.3 billion (today’s dollars).

Are you starting to sense a pattern?

John Adams: $19 million ($475 million)

James Monroe: $27 million.

In order to vote in the late 1700’s, one had to be a white, male landowner at least 21. This did not begin to change until around 1828, when the states began to change their voting laws.

Andrew Jackson: $119 million

Andrew Jackson (the 5th president) was among the first to start taking donations for his political campaign. He was also one of the first to organize a staff to facilitate the collection of donations, and to get his message out to the people.

Abraham Lincoln largely financed his own campaign, but he did take donations. Even with these donations, the campaign nearly bankrupted him.

Campaign donations began to grow and become more commonplace after the American Civil War. wealthy donors realized that they could get politicians to owe them favors (if they were elected) if the candidate were elected. Having a politician in office who owed you favors would definitely grease the skids for any projects the donor may have coming up.

However, the first campaign finance law also appeared after the Civil War: The Navy Appropriations bill of 1867 prohibited government workers from soliciting donations from Navy dock workers.

At the turn of the 20th Century, corporations began to make donations as well.

But here is where very staunch Republicans tend to get upset and say that people like me are trying to rewrite history.

The Progressive Movement of the 20th Century came about because of concerns that there was too much money in politics, that lawmakers were beholden to the rich and the corporations. And the Progressives were largely Republicans. The abolition of slavery was a Progressive cause (but they did not call themselves Progressives). Abraham Lincoln, much to the chagrin and denials of Republicans, was a Progressive.

In 1905, Republican Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican Progressive, proposed a law that would outlaw all corporate contributions.  This was, of course, met with stiff resistance from Congress, and never passed.

There have been various attempts to curtail campaign financing, the most recent being the McCain-Feingold Act of 2002. However, any law passed by Congress always has unintended consequences. McCain-Feingold has effectively cut the legs out from under the two major parties, but it has hamstrung the smaller parties. Was that the intention?

Funding has been diverted from the parties, who had to disclose this information, to outside SuperPACs, who don’t have to disclose anything. Transparency? McCain-Feingold has made that a thing of the past.

Now the rich and super-rich can do their thing without the spotlight on them.

Because we have amended the Constitution to move from Senators assigned by the State legislatures to direct election by the people, members of the Senate are now in the hooks of the wealthy, depending on them for campaign funds. I think worries about corruption, which was supposedly the driving force behind the XVIIth Amendment, is less of an issue than the wealthy owning the Senate.

Is there anything that can be done? Not without resistance from the wealthy.

Both parties owe their souls to the rich. Both try to hide it, but the Democrats are far more successful at it than the Republicans. The Dems are very skilled at the shell game, convincing people how the Republicans are owned by the wealthy while being able to obfuscate their own culpability.

No law will ever be able to stop the wealthy or corporations from attempting to buy politicians. If you outlaw SuperPACs, then you are assaulting free speech. Even though the likes of Elizabeth Warren say that corporations are not people, corporations are, in fact, comprised of people trying to make money. They have a life cycle, just like humans, and they will still find a way to contribute money to politicians who they believe can help further their businesses..

One has to ask which is worse, corporate contributions that are disclosed by the political parties, or contributions that are hidden away from the prying eyes of the public.

Before I close this out, let’s take a look at a few more presidents.

Very few presidents had a net worth of less than a million:

  1. James Buchanan
  2. Abraham Lincoln
  3. Andrew Johnson
  4. Ulysses S. Grant
  5. James A. Garfield
  6. Chester A. Arthur
  7. Woodrow Wilson
  8. Calvin Coolidge
  9. Harry S. Truman

Almost one quarter of US Grant’s funding came from a single donor.

John F. Kennedy was the first billionaire president.

Every president, other than the 9 listed, were worth $1 million or more.

Politics is a game for the wealthy. A Game of Thrones if you will.

Your children can grow up to become President of the United States.

As long as they belong to a family of means.



Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Two Party Tyranny

Posted on May 16, 2014. Filed under: Politics | Tags: |

It is midterm election time. For those not paying attention, it is primary time. Time for the two party system to do its worst, and select two candidates for us to choose from, one being an incumbent.

Now that I have gone back to work, I have the luxury of listening to local talk radio host Lars Larson. Sometimes he is hysterical in his beliefs, but he is fairly knowledgeable.

Since it is primary season here in Oregon, the major race is to see who the candidate to go up against incumbent US Senator Jeff Merkley is heating up. Currently, there are at least five candidates running for that slot. One of them called into Lars’ show this afternoon and lamented that he and two others were not invited to the debate. Lars’ attitude was that the bottom three candidates were only going to garner about 5% of the vote between them, so why should they be invited?

What it shows is that if you don’t have a lot of money in your war chest to advertise yourself, you get written off by the Establishment. The funny thing is that Lars kind of considers himself a Tea Party guy. The political parties have become an entrenched, invitation only, exclusive club. If you are on the outside, you aren’t invited to their party.

The Republicrats have gone to great pains to ensure their power, and anyone seeking to break that monopoly of power is shunned.

About 32% of the country are registered Republicans, while about 34% are registered Democrats, from the last numbers I’ve seen. That means that a full third of voters in this country are not adequately represented in the government. And the two parties like it that way.

The two parties control everything from election laws to campaign finance. Ever wonder why campaign finance laws never stick or term limits never gets off the ground?

I mean, it has been suggested that the 22nd amendment, presidential term limits, be repealed so that a president could do like FDR and run until they die. Currently, that’s how it works for more than a few in Congress.

The commission that runs the presidential debates has locked everyone else out of the process. They decide who is invited, the location of the debate, the format, the questions and the moderators. Socialists, communists and libertarians need not apply. They can go hang out in the designated “First Amendment Zone” if they want to be heard, far away so no one else can hear them, either.

These people have a right to be heard, regardless of if they will garner a small percentage of the vote or not. It would give them exposure, and that is exactly what the two party’s fear. A different voice exposing their hypocrisy. I may not agree with what they have to say, but they are being suppressed by the Washington Establishment Elite. The unsuccessful Senate run this year could translate into a successful State Senate run the next time, and the beginnings of a movement as this person may build a following, if they do the right thing.

Of course, there are also those who say that if there were more than two parties, Congress would break down into sectionalism as parties form in different regions. What would be wrong with representatives from different parts of the country forming political parties that looked out for the interests of the region in which they live? God forbid that representatives from Oregon would look out for the interests of (*gasp*) Oregon!

So, we should fear more than three parties because it might break down into sectionalism? So, how did the two party system fare in the run up to the American Civil War? How much sectionalism existed then?

The US Constitution can only attempt to guide and protect us from the government, but in the end, it is still only a piece of paper. The Constitution, however, cannot protect us from the political parties.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Congress Uses Their Power to Enrich Themselves

Posted on October 22, 2013. Filed under: Government, Politics | Tags: , , , |

Current members of the United States House of ...

US Representative Grace Napolitano (D- CA) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The CBS news magazine, 60 Minutes, ran a piece this last weekend that should have every American outraged. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Communists, and Socialists alike should be seething over the fact that Congress, as a whole, is bilking and fleecing taxpayers and campaign contributors alike for their own personal gain.

The government has become the playground of the rich, and those people often leave richer than they were when they started.

It’s not because of the paycheck. It isn’t because of books they’ve written, or the high profile committees they sit on.

It’s because of a thing called Leadership PACs.

Leadership PACs are political action committees that are established by both current and former members of Congress. With these PACs, they can accept money from businesses, individuals, and other PACs. They use this money to pay for travel expenses, re-election campaigns (their own, or other candidates), consultants and polling.

Everything seems to be on the up and up, right?

According to CBS, Congressional members also use that money to entertain, maybe some corporate bigwig, or a potential contributor, all paid for with this money.

These PACs came about after the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, and, according to CBS, Congressional leadership quietly created loopholes in the law to allow the establishment of Leadership PACs, because, again according to CBS, they are not “technically” campaign funds.

Nearly every Congressperson has one, and most of the money comes from lobbyists and special interest groups.

Back in the day, John Edwards used his PAC to pay his mistress over $100,000 to make a campaign video.

Republican Congressman Ander Crenshaw of Florida used his to fly bigwig contributors from the defense industry to California’s wine country for a tour.

Democrat Congressman Robert Andrews of New Jersey used his to fly his family to Scotland for the wedding of a friend he claimed he was thinking about hiring as a consultant. He is now under investigation. He claims the rules should be clearer as to what they can and can’t be used for, but CBS found that while almost every member of Congress pays lip service to that idea, no one lifts a finger to change it.

In fact, the CBS story goes on to say that members of Congress will hang on to these PACs, even after they have left office, for personal use, as long as they can make it look like a political expense, and just in case they decide to become lobbyists.

That’s right, about half of all Congresspeople who leave become lobbyists.

Even further, anti-nepotism laws prevent the hiring of family members on the official staff, but they can be hired on to the campaign staff, and be overpaid. This moves money from the PAC to the personal accounts.

Even Tea Party darling Ron Paul has taken advantage of this, hiring 6 members on his campaign payroll.

Senator David Vitter of Louisiana tried to introduce legislation to make it illegal to hire family members on campaign staffs and paying them with PAC money. He has yet to find a co-sponsor.

Democrat Congresswoman Grace Napolitano has made personal loans from her PAC to her campaign.

And charged the campaign 18% interest for the loan. She claims she has not benefitted from it personally, because she still drives a small car and has the same house. According to the LA Times, she made about $132,000 in interest over the 13 years of that loan ($228,000 over 12 years, according to CBS). When asked why she took so long to retire the debt, Napolitano said, “I didn’t need the money.” But she didn’t profit personally from it. She is one of the poorer members of Congress, being worth a maximum of just over $400k in 2011.

But she’s not the only one. CBS said that there have been at least 15 cases of Congresspersons making loans such as this.I agree with Steve Kroft. It isn’t the loan that’s disturbing, it is the exorbitant amount of interest charged.

So, if you are thinking about contributing to a candidate, think twice, because they may be using your contribution to go golfing so they can court a much bigger fish than you.

None of this is illegal, though. They use their power to make law to create loopholes for themselves. If you or I were to do something like this, it would be called fraud. Think about that.

You can see the whole piece here.

But it isn’t just the Leadership PACs. It is that they want the taxpayers to subsidize the healthcare for not just them, but their staffers as well. While members of Congress are our employees, their staffers are not. It should be up to the members of Congress, as their employers, to pay for their staffers health care.

And it doesn’t end there.

“Send me a bill that bans insider trading by members of Congress; I will sign it tomorrow.”  — President Obama, State of the Union, January 24, 2012

On April 4, 2012, Congress passed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act (STOCK Act), and President Obama signed it into law.

The law was supposed to stop members of Congress from making stock and bond trades based on knowledge that they had that the general public did not. It was a form of legal insider trading. The STOCK Act abolished that.

That is, up until this last April, when Congress undid most of the law, restoring their ability (and the ability of the President) to act on nonpublic information. There was little announcement and no fanfare over the new (old) law. Once again, Congress has helped themselves, while leaving us poor slobs working in the mines.It was Republican Eric Cantor who pushed the bill through, using a procedure called Unanimous Consent, sometimes referred to as “deem & pass”. As long as no one present in the chamber objects, the bill is considered to be passed.

If you or I were to make stock trades based on information not available to the general public, we would be thrown in jail for securities fraud. But not so, Congress.

Just because something is legal does not make it right.

People complain that Republicans and Democrats are too often at odds with each other, and nothing gets done in Washington.

Plenty gets done when it impacts them. When the two sides start acting in a bipartisan manner, that’s when we should start to worry.

It is well past time for a 28th Amendment: Congress shall pas no law that applies to them and not the Citizenry, and Congress shall pass no law that applies to the Citizenry and not themselves.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Republicans Cave on Budget Fight

Posted on October 17, 2013. Filed under: Government, Politics | Tags: , |

McConnell meeting with President Barack Obama.

McConnell meeting with President Barack Obama. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

After all the posturing, all the rhetoric and finger pointing, in the end, House Republicans completely caved to Democrat demands and passed a “continuing resolution” (DC speak for a spending bill), giving in completely to Reid and Obama’s demands.

It’s not like they didn’t get anything for their trouble, however.

The Senate agreed on the resolution, and sent it to the House for approval, but there were goodies tucked away inside the bill.

Funds to fix flooded roads in Colorado. Okay, I can see that.

$3 million in appropriation for a civil liberties oversight board. A Civil liberties oversight board?

I guess this is a governmental response to the NSA controversies.

But really, how much can you trust the government to watch the government?

Also included is funds for a one time payment to the widow of the late Senator Lautenburg of New Jersey. The United States government is the only system in the world where the employees get to determine how much they are paid, and their benefits. Congress should not be allowed to raise their pay unless we, the people, approve it. I’ve talked about the “Obamacare exemption” that Congress passed for themselves, requiring that the taxpayer continue to fund not only Congress’ healthcare, but the healthcare of their staffers as well. The law stated that they were not to be subsidized, but they voted themselves an exemption, and I know quite a few people who view it as Congress keeping their current plan. What other employees get to set their own healthcare plan offered by the employer?

Here’s the kicker. There is an additional $2.91 BILLION for Mitch McConnell, for construction on the lower Ohio River, known as the Kentucky Kickback. This is how Mitch McConnell’s backing was assured. Now he can go home, where he is facing a tough reelection season, and tell his constituents that he secured money for them to create jobs.

This is how things get done in Congress. All a member has to do is hold out, and sooner or later, someone will throw him a bone in the way of subsidies for his district/state. That’s how Obamacare passed. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska was a holdout until they bought him off.

It’s legalized bribery.

McConnell’s office told The Hill on Wednesday evening that the senator was not responsible for the dam funding authorization increase, instead referring to the White House and leaders of the Senate committee that is responsible for appropriations.

Of course, McConnell is not responsible for it. Reid is responsible for it. He just bribed McConnell into abandoning the Republicans in the House for his own gain.

Other than the media coverage, did anyone notice the government was shut down? The President bent over backwards to inflict as much pain on the American people as he possible could. He shut down all of the National Parks, shut down the open air Washington Mall, attempting to block World War II veterans from visiting their own memorial by barricading them. The veterans tore down the barricades and moved them to the White House, where Obama called out the riot police, just in case the men in wheelchairs and prosthetic limbs got out of control.

He shut down the National Forests, declared areas off limits to fishing and hunting. He shut down one place that is run by private funds, by barricading their parking lot.

He even evicted a pair of 80+ year olds from their home just because it sits on “Federal land”.

He refused to give death benefits to the families of fallen soldiers, because the government was “shut down”.

Just like he closed the White House to public tours during the so-called “sequester”, while taking a multi-million dollar vacation.

This man is vindictive, despicable and evil. How much money did he spend in order to achieve all this?

It shows that he cares not one whit about the American people. We are his subjects. He looks at us with scorn and disdain. When Congress refuses to do his bidding, he whips the American people as an example.

The Hill reports:

The legislation also includes specific language that aims to pay back furloughed federal government workers as soon as is practicable..

In other words, “non-essential” Federal employees just got a two week paid vacation, in addition to a pay raise in January.

The stupid thing is that we will have to listen to this crap yet again in December, because it is only in effect through January 15, 2014. The whole thing ended with the predictable whimper, but Republicans vowing that this fight isn’t over. Boehner and the Republicans have proven themselves worthless and weak. Louisiana Representative John Fleming:

“I think he has strengthened his position in leadership,” Representative John Fleming says about Boehner. “He hung in there with us. He’s been reluctant to go to these fights and now that we have stood up and fought for our values and he’s been there with us, leading, I think his stock has risen tremendously. He has great security as our leader and our speaker.” 

So, caving is the new euphemism for leadership? Boehner doesn’t know how to lead, he knows how to cave to pressure from Obama and Harry Reid.

“We all agree Obamacare is an abomination. We all agree taxes are too high. We all agree spending is too high. We all agree Washington is getting in the way of job growth. We all agree we have a real debt crisis that will cripple future generations. We all agree on these fundamental conservative principles. . . . We must not confuse tactics with principles. The differences between us are dwarfed by the differences we have with the Democratic party, and we can do more for the American people united,” [Representative Eric Cantor]  told [reporters].

So, in order to solve these problems, the House Republicans must continually cave to Senate pressure. I see how this works!

I swear, House Republicans are really Democrats in disguise.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Obama’s Syrian Propaganda Campaign

Posted on September 9, 2013. Filed under: Politics, World Affairs | Tags: , , , |

RFN Moskva

RFN Moskva (Photo credit:

After doing an abrupt about face from claiming he did not need Congress’ approval to launch strikes at Syria, President Obama has been seeking Congressional approval. I don’t think it is so much that he is doing it to make it legitimate as much as he is doing it to try to make Congress look bad if a) they failed to approve it, or b) the strikes failed. In other words, he is doing it to cover his own ass.

The United States Senate is expected to rubber stamp the authorization, because, well, the Senate approves anything the President wants because they are retarded.

The House, on the other hand, is giving more opposition. Right now, speculation is that Obama doesn’t have the votes in the House, which is why he is about to launch a propaganda campaign to try to sway them.

By propaganda, I mean he intends to show a video of children getting gassed. While this is truly a terrible and horrific thing, once again, our favorite dictator and whipping boy is trotting out children to make his case.

The only question he isn’t answering is who released the gas? Lurch maintains it was the government, while Russia has sent a 100 page report to the UN saying it was the Syrian “rebels”.

Point in fact that the so called “rebels” are al-Qaida, our enemy.

But it doesn’t stop there.

On Tuesday, the President will address a skeptical nation on national tv to try to convince Americans, who are overwhelmingly opposed to any action in Syria by a margin of 71% against to 27% for a strike. That’s a hefty margin of 44%. People are tired of war. Afghanistan and Iraq are really in no better shape now than they were before we invaded.

The public is also overwhelmingly opposed to drone strikes in other countries, such as Yemen and Pakistan.

If doing this was such a good idea, then why does he need to drag out the propaganda to try to convince the House of Representatives, and the public that it needs to be done?

Protesters are (finally) beginning to appear outside of Lurch’s house in Boston.

We must act to show Assad that using chemical weapons is not acceptable. Just like we showed Saddam, who these weapons belonged to in the first place!

I’ve said before that Russia has a national interest in Syria, so they will do anything they can to defend the government there. Anything that brings us into direct conflict with Russia should be avoided, especially in the Middle East.

This is not a Republicrat issue. Both sides in the House are heavily opposed to it. Even Charlie Rangel, decorated veteran of Korea, is against it. If you’ve lost Charlie Rangel, your leftist base is slipping away.

Rangel asked a very good, rational question:

“[If] 98% of the nations on this Earth actually oppose the use of chemical weapons,” Rangel asked why, then, they’re all “asking our kids to put their lives in jeopardy?” 

Right. Where are the rest of the 98%?

Lurch promises that this will be limited in scope.  So, sending missiles to attack a sovereign nation isn’t an act of war? Does that mean that the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor wasn’t an act of war?

How about flying airplanes into our buildings, killing 3000 people?

If it is to be so “unbelievably small”, it is likely to be impotent. So what’s the point? What happens if Syria launches the chemical weapons towards Israel? Israel strikes back, that’s what. Then what do we do, ignore Israel as Obama is wont to do?

Obama has bungled his foreign policy so badly that he has become the laughing stock of the world.

We were warned back in 2008 that he did not have the experience to be president. Unfortunately, the alternative was not much better, if better at all. I know Sarah Palin is loved by a great many people, but when I first heard she had been named as McCain’s running mate, my first reaction was “who????”

Obama is impotent, and the whole world knows it. The Democrats have become impotent, and the whole world knows it. Our politicians have become a bunch of conniving, self serving ass clowns. They look out for their best interests, not the interests of the nation.

Obama desperately wants to be seen a strong, but he is the weakest president since Carter (who in turn was the weakest president since Hoover, at least), and that’s saying something.

Does anyone remember the DNC, when the Democrats were touting how strong they were on defense and how they supported the troops, by showing pictures of Russian warships?

Maybe they honestly believe that the buildup of Russian warships in the Mediterranean is actually our buildup.

But answer these two questions, answer them truthfully and without the doublespeak and question avoidance of politicians.

Who really used the chemicals? The government or the rebels?

How does this constitute and immediate threat to our national security?

That’s what I thought.




Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Obama Wants to “Punish” Syria

Posted on August 30, 2013. Filed under: Government, Politics, World Affairs | Tags: , , |

Billboard with portrait of Assad and the text ...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Another day passes, and Obama dithers for another day. The White House announces that the President will address the nation about Syria, then suddenly he won’t.

Obama has John Kerry Syndrome. He won’t make a decision until he is sure which way the wind is blowing, so he sits in the White House with his finger in the air, waiting.

The UK has said no to getting involved, as have the Germans. Have you ever known the Germans to decline taking part in military action in a foreign country?

France still wants to go, as long as they think the US will go. If we back down, the French won’t act on their own, because they would have to pay for it.

But even if France were to suddenly decide they wanted nothing to do with it, Obama has signaled that he will go it alone if he has to.

You know what’s that’s called?

Unilateral military action. Something the left crucified Bush over for invading Iraq, despite the fact that he did not act unilaterally.  Did he heed the UN? No, and he should not have. Obama should not heed the UN, but he should heed Congress and the people of this nation. We have no business getting involved in the Syrian civil war.

The Obama administration has maintained that the Assad government “must be punished” for what they did, even though the evidence is not completely in.

Doesn’t this sound familiar, though?

Obama has a special talent when it comes to “punishing” his enemies. He has punished his political enemies by unleashing the IRS on them, and by some reports, they are still scrutinizing conservative groups more than liberal ones. He has unleashed the NSA on the people of this country, to spy on our communications, to monitor our financial transactions, what we do on the internet, in short, to watch us, just in case we might do something wrong.

But he has also signaled his utter incompetence by warning Syria, and allowing them time to move troops, equipment, and government officials out of harms way. The only people who will get killed will be civilians, unless he pulls a Bill Clinton and fires missiles at empty tents.

It’s intentional without a doubt, that he is warning the enemy before he lobs a hand grenade, but it is still incompetence, and it is no wonder the military doesn’t like him. He’s an amateur and a joke. It’s no wonder that Putin makes fun of him and tweaks his nose whenever possible.

But we’re more respected in the world.

Yeah, right.

It has often been said that the US is not the world’s police force, and this is why other countries hate us so much and complain that we act like the police of the world. The government of Syria is not our friend. Neither are the rebels. In fact, the rebels are our enemies.

But Minitrue is trying to erase that from history.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Shields to Paul & Christie: You Both Suck!

Posted on August 1, 2013. Filed under: Politics | Tags: , , |

Governor of New Jersey at a town hall in Hills...

Governor of New Jersey at a town hall in Hillsborough, NJ 3/2/11 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

After a war of words earlier this week between New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul over pork barrel spending, Paul decided to be the bigger man and apologized, and offered to have a beer with Governor Christie any time.

Paul declared on a local New Hampshire radio show that while he “didn’t pick this recent fight,” he feels “the party does better if we have less infighting, so I would suggest if he wants to ratchet it down, I’m more than happy to.”

Senator Paul, here’s a better idea. Instead of going on the radio, in New Hampshire of all places, and decrying that “He started it!” like a five year old, how about you just sit down and shut the fuck up for once. I swear, this guy likes the sound of his own voice more than John Edwards likes the look of his own hair.

Never mind that Paul referred to Christie as “the King of Bacon”, taking a shot not only at funds that he accepted after Hurricane Sandy, but obviously his weight.

Christie, on the other hand, didn’t take any redneck hick shots at Rand Paul.

That’s where I come in.

Rand Paul is a redneck hick, more redneck than any Texan you would ever meet in your lifetime. He is a prima donna grandstander, who cares only about his only political power and his path to the White House.

Much like his old man. Did Ron Paul actually care? Yes, he did. He cared about himself.

But according to Governor Christie, Kentucky gets back $1.51 for every dollar they send to Washington, while New Jersey helps subsidize them by receiving $0.61 for every dollar.

If this is not a strong argument against Federal taxes, I don’t know what is. Why should the States subsidize Kentucky?

Christie politely refused the beer.

” I wouldn’t have a beer with that sack of shit if he was buying!”

Okay, I made that quote up. Christie never said that.

“I’m running for reelection in New Jersey. I don’t really have time for that at the moment,” Christie told a New Jersey radio station. “You know, if I find myself down in Washington I’ll certainly look him up. I don’t suspect I’ll be there anytime soon. I’ve got work to do here.”

What’s interesting isn’t the feud, but the response of Rand Paul’s supporters. Both men are Republicans. but don’t see eye to eye on every issue. That’s okay. Not all Democrats see eye to eye, but if you aren’t in lock step with every knucklehead on the internet, your a RINO, a DINO, or just a piece of crap.

My wife is a southern conservative Democrat, but here in Oregon, she is considered a DINO. She also does not support this president, and is thus considered a racist as well.

Just because you do not believe in everything the party is doing does not make you a member “in name only”. Does accepting Federal money in the wake of a hurricane make Christie a RINO? What is he supposed to do, tell the people of New Jersey they are on their own?

But look at some of the comments from Rand Paul’s supporters.

Hey Christie ! (yeah, you doughnut boy), take your leftist BS and join the Demorats, we don’t want your pig like face around anymore you POS !

He’s not just a RINO, he’s a POS!

Chris has a big belly but is GUTLESS …. RINO LAND for this FRAUD and I hope he loses …

This person obviously has a big enough ass to talk out of.


A selfish, loud mouth blowhard who is not conservative and cares only about himself.

Is this guy sure he didn’t just describe Rand Paul?

I was an admirer of Christie’s candor and bluntness in the beginning [before it became clear he was a democrat and obama cultist]….

Im now done with him. Although Paul did the honorable thing…it was a mistake. He should have just let it die out on its own instead of allowing the Michelin Man to make him look foolish.

The esteemed young Senator from KY has learned a valuable lesson I hope… never get tangled up with pigs. And absolutely never apologize to them.

Wow. Another shot at Christie’s weight. Not a single rational discussion of issues, but pot shots lobbed across the internet. What guts that takes.

The only one who looks foolish here is Gov. Christie. How childish and petty. He’s a pathetic loser.

Governor Christie looks foolish? It wasn’t him who called Paul names, like “the King of Bacon”. I’m sure Paul tried to apologize, because he’s the one who looks foolish.

And finally…..

Crisco started the feud by sarcastically referring to Paul’s comments as “esoteric”. Paul took the high road by extending the olive branch. Crisco has threatened to “go Jersey” before, which is a HUGE turnoff to the other 49 states. New Jersey is like a hemorrhoid on the eastern seaboard as far as I’m concerned.

Crisco. Really? Mind if I start referring to you as “Dumb Ass”? Here, once again, we have the “he started it!” argument, followed by a whitewashing of Paul’s participation, but he “extended the olive branch” to Christie. You don’t do that on national radio. You make a personal call, but in order to keep their names in the papers, they have to air the dirty laundry in the national media.

And it’s not just “Joisey” that’s a hemorrhoid on the eastern seaboard. You forgot New York and Washington DC.

I’m no fan of Christie, but I am becoming less of a fan of Rand Paul every day that I hear him open his mouth. I get tired of seeing him on my television. I make fun of politicians and call them names, especially clever ones (which is rare), but that’s what I get paid to do.

Okay, I wish I got paid to do that.

But when I am trying to make a valid, serious argument, I try to refrain from the name calling. It serves no real purpose.

I think both the Senator from Kentucky and the Governor from New Jersey are both idiots. People in New Jersey are generally happy with Christie’s performance, and good for them. I’m not sure I would want him as my governor, but if he works for them, great! But one can’t help but notice that he is eyeing a Senate seat, but is running for governor again because Corey Booker is running for that seat. No sense running for a position you can’t win.

I am a supporter of Corey Booker, not that it matters. I don’t live in New Jersey.

There are very few Democrats that I like. I liked Evan Bayh from Indiana, but the Democrats drove him out of office.

Just keep one thing in mind whenever an “argument” like this breaks out in the newspapers.  it is for one reason and one reason only. To keep their names there.

And for those who accuse the Democrats of blindly following their candidates/elected officials, blithely excusing their behavior while pointing fingers at the other side, keep in mind that you are just as bad, and just as guilty as they are.

It’s well past time that we stop acting like children and start acting like adults.

No wonder this government is so messed up. We’re the one’s who put them there, so in the end, we’re the one’s at fault.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Government Cares Naught for the People

Posted on July 31, 2013. Filed under: Economy, Government, Politics, Taxes | Tags: , , |

English: Capitol Hill

Capitol Hill (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Wow. Two hundred posts.

Even I didn’t think I had that much to say.

I know I haven’t been writing a lot recently. I’ve been busy with other projects, both business and personal.

The president espouses that he cares for the Middle Class and the poor, but his actions belie that.

This year, taxes have gone up on the “wealthy”. Most small businesses, like mine, do their business taxes in their personal taxes. The recent tax hikes do not affect me, but they may at some point in the future, and they affect thousands of other small businesses. That’s because income made from the business is taxed at the personal rate, which has a top tier of 40%.

If a small business made enough for the principle owner to have an income of $250k or above, they get hit at 40%. That’s not even counting Obamacare expenses.

In order to lure business back from overseas, or at least their money that has been stashed away, Obama has proposed that the corporate rate be reduced from 35% to 28%.

In other words, screw the Middle Class, I must give my corporate task masters the tax breaks they’ve been looking for. Small business and the Middle Class can bear the burden.

The left keeps complaining about how the rich aren’t paying their fair share, but support a guy who is sticking it to them.

For a president that supposedly cares about the little guy, he sure doesn’t seem to care all that much.

In other news, GOP Governor of New Jersey and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul have engaged in a war of words. Paul accuses Christie of being the “King of Bacon” when it comes to accepting Federal money, while Christie accuses Paul of accepting lots of pork himself for the state of Kentucky.

I’ve written before that I think Rand Paul is nothing more than a poser and grandstander, but both need to shut up. I am so sick to death of hearing about both of them.

Both have presidential aspirations. but you know what? The Republicans don’t choose their candidates, the media does through choosing who they report on and who they don’t. It’s all about “national exposure”, and who the media chooses to expose. I don’t like either one of them. I’m not sure there is anyone from the government elite that I like at all.

Finally, Congress has a new word for “butt out”. It’s called “classified”.

Anything they don’t wish to discuss, they simply say it’s “classified”.

So, Senator, what was said in your committee meeting? “It’s classified.”

For a government “of the people, for the people and by the people”, it sure has gotten very secretive, and if anyone leaks anything, they go after them with a zeal not seen since the Spanish Inquisition. Every day seems to be a new witch hunt within the government, because the people don’t have a right to know what their government is doing.

How much longer are we going to put up with this? We will either take our government back, or we will become a subjugated people. There is no in between.

Which is it going to be?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

President Obama: A Lot of Reporters Tell Me My Ideas Sound Great

Posted on July 26, 2013. Filed under: Government, Politics | Tags: , , |

English: President Barack Obama, Vice Presiden...

English: President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and senior staff, react in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, as the House passes the health care reform bill. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

When President Obama goes on television and tells us that the majority of Americans agree with him, we now know where he gets that idea from. The press.

So, now the press is a representation of how the American people feel.

It’s interesting, in the run-up to this speech, a lot of reporters say that, well, Mr. President, these are all good ideas, but some of you’ve said before; some of them sound great, but you can’t get those through Congress. Republicans won’t agree with you. And I say, look, the fact is there are Republicans in Congress right now who privately agree with me on a lot of the ideas I’ll be proposing. I know because they’ve said so. But they worry they’ll face swift political retaliation for cooperating with me.

It’s easy to lie and say that a lot of Republicans “privately” agree with you. Why do I say lie? Because he’s lied about practically everything else. Why start believing him now?

It’s easy to say that people privately tell you things because there is no way to prove one way or the other.

Let me give you an example.

Most Democrats that I speak with privately wish that Obama wasn’t president, and that he’s a horse’s ass.

See how easy that was?

Let me break that down for you.

My wife is a Democrat, the only Democrat I generally discuss politics with. Thus, “most Democrats I speak with privately”, i.e., my wife, wishes Obama wasn’t president and thinks he’s a horse’s ass. My statement is 100% truthful, but very misleading.

Obama, on the other hand, doesn’t have a tendency to speak with any Republicans beyond the leadership, and even then it’s hit & miss.

So, what are some of your ideas, Mr. President?

Stepping up NSA surveillance on American citizens?

Taking away our gun rights?

Unilaterally and illegally suspending parts of Obamacare? Oh, wait, he’s already done that.

Turning our children into a bunch of starving, third world uneducated zombies?

How about ordering TSA to illegally search our cars after a valet parks them?

What other ideas are great ideas?

I know! Giving defacto amnesty to all the illegals and their children!

Or how about deciding to not decide whether or not there has been a coup in Egypt in order to keep from defunding our foreign aid to the region? Now, that would show real leadership!

That’s the major problem with this president, and John Kerry before him. He would stick his finger in the air to see which way the wind was blowing before taking a position, or changing a position for that matter. See the gay marriage debate.

The sycophant press is always going to tell him his ideas are great, even when they aren’t (GM bailout anyone?). And by sycophant, I mean fawning parasites.

The President surrounds himself with sycophants, and that is a lot of the problem. He’ll never get a straight answer from yes men and toadies, but then, he doesn’t want the truth.

His narcissistic, sociopathic behavior won’t let him surround himself with anyone other than people who tell him how great he is.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

NSA Spying on European Allies, Too.

Posted on July 1, 2013. Filed under: Government, Police State, Politics | Tags: , |

Flag of the IngSoc Party

Flag of the IngSoc Party

It came out over the weekend that not only is our government spying on us, the American people, it is spying on our allies as well.

When we elected Obama as our president, he said that we would be more liked and respected in the world.

As long as they didn’t find out we were spying on them.

Of course, Secretary of State Lurch defends it, saying that “spying on allies is not unusual”.

This came after the revelation that the US had bugged 38 embassies and foreign missions, including the European Union nerve center in Washington DC.

IngSoc is alive and well.

Lurch seems to be less Secretary of State, and more the Minister of Minitrue.

For those who don’t get the references, you need to read George Orwell’s 1984.

The Germans are starting to like us less and less.

Given our history, we Germans are not willing to trade in our liberty for potentially better security.

Of course, there are many Americans who don’t trust him, either.

To be certain, there are a number of Americans who just shrug their shoulders and say that they’ve been doing this for years.

That doesn’t make it right, and it doesn’t mean it should continue.

The NSA can justify it all they want, but “We’re just gathering intelligence” is not a valid excuse in my book.

This is why so many Americans are loading up on weaponry. Whenever we just shrug our shoulders and say that’s the way it is, the government steps on our throats just a little more.

Why does our government think this sort of activity is acceptable?

Oh, that’s right. They are keeping us safe and combating terrorism.

I’m surprised that Obama hasn’t droned German Prime Minister Angela Merkel yet.

The NSA and FBI are becoming the new Gestapo, and that should send chills down anyone’s spine. Obama’s critics are intimidated into silence. The power of the government is used to intimidate opponents during the election, or prevent them from running campaigns.

Oh, and Obama’s defense for spying on the EU and our allies?

“Well, everyone else does it!”


That’s the kind of argument I would expect from a five year old.

It appears that Obama’s stint in the Choom Gang has killed so many brain cells and left him emotionally stunted.

Honestly, I know politicians lie, but I don’t think I ever remember a president who was so full of excuses and lies as this man. Of course, we can’t be sure that it is him who is running the country, and not Valerie Jarrett.  Or George Soros.

After I had originally written and published this, I heard on the news that Obama had this to say in Tanzania:

It’s okay, because we work so closely together that we all share all of this information anyway.

What a knucklehead.

It appears that this administration, that this man, will stop at anything to find out about his enemies and do anything to destroy them.

He is doing his best to shackle us, and, it appears, shackle the world at the same time.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

« Previous Entries
  • Recent Posts

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Meta

  • Blog Stats

    • 14,743 hits

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: