Newt? Are you serious?

Maybe it is the fact that I don't listen to oldies on the radios, rarely watch old TV shows, and I don't like to sit and talk about "The good old days", but Newt Gingrich? This is a man that was drummed out of the House over 10 years ago, has been a shill for clients to anyone that will listen in government since then, and will state a policy on a Sunday talk show and by Tuesday say anything that he said on that show is a lie. Tea Party, are you so bereft of thinkers, of people with good ideas, of people who can articulate a thought, that you will back Newt? On second thought, you don't have to answer that on. I've watched the debates. Your real choices are between someone who will change his mind and say whatever is needed to get elected, and someone who has a background as conservative as anyone, as articulate as anyone, and as ideas that are even more thought out than anyone on the stage. But he decided that to him country was more important than party. So Tea Party, go back to the past. The rest of the country will be looking forward, and away from you and your party.

National Security Debate

Tuesday night's debate was interesting on a couple of levels, and although no candidate thought they made a mistake, there were several that were found by me and many others. The biggest, by far, was Mr. Cain and his ridiculous assertion that we couldn't invade Iran due to to the hilly terrain. Say what? Afghanistan isn't hilly, then? What a crock. Mr. Gingrich, a family who is here for 25 years illegally can get citizenship if they go to church? That way the family can stay together? What if they have no criminal record but don't go to church? Are they deported? So you want a church following person to be legal here? Which of your ex wives do you explain that to? Rep. Paul, foreign aid has done no good in Africa? Explain that to the hundreds of thousands that have worked in the Peace Corp in Africa for the last 50 years. Think they believe they've done no good, setting up schools, water treatment plants, distributed medicine, and taught trades and skills in towns in almost all the countries in Africa? These mistakes don't even include what I found interesting. 1, if the neo-cons are in decline in the GOP generally, they weren't in that room Tuesday night. And for Huntsman to say that the military budget must be looked at for savings was a brave statement. And the look on Romney's face as Huntsman explained in detail the reasons for a quick drawdown in Afghanistan was priceless. Yes, Mitt, you're right. It's a damn good thing for you that the GOP is too far right-wing to take a good, long look at Huntsman. If they did, you'd be toast. And speaking of toast, that's the second thing I found interesting, and that toast would be you, Gov. Perry. When you can make Michele Bachmann look serious, thoughtful, and mature, you're toast. Well done, even partially burnt. And even on this Thanksgiving week, we throw that toast out.   

No deal is a bad deal for Democrats

After the Super-Committee couldn't come up with a way to cut 1.2 trillion dollars from the budget over the next 10 years (was anyone really surprised?), the big surprise is that Democrats are scratching their heads over how this could happen. Why? The Tea Party had no skin in the deal. If no deal was met, what taxes would be raised? None, the entire 1.2 trillions were cuts, not tax increases. If there was no deal, Senators had already decided to write laws to exempt the military from the cuts, so all the cuts would come from domestic programs. So since this is exactly what the Tea Party would find acceptable, what were they bringing to the table? That's right, absolutely nothing. So no deal by the Super-Committee was still a deal for the country, just a bad one for the Democrats, and for the 99% that will be hurt by the cuts.  

Riot Control for Dummies

I hope that the police at all the University of California sites will take the time to look at the handbook that explains how to react to an unruly mob and has been out for quite a while, Riot Control for Dummies. In the handbook, it explains that in the case that an officer uses pepper spray, this is to be used to help subdue and tame people, making it easier to take down and hand cuff. For all those that can't get the order right, that think you take the person down, hand cuff and then pepper spray, I just hope you find another line of work, since you obviously can't read. Now as far as the Chief who said that the protesters were a threat to the police, I give him the benefit of the doubt. After all, just like Mr. Cain has said, he was hired to lead, not to read. For the Chief, we'll get him to watch the DVD.    

You're a mean one, Mr. Gingrich

I think after this weekend, and the ridiculous rant of Newt Gingrich, it would be very easy to think of all the Occupy places as off-shoots of Who-ville, and OWS itself could be thought of as Occupy Whoville Square. And yes, that would make Newt that mean green ogre taking the treats from the kids. For over 30 years, the wealth inequality in this country has swung the power in this country to a small group of people.Wall Street firms lead this country to the edge of financial ruin, get rescued from closure by the government ( ie. The people of the United States), and what do they do? They foreclose on homes they have no legal right to foreclose on since they don't own the actual deeds, stop loaning money to companies that want to expand, and give their managers millions of dollars in bonuses. So why aren't they the Grinch in this tale? Well, as anyone who watched TV this weekend, Newt has taken 10 steps right and found a place he's comfortable being in. To those protesting the gross unfairness that Wall Street is perpetuating, Newt says to take a bath and get a job! He states that protesters are on land they didn't pay for. Newt, public land is land that is given to city for the use by its citizens. That land is for all the people, not just those that the 1% say can voice their opinion. But that's right, you're the Grinch who is taking the rights away from those in Whoville. And who is helping you? All the idiots who applauded your line in Iowa this weekend. You're a mean one, Mr. Gingrich, you and all your ilk.  

This year's non-hit reality show: Debating with the would-be Stars

In looking back at the debates so far, I've realised that this has nothing to do with politics, but is just a reality show, with the winner going on to being on the ballot next November against the President. Now that we are getting down to the elimination rounds, let's look at the main contestants:
CAIN- This is the man who has a business plan that would increase the costs of goods with a VAT tax, ensure the middle class would pay more taxes, slowing their ability to buy things, and keep the lower class down with he flat tax. When it comes to foreign policy plans, he doesn't have any. He'll have to discuss things with his advisers, who we know nothing about. Personally, he has been accused of sexual harassment, and whether it is true or not, the organization he headed thought they were strong enough to settle out-of-court. And now wants a Secret Security detail to protect him from the press. And these are his strengths.
PERRY- The Texas governor can't remember his main talking points, has trouble articulating those that he can remember, and lies about his performance as governor, and his ads are inaccurate. These are his strengths.
GINGRICH- The former speaker can speak out of both sides of his mouth, retracts everything he says, is hypocritical in his beliefs, believes in the family value platform while on his 3rd marriage and in the year of hating everything Washington is the ultimate Washington insider. And he'll tell you that all this is a lie, right after he'll tell you these are his strengths.
BACHMANN- The representative thinks that China is a perfect economic model for America, wants to get rid of the clean air and water acts, doesn't know American history (or mistakenly speaks about it if she does), believes that states don't have the right to set health standards, and strongly believes that certain Americans should have fewer rights than others. And not only are these her strengths, explain them to her, and she'll be proud of them. Actually, the most consistent on the show.
PAUL- Wants to run the government to dismantle it, thinks all wars are bad, doesn't understand why Ciivil Rights Acts are needed, and that those in place should be repealed since the Constitution didn't give those rights to the Federal Government, and doesn't understand the difference in actions that need to be taken today if they weren't taken at the turn of the 20th century. Is very proud that these are his strengths.
SANTORUM- Believes that all actions to stop other countries from disagreeing with us should be military based, either with the threat or actual actions. He forgot that he lost an election in his home state which is needed to take the White House. Has other views that he'll be glad to tell you about, but nobody cares. And that is his greatest strength.
ROMNEY- Has spoken the truth as he has seen it at the time, and changed his mind every time. Has helped companies get rid of jobs and destroyed pension plans. His biggest strength is that he doesn't believe he ever did these things, and that is his biggest weakness.
HUNTSMAN- Is articulate, knows the needs of states and the federal government, has a knowledge of events and countries needed in this day and age, and doesn't like to speak in 30 second sound bites. Why? he believes all our problems are too big to decide in just 30 seconds. While these are his strengths, on this show, these are also killer weaknesses.
Well, now very soon we're getting to the elimination rounds, and to most, they can't come soon enough. But they're coming way too soon for the one candidate, Huntsman, who may be the first one voted off the island.    

It's called knowing your audience

Watching Morning Joe this morning, I was surprised to hear Michael Steele state that Jon Huntsman needs to stop being an ambassador and be a leader and take charge. In Michael's words, if he'd do that, " He'd cut through the Republican candidates like a knife through hot butter." Now Michael, you have a fine mind when it comes to politics, but you'd never make it as a comedian. I don't mean that you were saying was a joke, and yes, Jon Huntsman has the vision, ideas, and background to be a conservative but still mainstream President. But you forgot the first rule of a comedian: Know your audience. The people who are voting early in the GOP process are in states where the Tea Party will not listen to mainstream ideas, and take them as lies perpetuated by the media. Take almost any position, and to be a member of the Tea Party, you must be far, far right. And that is the group that will dominate the voting bloc early, and maybe even in the middle and late. No, it isn't the way he's speaking, and it isn't what he's saying, in a lot of ways. It's the audience, and nothing that is sensible, smart, and logical will be listened to, much less accepted. And since that is all Jon Huntsman has said, he'll never cut through the other candidates like a knife through hot butter, because the audience isn't looking for that person.      

Liberal media? Not in local news!

I didn't listen ot tape the GOP CBS Foreign Policy Debate because I didn't know there was one ( It may not have mattered. I have a limit to hearing politicians out-and-out lying, and one 2-hour GOP debate a week actually goes way over the limit). So imagine my surprise when my local news stated that not only was there one, no gaffes were made. So after a few looks on-line, and a few hours watching the Sunday morning shows, I was so glad that these weren't gaffes: Bachmann said the China, with substandard pay, horrid living conditions, and dirty air and water since they have no regulations, is a great model for our country's future; Perry stating that foreign aid is bad to give a government if they're not our friend, so much for things like development aid, and the Peace Corp, I guess; and Santorum and Romney stating that we need to either attack Iran or ensure Israel does; some saying that torture should again be part of our interrogation procedures; and all but Huntsman saying that Obama has no foreign policy other than to capitulate to other countries and listen to the ACLU. These aren't gaffes? If the local news said these statements are mainstream and normal, the GOP doesn't have to worry about a liberal bias in local news. But maybe we should worry about our local news. 

Shame on Penn State

I have waited a few days to write anything about Penn State to see what would happen today and wanted to wait until after the game, but after listening to the morning blogs and watching the shows, I finally had to speak. Penn State has had it's head in the sand for many years, and their latest attempt to look good and get ahead of the story has been a fiasco. The president of the university and the football coach are fired, but the assistant coach who witnessed the rape of a young boy is still on staff? He was going to be allowed to be on the sidelines today, but the school put him on paid leave and advised him not to go to the game, citing his safety as the reason for the action. His safety? What a crock! What about the safety of the young children under the watchful and leering eye of the pedophile? You don't care about them, and actually don't care about the assistant coach. You put him on paid leave? He should have been fired before either the president or the coach, although they should have been next. If he is being kept on staff to ensure his co-operation, this is also a laugh. If he refuses to co-operate, book him for accessory after the fact. You care about nothing but yourself, plain and simple. You are taking half-steps to do the minimum that will look to outsiders that you care and are taking every action you can. And for this, shame on you, Penn State.    

Negative polling numbers can lie, too

As everyone knows, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics, and when it comes to polling numbers, so far this year some of those numbers are actually worse than damn lies. And one of the the biggest lies is the President's polling numbers. Now like all statistics, the actual number is correct, but what it tells people is wrong. To give this some subtext, let's look at George W. Bush's numbers and compare them to President Obama. In W's last year, he hovered around 38%, and stayed there. Now this is a horrible number, but actually is higher than some would think. Take any generic president and say that after his first election, he would invade 2 counties, take a yearly surplus in taxes and turn it into a $7 trillion deficit, watch as a major American city was devastated by hurricane and man-made errors and do nothing to help, and still have a 38% approval rating, and while it's surprising that 38% still approved of his actions, it would be obvious that the approval would come from one wing of one party. Now there's Obama's numbers, which is a steady 44% approval rating. But here is where the numbers get different. With TARP, the Stimulus Bill, and Obamacare, it is obvious that the right hates the President. But what isn't shown is other actions that he's taken. The troop are still in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay is still open, DOMA still hasn't been overturned, and even in the health care bill, there was no single pay government entity like in Medicare. Each of these actions and lack of action have infuriated the left. So while only 44% approve of the Presidents actions, there are those on both sides of the aisle, and even some in the independent middle, that disagree with some of his actions. But as the GOP pulls farther right in their search of a nominee, the farther they go, the more they have no chance of getting the left, and less chance they have to get the independent middle. So yes, only 44% approve of the President's actions, this doesn't mean that 56% will vote against him.Find where the 56% stand on specific issue, and you'll know if the 44% statistic is just a lie, or a damn lie.          

What state is Kansas City in?

Ask anyone outside the state to name some places in Missouri, most people will tell you about the Arch in St. Louis, they'll tell you about the Ozarks and the hillbillies that supposedly live there, some will know that that Jefferson City is the capital, some will know the University (MU) is in Columbia, and now people, due to the tornado, will name Joplin. So people here in Kansas City aren't surprised that most don't know much about the city when it comes to people in other states. But Sunday, even MU forgot that Kansas City is in Missouri, when they made the announcement of leaving the Big 12 and going to the SEC. They didn't care what people here think. St. Louis? Oh yes, that is a city that MU made sure would love the move. Springfield and the south, they love the fact that Missouri will be in the same conference as Arkansas. So what about Kansas City? Having the mayor, congressman, and county chairman all say they wanted MU to stay in the Big 12, was this even heard?  Did they all fall on deaf ears, or was it that they weren't even considered part of the state. But maybe after the Chiefs lost to the previously win-less Dolphins and Sporting Kansas City lost in the MLS (soccer) Eastern Conference finals, they were just hoping that Kansas City wasn't part of the state. 

The Tea Party Symbol

I have argued that the Tea Party has no right to the name Republican, and to me the GOP is now the Tea Party, but I've also decided that the Elephant can't be the party symbol. If the GOP can't remember that it is the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Reagan, the Elephant isn't a proper symbol. So after watching the way the Tea Party doesn't believe anything they hear anyway, I've decided on the Ostrich as the party symbol. Cain has a sexual problem in his background, stick your head in the sand and dismiss it as false. Perry acts like he's high when he gives a speech, stick your head in the sand and say it was taken out of context. Canter lies about class warfare, stick your head in the sand and say it the Dems fault. Congress refuses to compromise, doesn't pass a bill that will add 1 job during this downturn and says it's the President that's playing politics. Yep, that's the Ostrich. Head stuck in the sand.

It's not the fall that kills ya'

Anyone who has ever watched any political scandal has got to be thinking that great Yogi-ism when they watch Mr. Cain twist and turn in the wind: It's deja-vu all over again. First you attack the organization that asks the question as biased and with an agenda, then there's the denial, then a lie, then a half-truth. Then enough people have the facts that the truth is given by the accused. And make no doubt about it, the truth does come out. But respect is lost, not in the original action, but in the lies and cover-ups. So now we know that over 10 years ago, Mr. Cain was accused of sexual harassment, there was a settlement made by the group he headed, and no criminal charges were ever filed. Since non-disclosure forms were signed, this may be the end of it. But it's too late now. But it wasn't the fall over 10 years ago that killed him, it was the steps taken recently that was his downfall. Don't believe me? Well, let's say that Mr. Cain had told Politico that he was accused of harassment, that lawyers decided that even though he had taken no actions, the trial would be messy, public, and cost more than the settlement, and so they settled. End of story. It doesn't drag on for days, and the campaign goes on. Sorry, Mr. Cain, it wasn't the fall that killed your campaign, but that first step afterward to the press was a doozy. And a killer.