Premium Premiums!

The Friday the 13th edition of The Wall Street Journal had an interesting commentary by Andrew Heinze about what Health Reform would do to his health insurance. An appropriate day for such an article was my thought. He explains how his insurance, basically catastrophic, will go away unless a plan is purchased that covers more than is wanted or indeed, needed, or be fined. This still sticks in my craw. That the government is going to bully us into health care options by threatening us with fines and even jail.

You see, as Jim Hightower points out, government employees, especially Congress, have their own gold plated system that bears no resemblace to the one they are foisting on us. That includes Republicans and Blue Dogs. Even those who serve but one term have their coverage for life. There is no having to revert to what with which the rest of the country will be saddled!

Somehow I can't feel too badly for government employees who are facing an increase in their premiums whiel the rest of us will be facing increased taxes (mark my words), fines or jail!

It will never happen, but if the Republicans or the Blue Dogs really want to do something for us, even if it's for no more than satisfaction, bury in the pork that they have to give up their goodies once back in the private sector! Just think of the savings that could be derived.

On the down side, we'd probably have more of them thinking election mandates a term for life and we'd never get them out of office unless we rid them of gerrymandering!

You'd Think They'd Learn!

These two are enough to give women in politics a bad name! I had hoped for better when Pelosi became Speaker of the House and had no hope what-so-ever when Palin became the Republican Vice Presidential nominee.

It seems not thinking before speaking knows no bounds when it comes to gender. Frankly, I'm tired of all the name calling and inflammatory language that has been coming from both sides of the political spectrum. It is not helping the dialog. These political heavy weights are the ones who should be calming people down, not rousing their ire! I thought we had enough of being accused of being less than American when the Bush Administration accused any and everybody questioning the war, among other things, as being unpatriotic.

Now Ms. Pelosi, in an op ed piece in USA Today, accuses those of us who dare to question bad legislation as being un-American!

These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades.

I'm having trouble believing she really said this. Would President Obama suggest she acted stupidly?

As for Ms. Palin, the current queen of Facebook and Twitter, hasn't helped the cause. I wouldn't go so far as to call her un-American, but I would suggest she too acted stupidly. She commented on Facebook that the health care plan is "downright evil".

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgement of their "level" of productivity in "society" whether they are worthy of health care.

You'd think someone who could put together a sentence like that might at least check the accuracy of it!

They sound like a couple of screeching cats. Can they sink any lower? Probably. There is always mud wrestling. Here all this time I've thought public service was a higher calling. Well. It seems to have no where else to go than up!

My Congressman Is A Blue Dog

In this very red state of Idaho we sent a Democrat to Congress. Of course his predecessor was from a planet so foreign from ours, even his own Republicans couldn't support him for another term.

I like Walt Minnick and I voted for him. I will again even though challengers are coming out of the woodwork because they smell blood. Kimberly Strassel wrote an excellent piece in The Wall Street Journal about the challenges facing these Congressmen in 2010. Mainly the Rahm/Nancy pressure cooker of partisan agenda.

I don't agree with every vote Minnick has made nor do I expect to in the future. What I do respect is the fact that he has a good solid background in business and also understands not only his state, but the people who populate it. He is also his own man to the point he's willing to think things through and voice his opinion even when the party bosses wish he would just go away. He won't. He has the tenacity of a Jack Russell digging for a gopher.

Two things are troubling me. One is that one of his challengers is a veteran who is trying to link him more to his "boss" Pelosi than to his stand on issues. For obvious reasons. What bothers me is not that he is a veteran; for his service he should be applauded loudly and strongly. It does not automatically qualify him for a seat in Congress. I need to be shown more than Republican talking points and that fact.

The other, and larger issue, is the Rahm/Nancy pressure cooker. This has been a sore spot with me since the onset of the Obama administration and I don't give Obama a pass on allowing it. It's interesting to me that a federal jury has ruled former Louisiana representative William Jefferson must forfeit $450,000 in bribery receipts. You remember him; the one who had $90,000 stashed in his freezer.

He was convicted on eleven counts, including bribery, for using his influence to broker business deals in Africa. I see little difference between his case and the influence lobbyists have on congressional representatives. Rather than outright taking cash and stashing it in their freezers as Jefferson did, they take it in the form of campaign contributions.

The hyprocrisy of Congress is mind boggling. Rahm is the strong arm. Nancy knows where her bread is buttered. Sometimes their hutzpah amazes me. They are now planning to to spend $550 million to buy eight jets to accommodate their taxpayer paid junkets.

Fly commercial like the rest of us? Not a chance. They'd then have to look into the draconian practices of the TSA. Would they consider the used jets they forced the auto execs to give up? Used? Heavens no!

Do you really want this group revamping our health care system? I do not. Everything they've touched so far has unintended circumstances that are devasting to some segment of the population. Even cash for clunkers. Think about what it's doing to the used car business and those charities who take clunkers as donations as just a couple of small examples.

What this country needs is a whole lot more Blue Dogs. If the Republicans want to call themselves Red Dogs, that would be fine with me.

Once A Comic, Always A Comic

Al Franken has officially been a member of the Senate since July 8th. Eight whole days and nary a peep. Not knowing how assignments are made, I'll just accept the fact he has a seat on the Judiciary Committee currently conducting the Sotomayor hearings.

I'm sure the Democrats helped him formulate the softball questions he would ask. These hearings are such a farce. Why they have to take up all day, everyday of CNN and MSNBC is beyond me. I thought that was the reason C-Span was created. No matter. What is, is.

I'm not much of a Franken fan. The last thing the Senate needs is another comedian, but no matter. What is, is. However, after three days of pontificating Senators and artfully dodging nominee, Franken at least brought a little comic relief.

Sotomayor has said the Perry Mason show inspired her to become a prosecutor. Franken asked her what the name of the one case Mason lost had been. She did not remember. "Didn't the White House prepare you?" he asked.

That last part was the funny part to me! That Franken also did not know didn't surprise me either. That the AP reporter checked it out did.

So here we have it. A new Senator reveals what we all really know anyway. The White House prepares the nominee for the questioning. She probably had all the Democrats questions in advance so there would be no slip up. The Republican questions get so lost in posturing they mean little in the pre-set scheme of things anyway.

The nominee has no quick recall of what might be considered trivia. That would explain a lot of evasions.

A reporter actually researched the answer for an unanswered question. Too bad it wasn't one of more importance. No matter. It's a step in the right direction!

The episode? "The Case of the Deadly Verdict." I wonder if that portends the end of the hearings and just how it will translate!

Zip Trip

There are better ways to eliminate oneself from Presidential contention than the one taken by South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford! After missing for days, leaving his state unattended, he finally resurfaced.

No one, not his wife nor his staff, had any idea where he had gone. Especially over the Father's Day weekend.

Someone ventured a guess he was off hiking the Appalachian trail. An idea he had purposely planted. Nope. He was in Argentina!

So begins an apology tour that makes Obama's apologies for all the country's sins of the past pale in comparison. You know, the tears and the apologies and the begging for forgiveness. One thing that was missing was the pained and betrayed wife at his side.

Good for her! Let him face it on his own. Bill CLinton, Eliot Spitzer, David Vitter, and of course John Edwards all come to mind when I think of recent political infidelities that rip families apart. There are always the tears. There is always the apology for letting the family down, not to mention the constituency who elected them. In truth, I firmly believe it is just because they've been caught.

Sanford, according to his home paper, The State , said the relationship would not work. Wonder why he didn't think about that before entering into it! Did he think because she was in Argentina no one would find out? Who knows. I can't figure these people out. I'm used to dealing with people who's brains are above their belt.

I've come to a couple of conclusions as I await the next indiscretion to hit the headlines. I would not want to go to the marriage counselors many of them claim to have consulted. And two, if I wanted to have a secure, loving marriage where I wouldn't be hurt and publicly humiliated, I'd steer clear of an ambitious politician.

I know, I know. The majority are good, family oriented men. It just seems that in a relatively small population of professional politicians there are inordinate numbers of those who are not.

Yesterday I spoke about how the price of freedom seems to be excessive death. Today I ponder about how the price for a successful political career should require little more than keeping it zipped!

I also find it interesting that the female of the political species rarely makes similar headlines. The closest I can recall was the rumor Sarah Palin had an affair with a business partner of her husband's. The story never gained traction. Thank heavens. If we want to eliminate prurient headlines from the political front maybe we should elect more women!

A Man True To Himself...But Who Else?

The Democrats are riding high. Maybe too high. If they take a fall you'll hear the thump throughout the world.

Obama has received high marks for his first 100 days. Even I will give him between a C and a C+. Al Franken will take the open Minnesota Senate seat in short order and Arlen Specter has switched parties. The Democrats will have the crucial filibuster proof 60 seats. The Republicans continue to bluster and fumble. The country will be at the mercy of the Democratic agenda. What I'm unsure of is if it's Obama's agenda or the Emanuel/Pelosi/Reid agenda. That does worry me for there are differences.

The euphoria may be short lived. Until the Republicans get their act together it matters little they still have centrist/mavericks among their numbers: Susan Collins and Olympia Snow of Maine, George Voinovich, Ohio and of course maverick in chief John McCain. I do give them credit for party loyalty. There will never be change if every one defects.

On the Democratic side, however, you have the Blue Dogs, Joe Lieberman and now Arlen Specter. None of their votes can be guaranteed.

Switching parties is nothing new. In some respects I admire Specter's candor in stating that he knows he'd have a tough Republican primary challenge from Representative Pat Toomey. Spector beat Toomey in 2004 by a mere 2%.

One would have to consider his age. Seventy eight to Toomey's forty seven. And his health - two bouts with Hodgkins disease in 2005 and again in 2008. Running again in another year may be moot.

What bothers me most about Mr. Specter's move is one statement he made, "I am not prepared to have my 29 years record in the United States Senate decided by the Pennsylvania Republican primary."

That is about as self-serving a statement as can be made. It will be interesting to see how the people of Pennsylvania feel.

Irony Of Ironies

When the news hit that Health and Human Services nominee Kathleen Sibelius had to scramble to settle some back tax "oversights" I just rolled my eyes. I didn't give her a pass because she was a woman; I gave her a pass because she was just one more cabinet appointee who ignores the fact we're all supposed to pay taxes.

As with the others, it was explained away and she was confirmed. One comes to the conclusion that to be in the Obama cabinet one must be "mathematically challenged" when it comes to taxes.

Unfortunately the story didn't end there. According to Forbes.com she also low balled a contribution to a PAC she had established while Kansas Insurance Commissioner to help raise money for other Democrats. By some $23,000. That she neglected to reveal this to the Senate Finance Committee when specifically asked can be tossed into the "So what else is new" basket except for one thing.

The contribution was from Dr. George Tiller, one of the country's few late term abortion providers. Somehow, to me this is as egregious as it can get. I'm pro choice for a lot of reasons. I am totally against late birth abortion if for nothing more than the pure inhumanity of it. So here we are. Our new Secretary of Health and Human Services, of all Departments, not only accepted the money for her PAC, no matter when it was. She was aware of it or she wouldn't have understated the amount. Then she lied about that. Another oversight by another Cabinet member. Do we really expect these people to govern effectively? They can't remember to pay their taxes. They can't remember how much PAC money they've been instrumental in attracting nor the implications of who the contributors have been .

I guess my final question would be, can they remember who they've been appointed to serve and why? I have an answer but there's no reason to state it. It wouldn't be remembered. And that would be considered, I'm sure, an oversight.

The Dark Side Of The Bank Bail Out

I do not want the government's fingers in my piggy bank! Apparently a lot of bigger banks don't either!

It leads me to wonder, why, if the government really does not want to nationalize the banks, are they not allowing banks who didn't want or need TARP money in the first place, return it?

As an example of what's happening, Investor's Business Daily tells of one bank which has no sub prime loans, no bad debts, no credit default swaps, didn't need, ask for or want the money.

They were told if they didn't take it there would be a multi-year public audit of their dealings. Now the government owns a 2% stake which gives them the right to control salaries, open access to the books, literally tell the bank how it can do business.

Again, I'm uncomfortable with the bully tactics the administration is using. To have guidelines for those that were truly bailed out is one thing; to force themselves on those who didn't want nor need their help smacks of extortion. If they succeed in nationalizing the banks and perhaps the auto industry, where will the strike next?

There is a place for government intervention, but intrusion into the private sector, under threat, where it's not needed is a dangerous precedent. I had enough of those during the Bush administration.

Keep a close eye on the charm offensive that's going on. It's only rhetoric. What counts is what's going on beneath the radar and it isn't pretty.

Senator Burr (R NC) - Obstructionist For The Sake Of It?

There has been no Cabinet appointee more right on than former General Eric Shinseki as Secretary of Veterans Affairs. You remember him. The General who Rumsfeld replaced because he told the truth about the number of troops it would take to stabilize Iraq after invasion. I should think few could understand the needs of our veterans more or care more to see that they are met.

Another stellar nomination for Assistant Secretary of the Department is Tammy Duckworth. You should remember her too. She was an Illinois Nation Guard helicopter pilot who lost both legs and the partial use of one arm when an IED downed the chopper she was piloting.. She would have bled to death had the heat from the explosion not cauterized her wounds. That's about as grim as it gets.

She went on to head veterans for the State of Illinois.

Who could be more qualified to serve? She was nominated by President Obama two months ago, her nomination hearing was last Wednesday, a confirmation vote planned for Thursday and swearing in scheduled for Friday. It didn't happen.

Senator Burr says he has "questions" about her nomination. That's what the hearings are for. To ask those questions. Everything will no be delayed until April 21.

His office offered the following rational. "He's basically doing some due diligence as he does for every nominee to ensure veterans have the best representation." Does he think she doesn't get it? Does he want the level of care they received under the Bush administration? Or does he just get a giggle out of yanking the administration's chain?

We'll always elect men like Senator Burr and he can play his games as long as his constituents don't care. If that's what he wants he should play them against someone of his own stature. There are plenty of them in the Senate. How dare he play such games with one of our military heroines who by the grace of God only gave her limbs for her country and not her life.

He can save the platitudes. He should be ashamed.

Bonuses As A Way Of Life

The big complaint about the AIG bonuses was that they were supposedly rewarding failure. If the government hadn't stepped in, would anything have been said? No. It's a way of life that reaches far beyond top executives!

In a time of economic stress at all levels, how about signing bonuses for coaches at a time when university budgets are being cut to the bone, teachers are facing either pay cuts or job loss, and fewer students are being accepted? Take for example Washington State's basketball coach Tony Bennett jumping ship for the University of Virginia. His total package is around $1.7 million a year plus a $500,000 signing bonus! That would provide a lot of faculty pay and tuition for a lot of students! What's even more questionable is the fact he's an unproven entity considering the differences between a Washington State and a Virginia! Failure isn't even an issue here. It's for signing on with high hopes. Heck of a deal.

Even harder to swallow for a lot of students, I should think, is John Calipari's deal with Kentucky. His eight year deal will bring him some $31.65 million plus a $2.5 million signing bonus. Please don't tell me it's worth that kind of money because of what the program brings in for the school. If it was all that successful, why are the budgets being cut?

It goes even further. Let's go back to tax payer money. The Wall Steet Journal tells us of the practice of Congress giving sometimes substantial bonuses to aides - with tax payer dollars.

We're told that last year more than $9.1 million was awarded to over 22,000 staffers. These discretionary bonuses went to staff earning more than $100,000, as merit bonuses.

To repeat a theme I harp on often, Congress gives itself automatic pay raises and gives out staff bonuses. Coaches are receiving huge signing bonuses while their schools flounder. Meanwhile Social Security cost of living increases are going to be frozen for the next three years, if not longer.

Does anyone besides me see the hypocrisy in all this?

Let Me Be Frank, Barney!

Have you noticed that those who shout the loudest have the most to hide? Yep, Mr. Frank, I talking about you! You headed the committee which passed a bill giving Treasury Secretary Geitner broad control over salaries at bailout companies. Fortunately, good sense prevailed and it died.

Now you've taken it a step further with the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009" where you intend to penalize all employees of bailout companies by tying their pay to performance for as long us the bailout money remains unpaid. Retroactively yet!

Okay folks. It's time for another Dogwalk solution. No more automatic pay raises for Congress. Let's insist on a "pay for performance" scale for them. After all, it is tax payer money! Let's let the whole country rate each and every one of them, not just the people in their districts or states who might be swayed by pork.

How would Barney fare? Let's look at the mortgage mess which actually began back in the Carter administration when mortgage lenders were being accused of being racist. Pressured to make loans to minorities and those with bad credit, lenders began loosening their standards under threat of punishment by regulators. Government chartered mortgage lenders, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, encouraged this "sub prime" lending then bought up the questionable mortgages.

We all know what happened. The bubble burst but all the while Frank insisted Freddie and Fannie faced no financial crisis. Right. Also, all the while, he blamed the private sector for having gotten us into the mess. With a lot of arm twisting by the government.

Barney Frank is the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. A one time partner of Frank's was an executive at Fannie who helped develop many of the lending programs. During that time Frank blocked tough regulations on banking companies.

Okay. Frank has been in the House since 1981. He's had his fingers in a lot of pies and a go round with the House Ethics Committee over a sex scandal. Idaho's Larry Craig, not unfamiliar with such, led an attempt to have him expelled or censured over that episode. It failed but the House did vote 408 to 18 to reprimand him. Of course, as it goes in Washington, he won re-election several times over.

In the 28 years he's been in Congress I'm sure he has been on the right side of some issues. His constituents would probably give him a 10 on a scale of 10, but what would the public as a whole give him? If we can't have term limits why not hit them where it really hurts? In the pocketbook. I'm not a constituent, you see, and my rating would definitely be "sub prime"!

Obama - Messiah Or Dictator?

There is a difference between anger and worry. I've experienced too much of both lately as I watch the administration try to mend the financial crisis by trial and error.

Today, I'm halting the emotions at worry. Tomorrow it may well be back to full blown anger. I am extremely uncomfortable with the sanctions that are being heaped on corporations receiving bailout money without the ground rules being set at the get go.

Take for instance the exit of Rick Wagoner from GM. GM was to submit their reorganization plans by March 31. That's tomorrow. However, the "auto czar", who has no auto industry experience, decided it wasn't adequate. The President, on his own, told Wagoner if there was to be any chance for GM to get additional help he had to go. Did Obama have that right? Should he have that right?

Granted, the GM board should have removed Wagoner long ago. And yes, it's tax payer dollars being used to bail them out. But without preset rules and an arbitrary opinion from someone outside the industry, it makes Mr. Wagoner the scapegoat. For what? To make the administration look tough?

I listened to Obama say that for GM to go in a new direction it needed new leadership. Wagoner's number two took over. Is that new leadership?

Okay, there can be a lot of arguments for everything the administration is doing because of tax payer dollars. However, more and more it looks to be an attempt to change the way corporate America works and if so, you'll soon see us as a diminished nation even more than we already are.

The New York Times had a story which was even more frightening. They are considering regulating executive pay via regulation rather then legislation. This smacks of dictatorship.

Even worse, they are considering extending this practice to financial institutions not receiving bailout money and even to publicly traded companies.

Obama campaigned on regulation to give share holders a larger say in setting executive pay. Well, that's the responsibility of the board. If the shareholders don't like what the board is doing they can vote them out. The hitch here is the shareholders have to exercise their right and vote their proxy's if they can't attend the annual meetings.

Just like politics. You have to vote to have a say. The responsibility, in that respect, falls on the shareholders, not the executives.

"What about corporate greed?" you may ask. There is far too much of it to be sure. But if what the administration is attempting doesn't shape them up nothing will. They will just move off shore.

Speaking of greed, how about the greed for power? To have the ultimate authority to reshape an entire country into a vision not necessarily sanctioned by the people? To dictate what CEO's can and cannot do while giving Unions a pass? By doing an end run around Congress?

Think about it. We criticized the Bush administration mightily for all Bush's signing statements stating he was going to ignore parts of passed legislation. We criticized Bush for ignoring the Constitution on many occasions. We criticize the Christian Conservatives for trying to hijack the government so they can force their agenda on those of us who don't agree with it.

I'm worried. Oh, yes I am. I see our President running around the country and the world as head cheerleader while in truth the team is making up the rules as they go. Who's our cheerleader and how can we win? Without a say, we can't.

Pitch Forks and Forked Tongues

For awhile now I've been suggesting the recipients of the "bailout bonuses" aren't necessarily the bad guys. This morning on Meet the Press David Gregory repeatedly asked Timothy Geitner, why, if he knew of the bonus plan at it's inception when he was still with the Fed, did he not object rather than feigning anger so far after the fact. Geitner never answered the question. No surprise there. Never stray from the administration's talking points.

As distasteful as the whole AIG mess has been, it is but the tip of the iceberg and shows what a bunch of hypocrites we have holding the reins. According to Newsweek , five major TARP recipients made campaign contributions to members of committees overseeing the TARP program since the administration came to power. You know, the ones in front of the cameras expressing their outrage.

Two of those receiving the contributions are House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and GOP Whip Eric Cantor. This is the first real sign of bipartisanship I've seen!

The rationale is that this money doesn't actually come from the company, but rather it's employees. This is how it works. The company has a political action committee (PAC) to which the employees are strongly advised to contribute. Therefore it is employee money. The problem, as I see it, is the employee has no say as to where the money goes. To me that makes it, technically, a corporate contribution of employee funds.

Hoyer's office said accepting such contributions is legal and "policy". Pelosi and Frank have said they won't take money from TARP recipients but, the article goes on, House fundraisers have said that "down the road" they will resume accepting them. Right. As soon as it's back under the radar!

This is not how I envisioned the pay back would work. I would have thought the money would go back into the treasury coffer; not campaign coffers! It indicates to me we do indeed have the best Congress money can buy!

Intimidation Is Not Justice

When I was a youngster, there were two things I was forbidden to discuss with my friends. My mother's age and my dad's salary. They were no one's business. Nor were they mine for I knew neither.

When I learned New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo threatened to make the names of the AIG bonus recipients public it was one more step too far. His rationale was that the public had a right to know where their tax dollars went. They already do. They went to bonuses. It need go no further. The recipients had no part in determining the bonuses.

He finally thought better of it. Considering the recipients had been instructed to call 911 should they feel at all threatened, to watch out for anyone who might seem suspicious around their place of business or home and to wear nothing that would indicate that they were an employee. Of course there was also the e-mailed suggestion that these recipients "should be executed with piano wire around their necks."

It seems this whole fiasco is surrounded by people who are trying to further their careers, like Mr. Cuomo, or save their careers like Geitner and Bernanke, Dodd and Frank.

This administration and those entwined with it are beginning to bear an uncomfortable resemblance to the Bush administration's governing by fear. Bush relieved us of too many of our rights in the name of "security". The Obama administration is using the economic melt down to grab power.

Yes, we are suffering the consequences of bad management and greed but fear mongering to the point of turning us into frothing mobs of hatred is no way to solve the problem.

"We have nothing to fear but fear itself" no longer rings true. We well should fear those who instill it.

A Step Too Far!

According to the International Herald Tribune the Obama administration is going to seek an increase in oversight of executive pay.

Whoa! This is taking the current populist stance way too far. I can understand strict oversight of the companies who have accepted bailout money willingly, but for those whom those monies were forced on or those not involved at all, this is intrusion we will come to regret.

I think what's happening here is the general public is seeing the multi million dollar figures without knowledge of how large corporations conduct their business nor how executive level employees across the board are compensated. The administration is fast approaching European socialism where governments intrude in all things corporate.

I've read hundreds of blogs parroting the outrage of the dollar amounts of the bonuses while the populist are losing their jobs and homes. How many companies other than AIG are handing out similar bonuses? A lot. Is the public equally outraged at this? Are they even aware of it? Has it finally hit home that both Geitner and the Fed were aware of the AIG bonus plan before and complicit with it before the money was distributed? Has it come across that Senator Dodd, who denied putting the clause in the stimulus package allowing the bonus to be paid, did in fact put it in? That he lied? And that Geitner did too by not coming forward with this information?

Let's see where the outrage is for a few other things like the multi million dollar contracts athletes get, not to mention signing bonuses for untried players. How about the cost to tax payers when they're held hostage by team owners who want a new stadium or arena and won't put up the money themselves but threaten to pull the team? Where's the outrage from the people who will never make that kind of money nor get those bonuses nor even attend a game. A game! I won't even get into the money Hollywood puts out for trash! Where's the outrage? All the while this is happening people are still losing their jobs and their homes.

At the moment everything bailout is in a state of chaos. It reminds me a bit of the French Revolution when Marie Antoinette was saying, "Let them eat cake" as the people were starving. The people rebelled and aristocratic heads rolled. A parallel exists here by looking at how the web that has been spun is beginning to strangle those who wove it. That's why I suggested in yesterday's post it's time for Obama to scale back his own big picture agenda and get a handle on what in the grand scheme of things should be a relatively minor blip. Or does he really want this "revolution" to continue fomenting?

Obama should take note of Georges Danton, a revolutionist himself who fell out with Robespierre. He's noted for saying, as he went to meet Madam Guillotine, "La revolution devore ses enfantes." The revolution eats it's own children. What did he do that was so egregious to the more extreme of his own kind? He was not a fanatic and was capable of moderation and genuine reason.

This is how I view Obama. However, if he doesn't start leading, the more extreme segments of his own party as well as we, his people may begin a revolution he'll not be able to contain. Maybe now is the time for some heads to roll!

Welcome To The Real World Congressman!

Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR), welcome to the world of your constituency! In other words, welcome to the real world.

Take a good look at this man. He could be a terrorist. No? He was pulled out of line for special security screening at the Portland International Airport. He was not happy. Nor should a 12 term Congressman be happy with such treatment. Neither am I when it comes to me! It's intrusive, it's embarrassing and it's intimidating.

Having already gone through security before boarding a flight in Eugene, he was making a connecting flight to D.C. in Portland when he was pulled from line and searched by rubber gloved TSA agents. It didn't feel good at all did it Congressman?

This member of the House Transportation aviation sub-committee told TSA officials "it was a stupid practice"! Do tell.

One thing I do not understand is why both the Congressman and the TSA admitted security operations are a "work in progress". Why? These searches have been going on and getting far more intrusive since long before 9/11. Why is it still a work in progress?

Time for another Dogwalk solution. Make every member of Congress fly from airports where they are not easily recognized. Out of their states and districts. See how they like being treated like the rest of us. More than a handful, I'd wager, will agree "There's room for improvement". Maybe that would force Mr. DeFazio and his aviation sub-committee to change that which he observed. "The TSA is off track and we are going to fix the policy."

Just make sure its for all of us. Not just members of Congress!

Blogging Does Not Automatically Equate Journalism

There is an article on Breitbart that tells me journalism is evolving, not dying. It points to the ever widening spread of the Internet as the reason. I, for one, skim many news sources on the web just to put together a post. But what of the millions of people, not only in this country, but worldwide, who do not have Internet access be it because of location or financial ability? Without hard copy newspapers how are they to be informed?

This brings to mind a headline today from the Salisbury, Maryland paper in which the Mayor, in her State of the City address suggested that mean spirited bloggers were the biggest threat the city faces. The news story was a fair analysis of the Mayor's comments.

The Spokesman Review's Huckleberries picked up on it and asked the following:

Question: In Coeur d’Alene, there are three online sites that touch of city of Coeur d’Alene business regularly — this one, OpenCDA.com, and the Coeur d’Alene Press comments section. The latter two sites are openly antagonistic to Mayor Sandi Bloem’s administration. Do you think those sites help or hurt the city?

I find it interesting when asking if readers thought the local blog sites were detrimental to the city, the moderator neglected to include his own. While he is correct that the other two sites are mostly antagonistic to the city administration and it's urban renewal agency, it is not always without cause. I should think being pro administration, no matter what, can be just as detrimental.

Following is the pertinent excerpt from Mayor Parsons' speech:

While we face the same challenges that other cities and towns are facing, our biggest
challenge by far is a small element within the City that consistently seeks to find
“smoking guns” and conspiracies within the ranks of the City workforce. Daily, I run into
citizens who are weary of the constant “gotcha” mentality on the part of a few citizens
and City Council members. Citizens fear standing up and serving because it quite simply
is not worth the vilification they chance at the hands of blogs and with threatening phone
calls.

Each week I do a taping on a radio station. This past week, I interviewed Gary Comegys
who is running for Mayor. The day the taping was to be broadcast, the station received a
very early morning call from a local lawyer threatening the station manager that if the
station aired the program they would be in violation of the FCC regulations. The week
before, that same lawyer called the owner of a senior complex at his home in
Westminster with a similar threat. The owner of the complex had invited his residents to
a lunch for Comegys and Councilwoman Shanie Shields. This lawyer stated that if the
luncheon were held, the owner would be in violation of federal law because the complex
was built through a program that awards tax credits on a highly competitive basis to
ensure affordable rents for residents. In both cases, there appears to be no legal backing
for his statements. He simply is utilizing threats and intimidation in the hope that those
whom he opposes in the election will have no advantage.

This is the same man who fostered the idea of a taxpayers’ suit against me during my first
year in office. This was dismissed at the most basic judicial level, but not before it cost
the City and our insurance carrier $32,000. In the intervening years, he has enjoyed the
ears of at least one member of each City Council and has cost the City tens of thousands
of dollars in legal and staff time. In almost every case, there has been no legal basis for
his claims and accusations. However much like the taxpayers suit against me in 1998, it
costs money, energy, time and focus from those good and decent people who come to
work everyday to simply do their job.

This is not about differences of opinion and policy questions. This is quite simply mean-
spirited ugly constant intimidation. Combined with the lies and innuendo of several
“bloggers” this city is under siege. Routinely, I receive calls and e-mails from citizens
who disagree with my positions on individual matters. We talk and often find common
ground, and sometimes agree to disagree. It is a very valuable process and I always find
that I see whatever issue under consideration from a new perspective.

This poses a far greater danger to the Salisbury’s future than the current financial crisis.
When people are afraid to step forward, run for office, speak on relevant issues, write
letters to the editor expressing individual opinions, then the future is in jeopardy. I leave
this job, an adventure that I have enjoyed with a firm conviction that the people of this
great city need to stand up and say, “No More”. Only then can we move forward to meet
the serious challenges and build upon the dreams and hard work of the twenty-four
mayors who preceded me in service to this City.

Sorry it is so lengthy, but it goes to the point that Coeur d'Alene's Mayor Bloem could have used much the same rhetoric. What isn't known, in either case, is how close to the truth the "mean and nasties" have come versus the credibility of the mayor's complaint?

There is no "journalism" involved in these blogs even though the Press blogs are under the banner of the Coeur d'Alene Press and Huckleberries is under the Spokesman Review's banner. Blogs are not necessarily and most often not journalism! They are opinion - right, wrong or indifferent. Bearing a newspaper's banner, at least locally, does not change that.

Rhetoric, on either side, can mask the truth. It cannot negate the truth. The question is will the truth will out? And if so, without good journalism, how?

The Whole World Is Suspect!

And we had better be watching for aliens from outer space!

USA Today reports that the government's terrorist watch list has now hit 1 million. That's a 32% increase since 2007! Now just how in the world do you keep track of that?

The FBI says 95% are foreigners. Terrific. People are put on it by intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Like the local traffic cop after issuing a ticket. Did you know that can happen? There are various levels of offenses that will get you on the list but just what the offense may be is not divulged.

What makes the matter worse, when people seek redress, some 51,000 in the past two years, they find that they have been misidentified. Do you think? Some of those names include Senator Edward Kennedy and Nelson Mandela. There is also Robert Johnson. Now there's an uncommon name. I know a Robert Johnson. The only thing he's likely to terrorize is a bottle of Scotch! John Williams? Which one? I must not forget John Anderson. Age 6.

Long before 9/11 we lived in Seattle. We often went to Canada to camp or do the galleries. We also groused about how long it took to get back across the border. To come home! It's much worse now. What are they going to do during the Winter Olympics? It will be madness.

I haven't flown for several years. I resent being pawed by "security" guards for, as I was once told, "my own good". I resent the passengers who when interviewed repeat the mantra, "well, as long as they're keeping us safe". From who? The 9/11 hijackers were here legally!

There are some 12 million illegal aliens in this country. How many of those names are on the watch list? Is yours? Is mine? This is one more instance where a bloated bureauracy has run amok and in so doing become largely ineffectual. There are no specific rules for who goes on the list. There is no easy way to get off the list.

Some intent on doing us harm will slip through the cracks. Even with all that is now in place - or maybe because of what is now in place. We'd do well to learn a lesson from the Europeans who've learned to pick themselves up and move on.

One million names and growing. The more it grows the more liberties we lose. Will we ever again be free of fear? Will we ever again be able to cross our borders or fly or sail or take a train without being screened? Which one of our lost liberties will be the one where we finally say enough? Or will we always be like lemmings marching to the sea until there is nothing left?

The Pork Queen - Nancy Pelosi

All across America small towns have their celebrations complete with Queen and court. It would seem we have one on the national level too.

Politico reports that House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi is open to a second stimulus package. She criticized the media for being too critical about the first for expecting too much too soon. Was there not enough pork in the first? Was there not enough allocated to save her little marsh mouse or find out why pigs smell the way they do?

This from the woman, who if she were up for a cabinet position, would probably have some tax problems of her own. While the new members of Congress fly commercial with the rest of we peons, she is known for demanding high end military aircraft to shuttle her entourage, including family, around and letting her upset be known should they not be readily available. Does she reimburse the military for their use? Does she pay tax on those jaunts as additional income? I rather doubt it. If Sarah Palin has to reimburse Alaska for family sojourns, then too should Ms. Pelosi reimburse the military. Not just for a first class ticket, either, but the full freight for operating expenses.

I do have to find fault with the President for allowing as much pork to pass in the first stimulus bill as was done, but is it me or does Ms. Pelosi just not get it? Actually, I think she gets it just fine. It's just that no one has had the will to reign her in. I find that worrisome.

The good news of the day is the market is up and Citi actually showed a profit. The bad news is the Democrats hold the house with the Pork Queen as speaker. The reason people are getting impatient is because they don't see the stimulus. Where is the job creation?

Military personnel cleaning up the planes after a Pelosi flight certainly isn't a job saved or created. If that is the thinking, then I can assuredly explain why pigs stink. They are, after all, pork.

The Best Reason For Breaking Our Dependence On Foreign Oil

This is a Saudi woman after having been lashed 50 times for the mistake of being raped.

A streamer on CNN this morning tells us a 75 year old widow in Saudi Arabia has been sentenced to 40 lashes and four months in jail for having bread brought to her house. That in itself was not her crime, but the fact that it was delivered by two young men to whom she was not related. If her appeal is denied what are her chances of surviving?

I have never been an isolationist and I understand we do not understand many cultures other than those of the civilized western world, but to maintain relations with barbarians for the sake of - what? - is insane. Countries who employ "religious police" to enforce an ideology defy comprehension.

I'm sorry. This is the 21st century. There is no excuse, especially under the guise of "religion" or "Islamic law", to tolerate such behavior. We've found, over the past eight years, that not only do we not understand them, we cannot change them. It's time we stop trying.

Instead of trying to bring Islamic terror mongers to heel by bribing war lords, perhaps it's time to isolate them. Truly isolate them. Left to their own devices perhaps they will destroy one another. Without the West's money and trade they have little to sustain themselves. You can't grow enough food stuffs in the desert to feed entire nations. Western countries have oil reserves; Canada does - we have our own. We might consider mending bridges with the Venezuela's of the world. While their leadership is unsavory, it hasn't yet fallen to the depths of the Islamic countries.

If we still can't quell the urge to "change" the world, let's help the poor African nations that are being systematically starved and slain into oblivion. What? They don't have any oil?

We haven't been able to bring human rights to China, obviously not to the women in Islamic countries and for that I am truly sick because we can't get them out. Nor, however, do we have to enable those who oppress them and that is exactly what we are doing.

Perhaps our efforts would be better spent helping to overthrow two bit dictators like Mumgabi in Zimbabwe! What? They have no oil??

Seeing women being lashed for the sport of men is a deplorable reality. Seeing children with flies thick on open sores barely covering skeletal little bodies that are starving is an equally deplorable reality.

One is ethnic cleansing. One is called religion. If the latter be true it doesn't take much to see why so many are beginning to question if, indeed, there is a God.