Latest News

  • JFK Conspiracy Theories

    JFK Conspiracy Theories

    Author Administrator

    Two conspiracy theorists die and go to heaven. St. Peter tells them that Heaven is a place of all knowledge, so they can each ask him one question and he will reveal the answer to them. The first one says "Who killed John F. Kennedy?" St. Peter says "Lee Harvey Oswald." The other says "Who was he working with?" St. Peter says "He acted alone." The two of them look at each other and say "Wow! The coverup is bigger than we thought!" But seriously, what keeps this stuff going? Some would say the evidence. Other would say mental illness. I myself am unsure, and I have a hard time really focusing on this one as I didn't live through it. This article is pretty much a starting point for me and a note to self. Steve, debunk this one.

  • Defending Incognito

    Defending Incognito

    Author Administrator

    As with any story, it is hard to say what happened unless you were there yourself. So why do I feel the need to post an article defending Richie Incognito? Because I can recognize a good snow job when I see one, and there is a blizzard coming from Jonathan Martin and company on this deal. Now to be fair, I am well aware that I am in the minority opinion on this one. Chances are if you are reading this you already have an opinion on this topic. Either I am preaching to the choir or I am dealing with a skeptic who wants to get a good chuckle at a brainwashed Dolphins fan defending the indefensible. So while I typically take the approach of building a good case, let me lay the best logical argument I have on you to kick this thing off.

  • Don't Drink The Tea

    Don't Drink The Tea

    Author Administrator

    Scott Brown, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, and Rick Snyder. What do these guys have in common? If you are a tea party member, then you already know the answer. Rick Snyder accepted the Medicare expansion for his state. Marco Rubio tried to tackle immigration reform. Scott Brown... who am I kidding? Like they need a reason? Heck, Chris Christie hugged Obama, let's throw him under the Tea Party Express. These are all candidates once endorsed by the Tea Party who have found themselves on the outs with the same group.  Now, with another midterm election looming around the corner, it appears Mitch McConnell has made the Tea Party Hit List as well. But before you guys get too far into this, would you kindly allow me to present you with some simple logic?

  • Black Suits and Knickerbockers

    Author Administrator

    If you think political talk radio is a brutal place, you should try sports talk radio. In the world of news talk, you have a biased hosed with a political agenda attempting to spin current events to make you see them his way. In the world of sports talk, you largely have a field of minds so jammed with statistics and dates that they are unable to form a point of view on anything other than a simple Vegas line, let alone manage to try to find a way to spin the event for the mindless masses who tune it. This can make listening to channels like Mad Dog Radio on Sirius and XM Radio an exercise in frustration. Yet it is an exercise that I perform almost daily, and occasionally I call in to try to straighten some of these guys out. My latest beef? The New York Knicks.

  • Abortion: Leopards Vs Hyenas

    Author Administrator

    One of the major drawbacks of being a blogger who has opinions that don't always fit the mainstream of either political party is that, after awhile, the party faithful tend to tune you out. Truth be told, I tend to get more responses from the left than from the right when I post my articles to facebook. On the issue of abortion, I am a guy who was once in the pro life political camp until my views evolved (politically, not personally) to pro choice. Yet I have long believed, ever since I knew there even was such an issue, that we should all be able to find some common ground on a child that has been born alive. That was, of course, before I knew about a State Senator from Illinois named Barack Obama and a doctor from Pennsylvania named Kermit Gosnell.

Tweet This

Print

If Not Now, Whom?

Written by Administrator on .

Republicans Vs DemocratsAs the Federal Government nears a potential shutdown, many members of the media wish to focus on which party will get the blame from the American people. The politicians seem to be all ready to cater to this wish by pointing fingers back and forth across the aisle. Once again, in typical bottom feeder fashion, the disease is overlooked in an attempt to cure the symptoms. Public opinion is important to the politicians, and public attention is the goal of the media, leaving the few of us who care about what is actually happening to dissect the story and work our way to the bottom. The right says the budget should have been passed last year. The left says the Republicans are trying to use the budget to score political points. Which side is right? Both. Here is how President Obama put it today.

 

"It would be inexcusable of us to not be able to take care of last year's business ... when we are this close, simply because of politics,"

Now let's face it. I am clearly on the right, and I should probably stomp my foot and feign righteous indignation at the Presidents assertion that my side is trying to score political points out of this budget deal. I'll spare you (and myself) the indignity. We are trying to score political points. We are trying to de-fund public broadcasting, planned parenthood, and a host of other left wing pet projects. Yes, that would be a political score for us.

On the other side, yes the budget should have been passed last October. Yet to pretend that the point is that the Democrat controlled House, Senate, and White House were derelict in their duty is to miss the point. The real point is why did they not pass a budget last year. Politico reported on this a year ago and said the following.

Indeed, some Democratic insiders suspect that leaders will skip the budget process altogether this year — a way to avoid the political unpleasantness of voting on spending, deficits and taxes in an election year — or simply go through a few of the motions, without any real effort to complete the work.

Republicans responded then with a letter to then Speaker Pelosi, urging her to put forth a budget proposal. I quote from that letter here.

While we may disagree on a number of issues, one issue we can all agree on is that our nation’s long-term fiscal outlook is unsustainable. The gap between revenues and expenditures, already large by historical standards, is only going to become larger over time. The longer Congress waits to deal with this fiscal imbalance, the more difficult the choices become to solve this problem. The time to start making decisions about our long term deficit is not some time in the distant future, but now.

The purpose of the Congressional budget is to create enforceable parameters within which Congress can consider legislation dealing with spending and revenue. In the absence of a budget, there would be virtually no procedural enforcement mechanism to constrain spending in either the House or the Senate. Especially in an election year, this would be an open invitation for Congress to increase spending to unprecedented levels.

In the current environment, prudent fiscal discipline is more important than ever. As we have seen in countries such as Greece, failure to adopt sensible spending restraint can have catastrophic implications.

Now, let's look at this realistically. At the time Republicans stood to gain big in the House and the Senate in the upcoming elections. Was it playing politics to ask the Democrats to pass a budget before they increased their power? Of course it was. If the Democrats had forced their members to vote through an unpopular budget in October, it would further increase Republican gains in November. The Democrats, well aware of that, decided to focus on "whom" as opposed to "when". Is the headline making sense yet?

This was a calculated political decision by the Democrats to try to protect their ranks, and the budget was thereby passed off to after the elections. Yet they still had a chance to pass this budget after the votes were cast. Having lost part of their majority in the Senate and all of it in the House, they once again sacrificed the budget to their political whims. Knowing that controversial issues that score points with their base (like repealing DADT and passing the DREAM Act) would be hard to have addressed in their newly shaped political future, they focused on these issues rather than the budget in the closing days of their majority session.

Now today, President Obama comes out and accuses the right of playing games and trying to score political points, and I'm supposed to shy away from that charge and give in to his demands? You had better think again. The Democrats already got their political payoff from the games they played with the budget, and now we are supposed to pass on ours?

Mr President, why don't you stop acting like a spoiled child and man up? You got to play your political games with the budget last fall, now it's our turn. If you don't like how your hand played out, that is not mine nor the elected Republicans problem. You can go throw your little temper tantrum in a secluded room of the White House if you like, but when the lights go out you are lying in the bed that you made. Quit crying to the American people like we are some kind of push-over mommy who will make the neighbor kid play nice. It was a bitter pill when we swallowed it, but we did. Now it's your turn. Enjoy!

Gallery

Phinatic