Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Jeff Bezo & The Washington Post

So the presidential general election cycle is almost upon us and here we go....

‘Not an appropriate way for a presidential candidate to behave’: Bezos fires back at Donald Trump 

A story by The Washington Post.  

Are you thinking what I am thinking?  Jeff Bezos owns The WaPo. The WaPo is now doing a story on the owner of their paper saying that Donald Trump does not 'behave like a presidential candidate'.

There are two ways to go with this story.  Shall I focus on the WaPo doing a story quoting the owner who was, at the time of the quote, appearing at a WaPo sponsored event called Transformers where he was interviewed by the WaPo Executive Director Martin Baron at the WaPo headquarters.  What's wrong with that?

Or, should I take their bait and discuss whether The Donald is correct?  Nah...

Let's go with option #1:  

Where to start?  Oh yeah,  let me set the scene.  The reporter, Paul Farhi, is sent to cover an event called Transformers.  This event is held (conveniently) at his place of work, thus cutting the travel expenses, I suppose.  So there he is listening attentively and taking notes at the event held at his place of work when there appears his boss (actually, probably his bosses boss) to apparently lead a Q & A discussion at the Transformers event held at his place of work.  Then his boss, introduces the owner of the company he works for (his bosses, bosses, boss?) for the interview.  Can't you just feel the pressure on this reporter to cover this event Transformers held at his place of work.

So when it is all said and done poor Paul Farhi had to write a story about the owner of the company he works for being interviewed by his bosses boss.  He needs to play this straight done the line, right?

Let's look:

Here's a good one,in one paragraph the report writes:  
Bezos was responding to criticism leveled against him and The Post by Trump last week.
He followed this up with this: 

An an interview with Fox News’s Sean Hannity on Thursday, Trump accused Bezos of using The Post to protect himself from higher taxes. He presented no evidence for his assertion.[emphasis mine]
Oh, really? So poor Paul went on:
“Amazon is controlling so much of what they’re doing,” he said. “And what they’ve done is he bought this paper for practically nothing, and he’s using that as a tool for political power against me and against other people, and I’ll tell you what, we can’t let him get away with it.”
To prove The Donald wrong, poor Paul pulls this gut punch the The Donald:
The paper’s editorial board, which is separate from its newsroom, has editorialized in favor of taxing online retailers such as Amazon the same as bricks-and-mortar stores. The paper’s position hasn’t changed since Bezos bought the paper, said Fred Hiatt, the editorial-page editor.
Oh.  Well then that settles it, right?  Wait.  Where is the evidence for this assertion?  Maybe he was trying to back up this statement when poor Paul wrote this:
“As the individual who oversees The Washington Post’s news staff, I can say categorically that I have received no instructions from Jeff Bezos regarding our coverage of the presidential campaign — or, for that matter, any other subject,” Baron said. “The Post has a long tradition of publishing thorough examinations of the major-party nominees for president. The decision to write a book on Donald Trump came entirely from the newsroom.”[emphasis mine]
But, here's the head scratcher:
Trump’s latest criticism of Bezos was sparked by comments made by Post reporter Bob Woodward last week during a speech to a business group. Woodward said, accurately, that the paper had assigned some 20 reporters to produce a biography of Trump. He added that Bezos has urged the newspaper to produce multiple stories on the presidential candidates as part of its duty to inform voters about the next president.
He said, ‘Look, the job at The Washington Post has to be tell us everything about who the eventual nominee will be in both parties — 15-part, 16-part series, 20-part series, we want to look at every part of their lives, and we’re never going get the whole story, of course, but we can get the best attainable,” Woodward told the group.[emphasis mine]
So which is it Paul? Does Bezo instruct the newsroom, or doesn't he? 

Friday, December 04, 2015

My take on Syed Farook and TashFeen Malik's Terrorist Attack

I know.  You have all been waiting for my thoughts on the California shootings.  So here it goes (liberals should leave now).
Investigation predictions:
1) Syed Farook (the husband) found a 'devote' Muslim via for muslims.  He was likely prone to extremism.  Why else would he seek for a suitable 'wife' on the other side of the world when he was actively involved in his local mosque and could have found a suitable wife right here in the good 'ol USA?
2) Tashfeen Malik was sent to Saudi Arabia to 'school' where she was radicalized, whether she was sent there to be radicalized or not, she was radicalized and/or learned her tradecraft in Saudi Arabia.
3) Some entity financed the relationship and the ensuing purchase of their arsenal consisting of readily available weapons & ammunition plus pipe bombs and remote control cars for delivery.  I believe (while, likely untraceable) the money came from Saudi Arabia.
4) Once here and married (or visa versa) they readily adapted to their surroundings.  They did what any newly married young couple would do, they made a baby.  Here is a disturbing part.  The child was not a result of a loving relationship between a married couple.  It was a prop in a masquerade as a happily married muslim couple.  No mother who had any vision of a life-long relationship with their child would voluntarily leave their baby behind to a likely suicide mission along side their husband.
5) Once here and married (and likely before - probably by whoever introduced them in Saudi Arabia) they began to plan a terrorist attack.  The attack they planned was likely much larger than the one they carried out, this the pipe bombs and transportation remote control cars for a delivery method.
6) Once here and married, as time ticked on, they began to plan an attack.  The more time they spent planning the attack, the more Syed felt dissed at work.  His anger grew at work and his radicalization was fed by his far more radical wife at home.
7) They decided an attack was likely imminent so they began to destroy their digital footprint by destroying hard drives and untraceable cell phones.
8) At the Christmas party, someone said something that pushed Syed over the edge.  He decided to push up the timeline of the planned attack. So he went home where he got loaded up with weapons, ammunition and bombs.  His wife insisted on joining him as he returned to the party to kill his co-workers.  They left their baby with their live-in baby sitter, his mom [ a likely co-conspirator].  They loaded up and returned to the party which was held in an insecure 'gun-free' building.
9) The big reveal (which will probaly NEVER be reported) is that all the money and all of the training came from Saudi Arabia.  remember 15 of 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi born citizens.
Here is something to think about:

All the crap going on in the muslim world and NO ATTACKS of any consequence has occurred in Saudi Arabia.  I do not believe in coincidences. The Middle-east is burning to the ground all around them (literally - look at a map) and Saudi Arabia is silent and unaffected? How is that possible? Muslim refugees are fleeing Syria and Iraq and NONE are seeking refuge in Saudi Arabia?  How is that possible?  Saudi Arabia has almost ALL the OIL money (not most of which is the USA's anymore, thankfully).

Now is the time to jam it up the Saudi's a**.  They cannot escape this anymore.  It is time to stand up to Saudi Arabia.
Want some background on Saudi Arabia?  Why not watch the last straight journalist left in the USA.

Monday, October 26, 2015

American Dominance is Being Challenged....

This article from the Economist is interesting, but as I point out in my comments below, the author doesn't really scratch the surface of the material facts.

Here is the article from The Economist:

The new game
American dominance is being challenged

There are a number of things being overlooked by the author. 

First, China as it exists today in untenable.  It is far more likely to collapse from within than any of the 'superpowers' or BRIC countries.  Its one child policy has left it with an aging workforce and not enough younger workers to fill the jobs necessary to sustain their economy (circa 2008 it took an additional 25 million new jobs a year to sustain their economy - I'm not sure the number today).  The chances of the yuan becoming the world currency is practically nil, at least until the Chinese government allows it to float, which is very unlikely under a communist regime. China does not have enough of its own natural resources and must import a massive amount of raw materials from other countries, largely from South America and the African Continent.  This makes them as dependent on those countries as those countries are on China.  

Which leads to my second point, the USA rules the seas - all of the seas - and no other single country can come close.  For example:
  • Of the 19 active air craft carriers the U.S. has 10 of them, China and Russia 1 each.  
  • Destroyers: U.S.: 62, China 25, Russia 12.  
  • Were the U.S. does lag behind is subs.  The U.S. has 71 missile & attack subs to China's 69 and Russia's 49.  
  • All in the U.S. has approximately 3+ Million tons of naval power, China 1 million and Russia 900,000.  
Additionally, the U.S. currently has 2 subs to be commissioned in 2016, 2 more currently under construction, and 20 more announced (7 already named).  There are an 44 more vessels in various stages.  All in that's 68 new vessels added to our fleet (not sure how many are scheduled to be decommissioned).  Regardless, my point is we are not, by nature of the number of vessels, going to lose control of the seas anytime soon.  However, another 8 years of foreign policy [or. lack thereof] like the last 8 years may have the U.S. simply cede control of the seas.

While I agree with the author that we are certainly not leading in the fight against ISIS and the Assad regime, I will acknowledge there is a possibility that the Obama regime may have dumbed into a scenario where Russia will get bogged down in the Middle East.  That is not something their economy can withstand long term unless oil prices jump dramatically.  If the U.S. manages their Middle Eastern policy correctly in the coming years, this could have one of two results.  First and most desirable would be for it to drive Putin from power – highly unlikely given his control over state-run media; or second he could be driven to do something extremely foolish in the region which would result in the world coalescing against Russia and beating them back from their expansionary plans via strict economic sanctions. Of course, there is a third option, which is Putin may simply go off the deep end and pull the world into WWIII.  

I would note that the U.S. did not lead the world in nuclear arms talks with the Iranians, the Obama regime lead the rise of Iran to be a legitimate nuclear armed country in less than a decade.  No one, save this author apparently, believes that Iran will abide to any agreement with the U.S.

Tuesday, October 06, 2015

POTUS: Let's talk about 'mass shootings'...

As the POTUS prepares to milk yet another tragedy to further his goal of limiting our 2nd Amendment Rights, we take a hard look at the data.  


246 homicides through September 26, 2015, September 2015 homicides up 39% from the same month in 2014 and 52% YTD over the previous year.  (non-fatal shooting are up 80% over 2014)
For the year, the 246 homicides recorded through Sept. 26 put Baltimore dangerously close to the record pace of 1993, when 353 people were victims of homicide. The fact that the spike occurred after April 19 bodes even worse: Before the unrest following the Gray arrest, Baltimore had recorded 65 homicides for the year. A four-decade high of 42 homicides in May was topped in July when 45 people were killed in homicides, making Baltimore the second deadliest city in America on a per capita basis, trailing only St. Louis.

Los Angeles.

486 homicides YTD [184 Black - 38%, 212 Latino - 44%, 61 White - 13%, 20 Asian - 4%]

Here are some graphics by the LA Times that show more detail.

New York City.

208 YTD up 9% over YTD 2014


351 YTD up 54%  over YTD 2014

Here is the data for the some of the largest U.S. cities:

2015 % Change
104 76%
St. Louis
136 60%
Baltimore 138 215 56%
Washington 73 105 44%
New Orleans 98 120 22%
Chicago 244 294 20%
Kansas City, Mo. 45 54 20%
Dallas 71 83 17%
New York 190 208 9%
Philadelphia 165 171 4%
1168 1490 30%
Year-to-date time periods range from Aug. 11 to Aug. 31.
Source: City police departments
By The New York Times

Can anyone please tell me what the common denominator is for these cities?  

Milwaukee:            Democrat or Socialist controlled since 1908
St Louis:                Democrat controlled since 1953
Baltimore:              Democrat controlled since 1967
Washington D.C.:  Democrat controlled since 1961 Last Republican 1883.
New Orleans:         Democrat controlled since 1936 Last Republican 1872.
Chicago:                 Democrat controlled since 1931
Kansas City, MO:  Democrat controlled since 1930 except for 1 Republican mayor
Dallas:                    Democrat Controlled since 1987 except for 1 term Republican
New York City:      Aside from the 8 years of Mayor Giuliani, it has been Democrat controlled since
                               1946 [Michael Bloomberg changed from Dem to Rep to get elected, then back to
                               Dem to stay elected.]
Philadelphia:          Democrat controlled since 1952

Do you notice any patterns?

According to Albert Einstein the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  

It is not difficult to conclude that the citizens of these cities are indeed insane.   

Monday, October 05, 2015

The Hillary doing her best to blame anyone but herself...

These clips are from NBC's Today Show October 5th - their 'Pancakes & Politics'.  I'm not holding my breath that they've have the equivalent production for any GOP nominee, except possibly The Donald, since he brings in big ratings and we all know they could you some help in that area.

What do you think?

I'm going with, delusional...

Monday, September 28, 2015

Being Black in Wisconsin

I have a response to this article from the website posted below.  But, before you read the article, I have to questions the author's credentials.  She is apparently from Wisconsin, growing up in Milwaukee.  I lived and worked in the city for 7 years in the 1990's (she was probably born in the 90's - ugh!).  Before that, I grew up in northern Wisconsin, in a very Mayberry atmosphere.  I did not learn about race until college.  I was social friends with the one black kid in our high school, it never occurred to me he was much different from me until I met him again in college.  He was with some of his 'brothers' and did not even acknowledge knowing me.  Then, when I lived and worked in Milwaukee I learned about segregation and racism in some very real ways.  The company I worked for employed up to a hundred twenty {mostly} blacks in entry level temporary jobs.  Many of these people were on probation and had ankle bracelets.  We employed so many of them in one location the parole office opened an office inside the same complex, so that our workers could check in on their breaks & lunch.  I could regale you with story after story of those years, some good, some not so much.

I suspect this girl's experience with race, racism and segregation is purely from the journalistic perspective.  I can assure you if she grew up in Milwaukee she probably lived in Whitefish (aka, white-folks) Bay.  Segregation is real in Milwaukee, or at least when I was there.  Blacks lived mostly west of the Milwaukee River, south of Brown Deer Rd, North of I-94 and west to about I-45. 

Let's face it, she's young and naive to say the least.  Which is why it's a shame she is allowed to write this psychobabble with impunity.

It isn’t easy being black in the Badger State

by Cristina Costantini

Here are some excerpts with my comments added:
Every year, my home state is rated one of the best states to grow up — if you’re white. But it’s one of the worst if you’re black.  
[This is, of course, untrue outside of Milwaukee & Madison. I doubt blacks in Green Bay, the Chippewa Valley, or LaCrosse would agree with this statement.]
When Wisconsin’s leaders talk about racial inequalities, they often point to longstanding segregation, chronic poverty, a failing public school system, and high black unemployment. But America’s Dairyland is plagued by another factor few Wisconsinites like talking about: very high and very unequal arrest rates.
Wisconsin has the second-highest arrest rate for juveniles in the country, behind only Indiana. Black kids are almost four times as likely to be arrested as white kids in the state, and five times as likely to be arrested for disorderly conduct, curfew violations, or loitering. 
[Again, this is disingenuous. What comes first? Long standing segregation? Chronic Poverty? Failing Public Schools? High Black Unemployment? Or, the very high and unequal arrest rates? She has it backwards. They are arrested at a higher rate, because of those things. What is the commonality between these social problems? Think about it, I'll come back to it later....]
In a city where whites outnumber blacks more than 11 to 1, Madison made over 1000 arrests of black children between the ages of 10 and 17 in 2013. It’s unclear how many kids may have been arrested more than once, but only 3,247 black children of that age live in the city, according to the Census. 
[Maybe I was one of those "lucky" white kids who got arrested between the age of 10-17.  Or, maybe I was just breaking the law.  Multiple times.  My point is, there were 1000 arrests out of 3,247 children.  Does that mean 1/3 of the kids were arrested?  No.  I was arrested 3 times from the age of 15-17.  Again, just lucky, I guess.  Actually, statistically speaking that was an almost nonexistent percentage compared to the amount of time I spent breaking laws.  But, I digress.  How many of the 100 arrests were the same bad apples?  My guess is a lot.]
Side note - They refer to a "big kid" named Christen Justice (really - Justice) who claims to have been wrongfully accused and then harassed. They even show a picture of him.  If you are from Wisconsin you'll note right away why this kid is being harassed.  For crying out loud, he's wearing a Hines Ward Pittsburgh Steelers jersey.  That alone makes him a target.  Just sayin'...  Put on a green and gold #12 jersey, make life simpler. 

She goes on describe how Madison is trying to change.  But, she misses the elephant in the room.

Remember I asked above what these places have in common?

So, what is the common denominator among ALL of these cities: Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, Houston, LA, Atlanta, Washington D.C., etc...?

Be honest, now. Research carefully before you answer.

That's right; they have been run by liberal democrats for generations. The blacks that live in these environments are the definition of insane (according to none other than Einstein himself): They do the same thing over and over again (i.e., vote for democrats) and they expect different results. Their great-great grandparents were likely Republicans, but FDR began that shift and LBJ cemented this unholy alliance between blacks and the democrat party. 

Their only hope is to learn the truth about the party they cannot seem to break free from. Hopefully, social media and the internet will allow those who have broken through to enlighten the rest that their hope for change from the democrat party never really existed. These un-kept promises aren't the fault of racist white Republicans, but of those city councilmen & women who sell them out every day for sweetheart deals that enrich themselves, those state district representatives who trade their future for campaign donations from teacher unions who keep them trapped in low performing schools by deigning school choice, their U.S. Congressmen who make sure the system is rigged to keep the underclass needy, so they can trade those "benefits" for votes from these same uneducated.

They are correct; the system is rigged against them. But, it is rigged by the people they are entrusting with their future - the democrat party. How many more decades will these people stay in abject poverty because they believe the lies? How many more young black men will go to prison where they will become radicalized against "The Man"? How many more young blacks will die on the streets of these cities because their own municipalities [run by democrats] will not allow their citizens their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms to protect themselves? How many more black families will be kept apart because the system their political party has created rewards women who bear children out of wedlock with more government benefits than those who are married?
People wonder why I hold the democrat party in great disdain. These are the reasons. I’ve witnessed it firsthand in both Milwaukee and Atlanta and it disgusts me. There will be no hope for the plight of blacks as long as the democrat party exists. Even worst for the blacks is that now their party is abandoning them for a more promising constituency: illegal immigrants. They will be even worse off and yet they stand beside these democrats and support them. 
The same goes for Jews. The democrats trade away the future of Israel and they continue their undying support of the same people.
It makes one wonder how all this is possible…?
Could it be due to the universities churning out liberals, making them conform to the leftist professors in order to get good grades?
Could be a leftist media, skewing every story with a leftist view point?
Could be that it is simply easier to be a liberal, where emotions and good intentions trump results because it makes people feel good?

Ideal GOP Political Platform Simplified...

Why is it so hard for seemingly intelligent people tell it like it is?  I'll give a few examples:

Illegal immigration:

The problems are huge but only in volume, not complexity.  40% of illegal immigrants came here legally and have over stayed their visas.  Why would be so hard to track them down and deport them?

14th amendment should be readdressed to reverse the anchor baby issue, which isn't a huge issue by volume, but is also not correct.  Trump is correct that the USA is one of a handful of countries in the world that allow this inane act.  It was originally targeted to native American's and ex-slaves, not women who come to the USA illegally to give birth in order to receive the plethora of government entitlements.

Finally, do we really not have enough immigration laws?  How would we know, when we haven't bothered to enforce many of them for decades.  How about we start enforcing them?

Fully implement E-Verify so that every employer cannot legally employ them.  Prosecute the employers, both companies and individuals who may employ housekeepers or landscapers.  Many will head back across the border on their own if they cannot find a job.

For the people who are left, I'd offer a 1 time chance for the following:
  • To register as an illegal immigrant.  You'd get a card and a court date.
  • On the court date, if you can provide proof of employment (which would be unlikely given the above restrictions on employment), proof you are legitimately paying taxes and not receiving government benefits, your ID card will become a illegal immigrant green card
  • The illegal immigrant green card will provide them with a place in line behind all the immigrants legally applying.
  • As long as the illegal immigrant maintains steady employment and pays taxes they can stay in the U.S.   
  • If for any reason the illegal immigrant cannot, they will be returned to their country of origin
  • If the illegal immigrant doesn't show up for their court date, a warrant for arrest would be issued and they'd be permanently denied legal citizenship and once discovered they'd be deported.
  • Any illegal immigrant with a criminal record (beyond being here illegally) will be denied citizenship.
  • Once an illegal immigrant green card is received, they will not be allowed to receive government benefits or to vote.
  • If they came here illegally and went through all this, then they can stay, but you will not be allowed to vote - ever.  The legal children of illegal immigrants would be allowed to vote (i.e., 2nd generation) 
  • Finally, what is so difficult about building a wall where it makes sense and installing electronic monitoring everywhere else to tighten up the border?  Just because it'd be a long wall?  Who cares?  If for no other reason, it should be built to keep out terrorists who aren't here already.
Middle East:

The U.S.A. has to be more engaged.  The damage has been done by Obama's leading from behind.  The evidence is everywhere.  ISIS must be defeated and that will likely require troops be returned to the dessert again.  I hate it, but anyone who says differently is naive, ignorant, lying, or some combination.


It should be made blatantly clear to the entire world that any attack on Israel is an attack on the US and it's NATO partners.  Mess with them and you'll pay a heavy price.


Install missile defense systems in Poland (which Obama reneged on), provide weapons and training to Ukraine and engage in NATO military exercises in the Baltic Sea and the plains of the Baltic States to show Putin the USA is back and we're in charge.


This is really handled through economic policy by allowing companies to repatriate their income if they return manufacturing to the US.  China is not the low cost producer it was in the 80's & 90's.  Once their manufacturing base begins to crumble, they'll be much more amenable to fair trade policies.  Once there is a little chink in the armor we can turn the heat up on human rights issues, their support of N. Korea, and their environmental policy.  We should also fight back (if we haven't already) on cyber terrorism.  We need to rebuild our navy to ensure the free flow of goods & services all over the world, especially the Pacific Rim.

Foreign Aid:

Eliminate all cash foreign aid to countries unless they have signed a treaty of non-aggression to the USA. No government shall receive any foreign unless there are free elections allowed.  This would be particularity applicable to African nations where the dictators receive aid in either cash, which they keep, or food which they promptly repackage so that it looks as if their own country is providing the aid to their population. In the case of the West African nations, we should encourage them to trade oil for food and insist the food be distributed through our own NGO's.  Remaining countries who would like the protection of the USA, should be providing us with payment for such services (i.e., Japan, Philippines, Korea, et al.).


Welfare state - Reinstate the requirement to be working to receive benefits that Obama suspended. You must also pass drug screening.  Block grant states their benefits based on population with bonuses to those who put more people back to work in real careers.  Provide childcare credits so parents can work and children can grow up seeing their parent go to work everyday in order to make a livelihood. Provide greater benefits to two parent households.

Social Security: Adjust the retirement age up.  60% benefits for those who retire between 62-65.  75% benefits for those who retire between 65-70.  90% for those who retire between 71-73.  100% for those who retire at 74 and over.  Same goes for income.  Anyone receiving retirement income, including union pensions, and tax-free income from muni's, annuities, trusts, etc.. would have their benefits reduced accordingly.  Benefits reduced by 25% for those whose income exceeds 200% of median household income, 50% over 300%, 75% over 400% and 100% over 500%.

The young should be able to opt out with proof of personal retirement investments equal to at least 10% of their pretax income annually.  This would be phases in over the 15-20 years.

Tax Simplification:

Phase 1 (1st term): Simple tax.  Eliminate all deductions, including those for home mortgages.  0% tax on first $50,000, 15% from $50,001 to $100,000, 20% from $100,001 to $300,000, $25% from $300,000-$500,000 and 30% on anything over $500,000.  All investment income taxed at this rate (i.e., eliminate capital gains tax, death tax, etc...)  The income in this example could be adjust to some percent of median income from previous tax year.

Eliminate income tax on repatriated profits of U.S. companies.

Eliminate all subsidies to industries (i.e. "corporate welfare') including all farm subsidies.

Allow companies instant depreciation on capital expenditures.

No special carve-outs for any company, industry or person.

Phase 2 (2nd term): Replace the simple tax with a consumption tax.  See: Fair Tax .


Abortion was made legal in all 50 states 1973 by 12 men in black robes.  Period.  All that is left for discussion are two things:
  1. What is the proper age in which a child may be murdered by their mother?
  2. Who is responsible to pay for said murders?
End of discussion.

Healthcare Reform:

Repeal Obamacare.  Replace with simple reforms:
  • Allow insurance companies to sell benefits across state lines.
  • Remove bundling of insurance (i.e., if you are a single man you should not be forced to pay for maternity coverage.)
  • Create a safety net pool for those with pre-existing conditions and for the unemployable.
  • Increase HSA usage - require it for all newborns and partially fund some HSA's for younger workers.  This money must be portable.  Some portion of you the HSA investment should be inheritable, with the balance going to fund the safety net for the indigent.  For example, if you've been contributing your entire life and you suddenly pass away at age 65 with a balance of $750,000 in your HSA, 75% is inheritable, while 25% goes into a fund (i.e., "lock-box) to fund healthcare for the indigent.  
  • No deductions for healthcare expenses, but would provide for lifetime cap, probably based on a multiple of your income.
  • This system would eventually phase out Medicare.
  • Every attempt should be made to encourage patients to directly pay the doctor, especially for routine visits such as check-ups and simple items to dispense prescriptions for cold,etc..
  • Allow drug companies to off-set future earnings by supplying prescriptions to the indigent for free or at a greatly reduced rate.
What's left...?

Cabinet/Department Consolidations:

Combine Departments of Labor, Commerce, Transportation and Agriculture, putting them under the Department of the Interior.  Department of Energy would be put under Defense.

Eliminate Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development

So the Departments would be as follows:
  • Department of Defense
  • Department of State
  • Department of Justice
  • Department of Interior
  • Department of Health and Human Services (I'd rename it: Department of Social Welfare - so no one would lose sight of it's real purpose.)
  • Department of Veterans Affairs (renamed: Department of Veterans Recovery)
  • Department of Homeland Security
The federal government should institute a hiring freeze for every department except for the recruiting of soldiers for the Department of Defense and Federal Air Traffic Controllers.  Open positions would be filled by current under-utilized employees from other departments.  Every department would have their REAL budget cut (not the 'Base-line-budget number) by 10% annually for 4 years, then 5% for 4 years.  This would put us back to pre-Obama budgets.


Every politician seems to run on term limits only to drop the subject once elected.  The POTUS should use his/her bully pulpit to urge the GOP controlled congress to pass the following term limits and reduction of pensions for congressmen & senators:

Congressmen: 3 terms.  Unless you complete all 3 terms no pension.  If you do, your pension would consist of $25,000 for life and be subject to a phase out similar to the Social Security means testing described above.

Senators: 2 terms, unless you served for any amount of time as a congressman, then 1 term and out. Same pension as Congressmen.

Congress should also eliminate all of the sweet benefits they receive, like free haircuts, free gym, etc...

Congress should be subject to Obamacare until it is repealed.

Veterans Healthcare:

Much like education, the money should follow the soldier, regardless of the provider.  If a vet needs common healthcare they should be allowed to go to any provider.  Vets with special needs such as PTSD therapy should be provided that care quickly and completely at Veterans Hospitals nationwide.  In the rare case where the care isn't quickly and easily available, they should be allowed to seek care where they can and have the costs covered.  

Saturday, September 19, 2015

CNN GOP Debate Review

Here are some take away's:

  1. CNN did a horrible job.  No control.  No limiting cross talk.  Allowing others to interrupt. Questions which attempted to pit candidates against each other, instead of against the liberal democrat statists they will eventually be running against.  I suppose by CNN standards they accomplished exactly what they wanted, which was to limit attacks on Hillary.
  2. Fringe candidates like Huckabee and Pataki should not have been on the stage.  They added nothing to the debate.
  3. Same could be said for Rand Paul.  He is completely out of sync with the rest of the GOP on foreign relations.
  4. Current governors like Walker and Christie [and I'd add Jindahl] did not get nearly enough time, especially since they are the only people running who are currently leading in this political environment.
  5. Senators Rubio and Cruz had a tendency to fall into the political speak and sounded like politicians. 
  6. Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina are the only non-politicians who have the proper temperament to be president.
  7. And last but not least, Trump.  I cannot imagine 4-8 years of having to listen to his chest beating and braggadocio.  Probably would be a great Secretary of Commerce (and he'd make billions in side deals and probably be indicted).

Clinton/Obama Foreign Policy Failures in Review, Part 3, Abandoning Poland

Here we are, a mere 8 months into the Clinton/Obama Foreign Policy Failure Train.

So, what's up next?  How about we bailed on an agreement with one of best and longest NATO allies that was once a former Soviet Union's Eastern Bloc country.  Here the Cliff notes version of the story:

President Bush had agreed in March of 2008 to upgrade fellow NATO member Poland's aging air defense system and install a missile defense system. He would later include the Czech Republic as well.  Bush declared these steps as necessary to defend Europe against Iran not Russia, as they would provide little defense against overwhelming Russian force.  Although it was certainly symbolic enough as to rattle Putin's cage a little.

Fast forward to September of 2009, a mere 8 months into the Clinton/Obama fledgling foreign policy failures.   Barack Hussein Obama announces he will abandon our NATO allies and not provide the missile defense shield Bush had committed to.  This after 6 years of negotiation with the U.S.

This would become one of a string of actions by the Clinton/Obama foreign policy of abandoning our allies.  Over the coming years this pattern repeats itself over and over again, most notably in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Ukraine, and the Arab Gulf countries.  I'll detail each of these in the coming weeks and months, but suffice to say this 180 degree reversal of established U.S. policy in September of 2009 is a foreshadowing of the Clinton/Obama foreign policy blunders to come.

These Clinton/Obama foreign policy blunders will result in our allies not trusting us and our enemies not fearing us (actually, not only not fearing us, not even respecting us).

One has to wonder, "This is so blatant it's almost like the Clinton/Obama foreign policy is intentionally trying to lessen the U.S.A.'s stature."

And, just to make sure you don't think I know, yes, I realize that Poland purchased the U.S. Patriot Weapons System this year.  Keep in mind this happened just days after Russia announced it would sell its S-300 anti-missile defense system to Iran.  Sadly, the damage has been done.  Our allies still don't trust us and our enemies don't fear us.  Period.