News of the Day: Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Here are some interesting news stories of the day.  Most of them horrify, and that's the point.  Why does all the news sound so bleak?

The words: "Husband" and "Wife" and "Bride" are Verboten!

  It always bothers me how some always claim to champion the concept of diversity when they are the ones making us all the same.  Whether states recognize gay marriage (or whatever the name du jour is) is up to them, or in this case, up to the United Kingdom.

When Prime Minister David Cameron chose to open up "civil marriage" to gay couples, these linguistic mandates followed close behind.  The government as well as industry will have to revise their websites and documents to use sanitized words like "spouse" or "partner".  Here in the US, they've tossed around "applicant 1" and "applicant 2". 

Instead of truly opening it up for everyone, they are making us all the same on paper.  We all have the same rights, but we are all not the same.  Why aren't we allowed to be proud of who we are?  As men.  As women.  As straight couples.  Or gay couples.  Truly embracing that rainbow of diversity would require acceptance of our differences, not a passive denial--as well as more boxes to tick on documents.  (It seemed to work FOREVER with Mr./Mrs. boxes to tick...)

Once again proving my point that if only so-called conservatives actually step up and make some reforms in a smart and calculated way, we wouldn't have liberals doing it with such disregard for traditional values and society on the whole.  Usually the liberal Democrats shut out any reforms from Republicans until they get the power, at which point the "Republicans" abandon their principles for the sake of faux-bi-partisanship, while still being smeared as the bad guys.

Man Jailed Because Bad Economy Prevented Him from Finishing Home Repairs, Town Board EVIL

A Minnesota man was arrested and jailed after city leaders determined he had not finished installing siding on his house.
Mitch Faber, of Burnsville, MN, was charged with “having an unfinished exterior,” according to court documents obtained by Fox News. He was ultimately sentenced to 30 days in jail but was given the opportunity to serve his sentence at home by wearing an electronic monitoring bracelet.

 My blood is searing with rage as I write this.  Can you imagine despotic city leaders throwing a man in jail for two days with no bail, and giving him a 1,000 dollar fine when he can't even pay to finish repairs on his home?  Is this the feudal system again?  Do we exist merely to serve Kings?

The judge did not sympathize with the fact that he's not had summer work or done very well over the last three years (when who was president?), and sentenced him to 30 days (on top of the 2 he served shackled in prison) under house arrest with an ankle monitor.  He waived the fine.  How big of him.

Neighbors complained--though they certainly have no concept of what it means to be a neighbor or perhaps they would've helped him finish repairs to his house instead of gettings favors from their apparent friends in power.

Of course, charity is being outlawed in America.  I'm sure I'll get into Mayor Bloomberg's banning of food donations in NYC to kitchens and shelters out of "concern for their health".  "No fatty or salty foods," proclaims the food police.  That rich disgrace has no sense of what it means to suffer under his and others unamerican policies.  Last week, I saw a poor, homeless Vet walking--no, TRUDGING along, and I tell you, Bloomberg, how dare you deny charitable donations in the United States of America!

To Coin a Phrase: "Thanks, But No Thanks, John McCain."

I've always been grateful for his service to America in uniform, and thought he was at least a little different from some politicians (allegedly being anti-earmark) but in the end I only supported McCain because I supported Sarah Palin.  That's not the point of this, however.

McCain is at it again, now that he's not running for re-election.  The double speak, the progressivism and his lack of respect for the citizens (and our intelligence) is back in full swing.

McCain, along with Senator Tom Harkin (a democrat), have introduced a bill that would eliminate the dollar bill and replace it with a dollar coin.  Perhaps the Chinese prefer carrying coins.

The clever title of the bill is The Currency Optimization, Innovation and National Savings Act, or so cleverly abbreviated: The COINS Act.  It must be necessary and for our own good, even though we've never warmed up to dollar coins in the past.  Don't you want to optimize, innovate and save?

The bill, if it becomes law would force the discontinuation of dollar bills in four years or when the, "circulation of $1 coins exceeds 600 million annually," whichever blessed day comes first.

House RINOs--err, Republicans, put forth a bill in September to do much the same thing: replace the dollar note with a coin.  So, moving forward on this latest scheme would require the House and Senate reconciling their two bills.

Senator McCain proclaimed, "by moving from the costly dollar bill to the dollar coin, we can save real money and show the American taxpayer that we are serious about cutting spending in Washington."

The Senate bill estimates savings of 5.5 billion dollars....over the next THIRTY years.  This comes out to 183 million annually.  I'm impressed.  Real money, indeed.

Meanwhile, if McCain or any of these slick car salesmen actually wanted to save money they could cease the Essential Air Service Program which wastes 200 million tax dollars each year.

What they essentially do is pay airlines to fly planes into more remote areas to keep those places connected via the skies.  This must be one of those "human rights" like getting your own personal computers through the government or citizenship for illegals.

The government often pays up to $4000 in subsidies for a coach ticket.

Take flights out of Ely, Nevada. The Great Lakes Airlines flight to Las Vegas on this occasion carried just one passenger. In total, only 227 passengers flew out of Ely in the entire year of 2010 — paying 70-90 dollars. The taxpayers however paid $4,107 per ticket.

Our fearless representatives in Congress certainly won't bring this 1978 program to an end.  We need to have everything--immediately!  If you move near an airport, you're going to hear noise.  If you move near the railroad, you're going to hear trains.  If you live in a rural area, you'll have to travel greater distances to do your shopping and plan accordingly.  It seems like common sense to me.

If we also want to save money, how about reigning in Obama and FLOTUS's travel expenses.  When a "date night" in NYC with the secret service costs alone at a staggering $11,000 dollars, it makes you wonder why they couldn't just visit the (free) National Zoo or take in a Broadway musical that happens to be on the road and in DC.

We've all but forgotten Obama's half million dollar failed Olympic bid.

What about Michelle Obama's African vacation, where the air transportation alone cost taxpayers nearly a half million dollars?  Not to mention how she frequently travels ahead of Barry, requiring her own plane.

Air Force One is exceptionally costly.  Obama used AFO 172 times in 2010 and the Air Force estimates that it costs us $181,757 each and every flight hour.  Again, this covers just the air travel.

We also have countless billions of wasted dollars being spent on ridiculous earmarks each day.  According to Sen. Tom Coburn, the National Science Foundation alone receives 3 billion dollars for stupid projects like jello-wrestling contests in Antarctica or over a half million to study shrimp on treadmills to combat global warming.

I never thought I'd side with both John Kerry and RINO Scott Brown on any issue but I will support their opposition of this bill.

With extravagant travel expenses in the executive branch and shrimp on treadmills in the earmark arena, Congress is going to have to come up with something better than an unpopular dollar coin policy shift.

With Republican and Democrat support, (sorry) is this the change we can believe in?

A Primary Problem

I really wish presidental primary elections were held on the same day across the country.  They are, after all for a presidential, or nation-wide race.

For internal matters of a particular state: fine.  They can follow whatever procedures or jump through whatever hoops their voters approve of.  Governor.  State Senators.  Go ahead, knock yourselves out.  But why are on earth would we want the first handful of states to hold primaries to decide what candidates advance, or even get the eventual nomination?

I thought we were a unified country where in terms of nation-wide policy and elections we all get an equal voice?  It seems the insiders who covet these garish side-shows known as presidential primaries (for any party), would have us go back to saying "these United States", where some are more equal than others.

THE United States is supposed to be a unifed (singular) country where we all get equal representation.  As determined already by legislatures, there will be primaries from January 3rd through June 26th!  Poor Utah, bringing up the rear!

In 2008, Rudy Giuliani dropped out before his state of New York held their primary.  This is just one example of how many people who would've supported him didn't get the chance to voice their support. 

Presidential primaries, much like the general elections are prime examples of how the various power groups throw their weight, money and influence around to knock out candidates they feel won't go along to get along or can't be easily controlled or compelled by any particular political establishment or media power players.  They are the steering committee.  We the "voters" are their cattle.

It sounds borderline conspiratorial when you don't take a step back.  The question is however, if they (the political establishment, the media, and other less visible power players) really just want to step back and let the people decide without influencing them:

--Why do newspapers endorse primary, as well as presidential candidates instead of just REPORTING the news?

--Why aren't the primaries all on the same day, like the general elections?

--Why are there millions of polls leading up to election days, and countless exit polls--all of which affect voters' decisions--when the only poll that actually matters is what's inside the ballot box?

--Why will New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, Arizona and Michigan all be penalized for holding their primaries before March 6th and have their numbers of delegates at the convention cut in half?

--Why will some states let their delegates support a different candidate than their state voters chose, or at times have delegates split their support?

Another point I find absolutely infuriating is how we can have NASA astronauts (remember them: those American men and women of bygone days who blasted off into the final frontier and now are being replaced by a dorky robot that might land on an awe-inspiring rock, err--asteroid in a decade...)  Anyway, astronauts were (sigh) able to vote in real-time on the day of the election from space, yet servicemen and women who are deployed can not--and more often than not their absentee ballots are lost or returned.  Besides, how can you vote absentee for a primary when half the time your candidate will be out by the time you get to vote? 


We have a lot of problems to tackle to set America back on the right course after a century-long infection known as progressivism took hold of our nation's compass.  This might not be the biggest problem, but it's easily solvable if we simplify the system--put it all out in the open so we have real transparency.  No games.  No steering or nudging us to willingly do the elites' bidding.  Just the principles our founders fought and died to give us.

Wouldn't that be grand?