Posts Tagged ‘democrat’

The definition of CRONY CAPITALISM/NEPOTISM…

May 14, 2014

Does anyone else find this absolutely DISGUSTING???

Here is the definition of Crony Capitalism from Wikipedia:

Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials.

It is also used world wide to describe virtually any governmental decisions favoring “cronies” of governmental officials.

Here is the definition of Nepotism from Dictionary.com:

nep·o·tism

[nepuh-tiz-uhm] 
noun

patronage bestowed or favoritism shown on the basis of family relationship, as in business and politics: She was accused of nepotism when she made her nephew an officer of the firm.”

In case you have missed the story here is a start by the Washington Examiner:”

Jay Carney: Joe Biden’s son accepted position with Ukrainian gas company as ‘private citizen'”

“Hunter Biden and other members of the family are obviously private citizens and where they work is not an endorsement by the president or vice president,” he said.”

OK Jay, whatever you say. 

My opinion: There is NO WAY that Hunter, who has NO experience in oil and gas, gets a board seat if he is not related to the Vice President!!! 

And here are the pictures that need to be posted on both of these definitions

 

crony capitalist

crony capitalist

 

crony capitalist

crony capitalist

Vice-President Joe Biden

Vice President’s Son Hunter Biden

Hey Jay, I hear that Saddam might be looking for someone to replace Baghdad Bob……you might be overqualified though…

P.S. – What would Dimmocrats say if the offspring of a Republican Vice President got “appointed” to an oil company board during a “war”???  The silence is deafening!!!

 

 

Advertisements

Gun Magazines Larger Than 10 Rounds???

January 17, 2013

I have been hearing, A LOT lately, about how the President and Democrats want to limit the magazine size of guns to less than 10 bullets.   This has become THE BIG NEWS STORY since the tragic massacre in Newtown, by a psychologically disturbed madman who killed his own mother and stole her guns to perpetrate the slaughter in a gun free zone.

Why We Must Ban High-Capacity Gun Magazines” – Huffington Post

Gun control advocates target high-capacity magazines” – USA Today

Obama gun control plan riles Hudson Valley critics” – Newsday

Emanuel Calls Obama Gun Laws “Common Sense”” – NBC Chicago

I’m positive that you can find many, many more articles, but these give the basics.  Obama wants to ban “high capacity gun magazines.

For years, gun control advocates have tried to ban high-capacity magazines, arguing they have no place in civil society.”

The proposed legislation would impose a 10-round limit on ammunition magazines

I’m sure you get the argument, I mean, NO ONE NEEDS more than 10 bullets for “self-defense“!!  Here is a quote from the President:

“…while there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely, no piece of legislation that will prevent every tragedy, every act of evil, if there’s even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if there’s even one life that can be saved, then we’ve got an obligation to try.”

Don’t you see, we need to save ONE LIFE!!!

And now for my opinion.

I’ll make a deal with the President, I will consider a ban on “high capacity magazines”, IF he will enact the following:

He will sign no bill into law that is longer than 10 pages.  AND, he will eliminate any current law that is more than 10 pages. 

I mean, who needs more than 10 pages to tell people what they cannot do??  Who needs 2,471 pages for a new law, like ObamaCare??

But, is it really that number of pages?  I don’t think that it is.  It’s much, much more.

The bill is filled with references to other laws, bills, and regulations, and those references are not explained in context with the language of the bill.
For example.

(2) in subsection (c)(2)(C)—
(A) by striking ‘‘9.8 percent’’ in clauses (i)(II) and (iv)
and inserting ‘‘9.5 percent’’; and
(B) by striking ‘‘(b)(3)(A)(iii)’’ in clause (iv) and
inserting ‘‘(b)(3)(A)(ii)’’.
(b) COST SHARING.—Section 1402(c) of the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act is amended—
(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(i)—
(A) in subclause (I), by striking ‘‘90’’ and inserting
‘‘94’’;
(B) in subclause (II)—
(i) by striking ‘‘80’’ and inserting ‘‘87’’; and
(ii) by striking ‘‘and’’; and H. R. 4872—4
(C) by striking subclause (III) and inserting the following:

WTF.

Would somebody tell me just exactly what the hell any of that means?  Is there one person on the whole freaking planet that can understand that gobbledygook?  I don’t think so.

Or how about this.

Replaced by section 10101(d).
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A group health plan (other than a self-insured
plan) shall satisfy the requirements of section 105(h)(2) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to prohibition on discrimination
in favor of highly compensated individuals).

So this paragraph is meaningless unless we drag out the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and read section 105(h)(2).

But guess what?  You can’t find section 105(h)(2).  In an hour of searching irs.gov, I found ten-page summaries, and three-page summaries, and twenty-page summaries of that section.  All from links on the IRS site that point to non IRS sources, so these summaries all had a disclaimer to the effect of “This a summary, and not the actual law, and should not be the basis of a legal decision”, or similar wording.

So, if you base a legal decision on the wording of a non IRS summary that the IRS directed you to, and some bureaucrat decides to make your life miserable, he can just blow the dust off of his secret copy of the actual document, and find something in it not covered by the summary, which you had no way of knowing, and he can stick it to you for violating a rule that NOBODY, not even the bureaucrat, knew existed before he started looking for a way to mess with you.

I don’t mean to impugn all bureaucrats.  I presume that most aren’t inclined to use their power as a hammer on other people, but we’ve all encountered bureaucrats who are petty, small minded jerks who take their frustrations out on the general public for no other reason than the fact that they can.

There is not one single person on Planet Earth who can understand or explain this law in its entirety.  Not even the people who drafted it, since it was drafted in pieces.  You might find someone who could do a passable job of explaining pages 50 through 100, or 300 through 350, but no one who could explain it all.

The examples I’ve given are just a drop in the bucket.  The bill is riddled with references to other bills.  My best guess is that if you wanted to really understand the President’s health care plan, you would not only have to gather the two thousand plus pages of the bill itself, but about twenty thousand pages of other bills that it refers to.

You simply can’t understand this bill.  I don’t understand it.  Nancy Pelosi doesn’t understand it.  Harry Reid doesn’t understand it.  And the President doesn’t understand it.

So, to those people who are of the opinion that our country’s health care needs are better served with a large amount of government involvement, please think about the complexity of the bill.  Why did they make it so incomprehensible?  If the Obama/Reid/Pelosi triumvirate really had your best interests at heart, wouldn’t they have insisted on a bill that could be read and understood by the average person?”Neill Arnhart

Or who needs MORE THAN 70,000 pages to tell Americans how much they need to pay the US Government in TAXES??

The federal tax code, which was 400 pages long in 1913, has swollen to about 70,000. Americans now spend 7.6 billion hours a year grappling with an incomprehensible tangle of deductions, loopholes and arcane reporting requirements. That is the equivalent of 3.8 million skilled workers toiling full-time, year-round, just to handle the paperwork. By this measure, the tax-compliance industry is six times larger than car-making.

An incredible 82 percent of taxpayers are so flummoxed that they pay for help. Some 60 percent hire an accountant or tax preparer, while another 22 percent use tax software.

The Economist points out that “even the head of the Internal Revenue Service, Douglas Shulman, gets someone else to do his taxes.” I don’t know how the Economist reporters know that, but if that’s true it’s exhibit A in why we need tax reform.

Here’s exhibit B: The Annual Report of the National Taxpayer Advocate, who works on taxpayers’ behalf at the IRS, says that the most serious problem for taxpayers is that the IRS only answers their toll-free phones 71 percent of the time. I don’t think that’s the most serious problem when it comes to paying taxes.” – USNews

So what say you Mr. President??  Will you put a stop to the Bills and Laws that KILLING Grandmas and Babies??  How come you don’t care?? 

NO MORE LAWS LONGER THAN 10 PAGES!!!

Let me know what you think.

Fast and Furious, and MY challenge to “Democrats”….

January 31, 2012

By now you should have heard about Operation Fast and Furious conducted by the Department of Justice (Eric Holder), the State Department (Hillary Clinton), the Department of Homeland Security (Janet Napolitano), the FBI, ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) and other Government organizations.

Sharyl Attkisson with CBS News has done a great job documenting the scandal, so if you would like more information, her page is a great place to start.

Now we get this from the Democrats investigating the scandal:

“”It is clear that ATF agents in Phoenix and prosecutors in the Arizona U.S. Attorney’s Office embarked on a deliberate strategy not to arrest suspected straw purchasers while they attempted to make larger cases against higher-level targets,” the report reads.”

and

“”Although these officials claimed they had no probable cause to arrest any straw purchasers at the time, allowing hundreds of illegally purchased military-grade assault weapons to fall into the hands of violent drug cartels over the course of five years created an obvious and inexcusable threat to public safety on both sides of the border.”(my emphasis)

So, let me get this straight.  Just because some weapons were ILLEGALLY purchased, there was NO PROBABLE CAUSE???  Excuse me!!!  When do we have probable cause??  If something is ILLEGAL, then it is AGAINST the law!!  This has nothing to do with what the definition of is, is!!! 

These are Department of Justice officials.  Their job is to prosecute the LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES………without prejudice!!  They deserve to be fired…..at a minimum.

Here is MY challenge to the “Democrats” that authored this report.  Fine!!  I will agree with your conclusions.  Now, we need to charge these officials with wrong doing and have a trial.  They BROKE the laws of the United States (by allowing/selling weapons to unauthorized personnel, hence the ILLEGAL purchases) and International law (by allowing those ILLEGALLY purchase weapons to knowingly cross an International border with Mexico).  I want a TRIAL.  IF they are the ones responsible they should end up in JAIL!!  I doubt that this does not go higher into Obama’s Administration, so it will be interesting to see their defense.

What say you, Democrats??  Are we going to have a TRIAL??

Debt Ceiling???

April 22, 2011

I have seen many reports that the Democrats are SCREAMING that if the debt ceiling does not get raised, then the economy is going to crash and every bad thing that happens can be blamed on the Republicans.

OK, let’s say that I, and the rest of the American Public, agree.  If the debt ceiling does NOT get raised, then the economy will enter a second recession, or worse a depression..  OK.

Then I believe that the Republicans should agree with raising the debt ceiling!!

But…..what if I disagree?  What if , I say that if we do NOT control the spending of the Government of the United States of America, then NOTHING will help us avoid the slow death that is coming……courtesy of Obama’s death panel….because it will become too expensive to save the patient, that is the USA.

I think I have a solution that will satisfy BOTH beliefs!!!

I think that the Republicans should agree to raise the debt ceiling, with NO conditions!!!  Then, ANYTHING that happens after that IS the President’s, and by default the Democrats, fault!!!  If you think that things are not going to get worse from here, I think you are delusional.

P.S. – I think the Republicans should raise the debt ceiling……………..

………….by $1!!!!!!

Now, it is the President’s fault!!!  He did not say how MUCH he wanted it raised by!!  Because, he has NO idea how to lead!!!

Irony…. (reposted with updates)

January 27, 2011

Does anyone else find it ironic, that now that the Republicans in the House of Representatives are going to hold a vote to REPEAL ObamaCare, the only things the Democrats can talk about is Jobs? (UPDATE:  The House has passed the repeal of ObamaCare, now it is up to the Senate.)

Let me get this straight. 

You, the Democrats, worked for almost 2 full years to jam ObamaCare down our, the American Public, throats against the will of a majority of us.  This is during the longest period of 9%+ unemployment in the history of the United States of America.  And now you want to say do not worry about the JOB KILLING provisions and uncertainty contained in the 2,000+ pages of a bill that NO ONE has read, worry about the economy and jobs.  Huhhhhh?

Seriously, at this point there have been 111 organizations that represent more than 1 million Americans that have been granted a waiver from complying with ObamaCare.  (UPDATE #1:  As of December 3, 2010:  The number has increased to 222 organizations and more than 1.5 million Americans, the HHS summary.  That is a 100% increase in the approved waivers, in 3 weeks!!)  (UPDATE#2 : As of January 27, 2011:  The number has increased to 733 organizations  and more than 2.1 million Americans. More than a 300% increase in 8 weeks!!)  The White House will not say how many have applied or how many are planning on applying.  So by my calculations, we have at least 111 people that have wasted spent time applying and we have at least 1 government employee reviewing the applications.  This is being generous on both counts, as I imagine that there at least 20 people in the government and at least 5 people involved in the private sector per application.  So you see, the Democrats are creating jobs!!

To the Democrats:  You have had more than 18 months of 9%+ unemployment to concentrate on jobs and the economy, and have only damaged or ignored both.  For examples, examine the off shore drilling moratorium that you have enacted, or the Obamacare fiasco that NO ONE in the world knows how it will be implemented, but most economists agree that it puts a strain on new hiring.  I suggest you sit down and learn something about how the real world, ie. not D.C., works!!

To the Republicans:  REPEAL the farce that is ObamaCare!!

I welcome any proof that the policies enacted by the Democrats, in the last two years, has created ANY jobs, not related to government.

The Red state/Blue state question???

August 3, 2010

I always wondered about the colors that depict the states leaning towards the Democrats and the states leaning towards the Republicans during Election reporting.  Especially on Network News or MSM.  And how did they all come to use the same colors??

After revelations about the JournoList, as revealed on the Daily Caller, I think all questions are more relevant.

Why did the Democrats get to be Blue??

Why did the Republicans end up with Red??

Could this be a subliminal suggestion to the masses to try and shape their responses??

Here are a couple of excerpts from Color Psychology:

Blue – Blue is described as a favorite color by many people and is the color most preferred by men.  Blue calls to mind feelings of calmness or serenity. It is often described as peaceful, tranquil, secure, and orderly.

Red – Red is a bright, warm color that evokes strong emotions.  Red is also considered an intense, or even angry, color that creates feelings of excitement or intensity.

Who picked these colors?? and why??  What were their intentions??

Should we change these colors to be more neutral??  Perhaps the Democrats can keep blue, but maybe Republicans can pick….green? 

Remember I am not a Psychologist, but I could play one on TV.  Provided they would pay me, of course.

ObamaCare

March 25, 2010

When I wrote this I KNEW that it would not happen.  I was just hoping that the citizens of the United States of America, at least the ones that vote, would have insisted that the Politicians and everyone involved with enacting ObamaNONCare would have been REQUIRED to use it.

Now we get this.  They EXEMPT themselves from the greatest national health care system in the world.  Does this mean that they think that they can find a better deal.  If so, WHY vote for the bill?  Well, Democrats, what is the answer??

Please, leave your comments and contact your representatives.

Obama and Las Vegas…

February 3, 2010

President Obama apparently does not like Las Vegas….except when he does??? 

In making another speech, in New Hampshire, he said “You don’t blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you’re trying to save for college”.  This comment has generated a lot of criticism from the folks in Nevada, and I was reading this one, when I saw the following quote: 

“Enough is enough!” Democratic Congresswoman Shelley Berkley said in a statement. “President Obama needs to stop picking on Las Vegas and he needs to let Americans decide for themselves how and where to spend their hard-earned vacation dollars.” Here is my question: 

Democratic Congresswoman Berkley, can we agree that ALL elected officials should stop “picking on” the American Citizen, and LET them decide how and where to spend THEIR hard-earned dollars? 

Vote NO on ObamaCare, Cap and Trade, ANY tax increases, etc., let the people decide the best use for their money!!

Senator Kent Conrad is an IDIOT

January 21, 2010

Well which is it?  Is this the worst recession that the United States has had since The Great Depression or is it WORSE than that????    Huhh???

The following is a quote from Senator Kent Conrad, DEMOCRAT from North Dakota, on January 21, 2010.  That is the day after Scott Brown, a Republican, was elected to the Senate in the state of Massachusetts.  You know, the most democrat state in the most democrat region of the United States.

“I think part of the problem is the agenda itself,” said Conrad, who doesn’t face voters again until 2012. Instead of spending so much time on health care reform, Conrad said Democrats should have focused first on reducing the national debt and a bipartisan energy bill — and that President Barack Obama should have done a better job of explaining that the economic situation he inherited was “far worse” than he’d originally thought.(My emphasis)

The following is a quote from President-Elect Obama, The One, on January 11, 2009.

“Whether it’s retail sales, manufacturing, all of the indicators show that we are in the worst recession since the Great Depression,” Obama said on ABC. (My emphasis)

No, Senator Conrad, the problem IS the agenda, and that is why the American people are going to throw all of you lying politicians out of office as soon as we can.  You STILL do NOT get it!!!!!

The AARP Scam

December 18, 2009

The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP).  Another SCAM on the American PUBLIC, including, but not limited to,  RETIRED people.

If you are a member of AARP, ASK them where YOUR money goes? 

Here is a hint, NOT to help YOU.  AARP is endorsing the new Democratic Health Care plan(s) for cold, hard cash.  AARP does not even NEED you to be a member any longer.  AARP is making more money from selling insurance and our “GOVERNMENT” than they get from members.  By endorsing the Democrat Health Care plan(s), they will INCREASE their income from insurance.  This INCREASE in insurance premiums will come from YOU, because of reductions in Medicare and Medicaid.

If I have not been clear, let me try again.  AARP wants the “Governement” to reduce Medicare and Medicaid, so that, Seniors (retired persons) will find it necessary to purchase (spend more of their own money) insurance to cover the reductions.  AARP will only be only too happy to provide this insurance.

If you do not want to believe me, do your own research.  You can start here.

I have also called these plans the Democrat Health Care plan(s), because that is what they are.  They have not worked with anyone, but a select few (not even all the Democarts are involved) to draft these “plans”. 

Also, how can AARP endorse a plan without reading it??  How do I know they have not read it, you ask.  Because even the Senators and Representatives that are voting on the plans, have NOT even SEEN the plans, let alone read them.

Call your representatives, tell them to read the bills, AND explain them to YOU!!!!  What will it cost YOU if you do nothing????