Archive for December, 2009
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall.
No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted — by present facts — of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can’t think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it’s because they want them in IRAQ
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it’s because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,” “inflation,” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people and they alone, are responsible.
They and they alone, have the power.
They and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.
Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/23/worse-than-scrooge-gladneys-brother-and-public-advocate-fired-hours-before-christmas/Posted in FAIL, Hate, politics, Racism, Tea Party with tags Acorn, Animal Control Officer, Big Government, Department of Health, Ebenezer Scrooge, Kenneth Gladney, Labor Unions, Patricia Redington, SEIU, Town Hall Protest, Union Thugs on December 24, 2009 by spikestl
As bad as Ebenezer Scrooge was, at least he didn’t fire Bob Cratchit right before Christmas. I can’t say the same for the St. Louis Dept of Health. Animal Control Officer, Keith Gladney was fired on December 23rd, less than 48 hours before Christmas Day.
Regular readers of Big Government will recognize the sur name of this unfortunate soul who finds himself unemployed just as the holidays are upon us. Yes, Keith Gladney is the brother of Kenneth Gladney, the man who was assaulted by leaders of the St. Louis SEIU outside of Rep. Russ Carnahan’s Town Hall for Health Care on August 6, 2009.
Considering the fact that government work seems to be the only growth industry in this economy Keith probably thought he was in a stable job, serving diligently for the Animal Control agency, a division of the St. Louis Dept. of Health. And, considering he was just given a positive job performance rating as recently as October, it must have come as a heartbreaking shock to learn of this Dickensian turn of events just he was preparing for his Christmas.
So, what changed between September and today? What could have been the reason for Mr. Gladney’s termination?
Could it be that Mr. Gladney was outspoken in his support for his brother?
That he called on the County Prosecuting Attorney to bring justice to his family for the assault that had been captured on video and detailed in a 23-page police report?
Is it a coincidence that the same Prosecuting Attorney that Keith called out in his statement is also one of the highest ranking officials in the government structure that Keith worked for?
Is it surprising to learn that the Department of Health (the department that oversees the operations of Keith’s agency) works very closely with SEIU Local 1 on County Health related issues and policies?
And why now? Of all times? If they really wanted to punish Keith for his statements in favor of his brother’s case, why wait until now?
Is it a coincidence that this happens hours after the Senate finally got Pres. Obama’s Health Care Scheme passed through the Senate cloture vote and on its way to final ratification?
Could it be that the power structure in the county was waiting for the cloture vote so as to act from a position of political safety with no potential negative repercussions?
These are questions many of us have been asking each other since we heard this sad and disturbing news. Rest assured that Big Government is gathering much information regarding the stated reasons for Gladney’s termination and the facts involved with his job performance. We plan to answer all of these questions in the coming days.
But, for now. All that matters is that a man is suddenly out of work right before Christmas Day. Please, now more than ever, keep the Gladney family in your prayers and let us all hope that 2010 shows them real justice and, dare I say… hope?
God Bless Rick Santelli
Chrysler Says It Won’t Pay U.S. (Us) BackSeparation of “Old Chrysler” and “New Chrysler” Leaves Some UnsatisfiedPosted in Global Warming, Hate, politics on December 22, 2009 by spikestl
Editor-in-Chief, AOL Autos
If you’re keeping a list of who’s been naughty or nice, you might want to sharpen your pencil for Chrysler and GM.
In a special message of holiday cheer, Chrysler announced through filings last week that its pre-bankruptcy self doesn’t appear to want to make good on its $3.7 billion loan from U.S. taxpayers. The money went to the old Chrysler (now called, officially, the “OldCar Co”) through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in April of 2009 when the company announced its “fast track” Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Counter that against the letter then-CEO Bob Nardelli wrote to stakeholders before the money came through:
“Our viability plan demonstrates that Chrysler will repay the U.S. government loans in full, with a premium beginning in 2012,” Nardelli wrote. “As we have indicated all along, shared sacrifice is necessary for Chrysler’s survival.”
Nardelli, long gone, doesn’t have to answer why, but we hope he blushes when he looks at himself in the mirror in the morning. The announcement also appears to fly in the face of TARP’s marching orders, which counted recoupment as a major factor in its passage through Congress. The thinking was that no TARP funds would ever add to the national debt. At least from what we’ve heard from Chrysler, that doesn’t appear to be the case.
When we reached out to Chrysler for comment, spokesperson Shawn Morgan told us: “First, the “Chrysler” you are talking about is now called “OldCar Co” and that company is still in bankruptcy. That company, “OldCar Co” made a filing last week however, you’d need to speak with that company for a comment.” The nuances of the “old Chrysler” and “new Chrysler” as created by the bankruptcy filing are likely to be lost on most in the American public.
To paraphrase Gertrude Stein, $4 billion is $4 billion is $4 billion. Especially when it’s public money.
As commenter “hillsamurai” duly noted in our comments section, “If ‘OldCar Co’ is not going to repay my money that it was given, will “OldCar CO” give me a new car as reimbursement?”
Journalist Chris Woodyard, author of USA Today’s DriveOn blog, describes the awful conditions in which Chrysler is operating as a reason for its inability to pay back the loans made to the “OldCar Co.”
“Chrysler is on track to post the worst sales performance of the 10 largest automakers this year,” Woodyard writes on his site. “Sales tumbled 38% during the first 11 months of the year. In November, sales were still down 25% even as Ford and General Motors had largely swung back to even compared to the same month a year ago, Autodata figures show.
“Not bleak enough? Consider this: Underscoring its lack of product, Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep have no press conferences scheduled for the all-important Detroit auto show where new models are typically unveiled amid lots of hoopla. There used to be one press conference for each brand before its bankruptcy reorganization earlier this year. Dealers are stuck selling the same tired models that have gone without updates for years now. Even Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne, with a controlling stake in Chrysler, sounds pessimistic about about a turnaround.”
This flies in the face of Chrysler’s last major government bailout, of course. Back in 1979 the company took $1.5 billion in government-backed loans (while only $1 per year went to pay CEO Lee Iacocca’s salary at the time) but was able to repay it ahead of schedule, something that the Heritage Foundation notes as a “favorite example cited by proponents of national industrial policy who call for massive and costly federal efforts to revive what they describe as a deperately ailing American economy.” The foundation was not an advocate of the 1979 bailout (or that of last year, either), citing amongst other things that the current and future laid off Ford and GM workers never understood that their tax dollars were being used to destroy their own jobs in order to save jobs at Chrysler.
GM, on the other hand, is making news from the announcement that it will not only pay back its $52 billion loan, but do so early. Of that $52 billion, a good portion of it went into equity in the company ($45.3 billion in shares, which is why we now say that U.S. taxpayers own about 60 percent of GM) while the rest was a straight cash loan to be repaid over a period of time. The company said it will present the government with a payment of over $1 million by the end of this month, while the remaining $5 billion or so will be paid back by mid next year. This is different from Chrysler’s news, however, because it constitutes the “new GM,” whereas the GM’s version of “OldCar Co” is separate. Confused yet?