Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, April 13, 2011


The song and the voice... forever intertwined.
Posted by at

17 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/155509-hoyer-joins-obama-in-calling-past-vote-on-debt-ceiling-a-mistake

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer has joined President Obama in conceding that he blundered by voting against an increase to the government’s debt ceiling.

“I have voted against the debt limit in the past. That was a mistake,” Hoyer (Md.), the second-ranking House Democrat, said in an unprompted admission to reporters on Tuesday.

* THESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT AND SHOT. SERIOUSLY. THEY'RE SO SLEAZY... SO SCUMMY... AND HAVE SUCH POWER... THE WORLD WOULD BE A MUCH BETTER PLACE WITH THEM DEAD.

* I UNDERSTAND... (*PAUSE*)... MOST OF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE HYPOCRISY QUALIFIES AS A CAPITAL CRIME. SO... IN THE SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE... LET'S RIDE HOYER OUT OF WASHINGTON D.C. ON A RAIL! LET'S TAR AND FEATHER THE BASTARD AND RELEASE HIM INTO THE STREETS OF THE WORST NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE CAPITAL DISTRICT!

* FOLKS... YES... I RECOGNIZE THAT I'M RANTING! ON A 100% SERIOUS NOTE... IT'S TIME WE ALL BEGAN TO RANT! IT'S TIME THAT MEN AND WOMEN WHO LOVE THEIR COUNTRY AND WANT IT HANDED OVER TO OUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS SOME DAY IN FAIRLY GOOD SHAPE NEED TO FORCE REFORM. WE MUST BATTLE HYPOCRISY AND FRAUD!!!

His comment came two days after White House adviser David Plouffe said Obama made a mistake by voting against raising the debt ceiling when he was a senator.

* FOLKS... (*SIGH*)... NO "MISTAKES" WERE MADE. THESE SCUM - MEN LIKE OBAMA AND HOYER - HAVE NO HONOR AND THEY BELIEVE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY EITHER; THEY BELIEVE YOU'LL "ACCEPT" THEIR "APOLOGIES" AND "MOVE ON."

* FOLKS... ACCEPTING A LACK OF BASIC INTEGRITY AND HONESTY FROM OUR POLITICIANS IS WHAT HAS GOTTEN US INTO THIS MESS WE'RE IN IN THE FIRST PLACE!

The National Republican Senatorial Committee attacked Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who voted against raising the ceiling in 2007, for “flip-flopping” on the issue when she called Republicans “profoundly irresponsible” for threatening to do the same thing.

* I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHAT THE NRSC SAYS OR DOES! BUT THE TRUTH IS... THEY'RE RIGHT! WE SHOULD ALL BE ATTACKING FOLKS LIKE MCCASKILL FOR BEING HYPOCRITICAL SCUM!

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) voted against the debt-limit increase in 2006...

* SCUM. FILTHY, HYPOCRITICAL SCUM.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) also defended his earlier vote [against raising debt limits when Bush was president].

* WELL WE KNOW LIEBERMAN IS A PIECE OF GARBAGE.. (*SHRUG*)

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Caucus Chairman John Larson (D-Conn.) did not respond to requests for comment.

(*SNORT*)

Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn (S.C.) said...

* ENOUGH! WE GET IT! THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP IF FILLED WITH... HYPOCRITICAL SCUMBAGS.

April 13, 2011 at 9:16 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703518704576259332428064652.html

[T]he U.S. government said its employees and citizens could be the targets of drug gangs in three Mexican states...

* YA THINK...?!?!

The little-noticed warning, published last Friday in a warden's message from the U.S. Consulate General in Monterrey, said U.S. officials had "information that Mexican criminal gangs may intend to attack U.S. law-enforcement officers or U.S. citizens in the near future in Tamaulipas, Nuevo León and San Luis Potosí."

(*SARCASTIC CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

In Tamaulipas state, 32 bodies were found in mass graves on a ranch on Tuesday, bringing the total discovered there since last week to 120, authorities said.

* SING IT WITH ME, FOLKS: "SOUTH OF THE BORDER... DOWN MEXICO WAY..." (*DOING MY BEST SINATRA*)

On Friday, the U.S. State Department said an American man was reported kidnapped from a bus in the state, but it wasn't known if he was among the dead.

* A SCUMBAG OR A REGULAR PERSON?

Among the cities covered in the warning is Monterrey, the country's northern business hub where U.S. companies like Whirlpool Corp. and General Electric Co. have their regional bases.

* MORE SINGING! "IT HAPPENED... IN MONTERREY... A LONG TIME AGO..." (*BELTING IT OUT*)

This year has included some grisly slayings of Americans. In January, Nancy Davis, a 59-year-old missionary was shot in the head after being ambushed in her car near San Fernando. Her husband raced her car across a border bridge against traffic into Texas, where she later died.

And last year David Hartley, an American riding a jet ski on the Mexican side of a lake on the Texas border was abducted, his body never found. Shortly afterward, the severed head of a detective on the case was found in front of a Mexican army barracks.

Last year, 107 American citizens were victims of homicide in Mexico, according to the State Department, up from 77 homicides the year before.

April 13, 2011 at 10:32 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703518704576259243797897836.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop

* FIRST PARAGRAPH... TODAY'S WSJ "REVIEW AND OUTLOOK" SECTION:

A mini-revolt is brewing among Republican backbenchers on Capitol Hill now that the specific spending cuts in Friday's budget deal are being revealed. After separating out the accounting gimmicks and one-year savings, the actual cuts look to be closer to $20 billion than to the $38 billion that both sides advertised.

(*SMIRK*)

* FOLKS... THE PIECE IS BASICALLY A REHASH OF YESTERDAY'S AP PIECE POSTED WITHIN YESTERDAYS NEWSBITES. FEEL FREE TO READ IT IF YOU'RE A MASOCHIST.

* LAST PARAGRAPH... LAST SENTENCE, ACTUALLY... OF THE PIECE:

Above all, the hokum belies the House GOP's promise to usher in a new era of lawmaking candor and transparency.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

* BTW... THE WSJ STILL REFUSES TO CONCEDE THAT NO REAL CUTS HAVE BEEN MADE AT ALL. SPENDING FOR 2011 WILL BE HIGHER THAN SPENDING FOR 2010.

(*SHRUG*)

* WHY WON'T THE WSJ TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?

(*SHRUG*)

April 13, 2011 at 10:33 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53068.html

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign ended in the summer of 2008, but in the first three months of the year, her still operational campaign committee raised $63,000 - primarily by renting its email list to allies - and paid off $75,000 in debt to its pollster Mark Penn.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

According to a report filed last week with the Federal Election Commission, Clinton’s campaign committee ended the first quarter with $329,000 in debt - all to Penn’s firm...

(*HEADACHE*)

April 13, 2011 at 10:33 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/42551209

Inflation, using the reporting methodologies in place before 1980, hit an annual rate of 9.6% in February, according to the Shadow Government Statistics newsletter.

Since 1980, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has changed the way it calculates the CPI...

(*SNORT*)

* FOLKS... I KNOW REGULAR READERS ARE WELL AWARE OF THIS - OF THE WAY THE GOVERNMENT MANIPULATES STATISTICAL METHODOLOGIES IN ORDER TO GET A PRE-DETERMINED RESULT - BUT ASK YOURSELVES... HOW MANY OF YOUR FRIENDS, RELATIVES, COLLEAGUES HAVE THE FAINTEST CLUE? HECK, I'M GUESSING MOST TEACHERS ARE UNAWARE OF THIS. I'M GUESSING MANY POLITICIANS ARE UNAWARE OF THIS. I'M GUESSING MOST OF THE MEDIA ARE UNAWARE OF THIS.

(*SHRUG*)

Backing out more methods implemented in 1990 by the BLS still puts inflation at a 5.5% rate and getting worse, according to the calculations by the newsletter’s web site, Shadowstats.com.

* OH, YEAH... IT WASN'T JUST 1980 WHEN THE GOALPOSTS WERE MOVED - THEY WERE MOVED AGAIN IN 1990!

* AND, FOLKS... NOTE... WHILE CARTER WAS PRESIDENT THRU THE WHOLE OF 1980, PAPPY BUSH WAS PRESIDENT IN 1990. FOLKS... THE LIES AND DECEPTIONS AREN'T NECESSARILY PARTISAN BY NATURE. (*SHRUG*) WE'RE IN TROUBLE!

April 13, 2011 at 10:33 AM
William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://www.realclearmarkets.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2011/04/13/if_paul_ryan_is_ronald_reagan_were_all_in_trouble_98960.html

* BY JOHN TAMNY

The response to last week's release of Rep. Paul Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" budget was entirely too predictable for the commentary it generated. On the Left were the typical pejoratives about the plan being "cruel" and too geared toward "smaller government", while the bouquets thrown from the Right seemed to coalesce around "Reaganesque", and irony of ironies, a budget geared toward "smaller government."

(*SNORT*)

Both sides should have their heads examined.

* YEP! FOLKS... (*SIGH*)... WE'RE TALKING ABOUT... (*DRUM ROLL*) (*READ ON*)

...a budget proposal that will at best slow the continued expansion of our federal government.

(*SIGH*) (*HEADACHE*)

Far from a major reduction in the size and scope of government, Ryan's alleged lurch to fiscal sanity involves returning us to 2008 levels of spending; the very levels that so angered a less organized Republican base not long ago such that they handed the keys to the Democrats.

* ACTUALLY, IT WAS 2006 SPENDING LEVELS THAT GREATLY CONTRIBUTED TO THE GROUNDSWELL OF DISAPPROVAL FOR THE "OLD" REPUBLICAN CONGRESS TO THE POINT WHERE PELOSI's and REID's DEMOCRATS WON THE ELECTION OF 2006!

[Promoting] a return to 2008 levels [of federal spending] reveals a Republican leadership still well out of touch with the an increasingly skeptical base.

(*NOD*)

* To be continued...

April 13, 2011 at 1:12 PM
William R. Barker said...

* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 2)

[R]ather than a budget meant to abolish the welfare state (all is preserved with the exception of ObamaCare), Ryan's budget at best slows its growth, and not by much.

The Tea Party helped put an undeserving GOP back in power based on the naïve belief that constitutional governance of the 10th Amendment variety would finally have its day, but to read Ryan's summary of what the federal government should do is to read about the perpetuation of myriad programs that have no constitutional basis.

(*SIGH*) (*FEELING SICK TO MY STOMACH*)

Basically Ryan pays insulting lip service to constitutionally limited government with his line about making sure "government spends and taxes only as much as it needs to fulfill its constitutional prescribed roles", but then proposes a budget that reveals a great deal of contempt for the Constitution's limiting features.

On taxes, Ryan proposes a simpler 25% flat rate which, while an improvement, is still far too high for a nation founded on limited government, and then he commits his second fatal error by virtue of talking up the tax cut's alleged "revenue-neutral" attributes. Whatever the revenue impact of lower marginal rates (history says revenues will actually rise if the tax penalty is reduced per Ryan's plan), it's long past time that the Republicans cease their worship of rising federal receipts.

* HEAR! HEAR! (*JUMPING UP, SLAMMING MY FIST UPON THE DESK AND SHOUTING MY APPROVAL*)

[A]s the late Warren Brookes along ago observed in The Economy In Mind, "politicians tend to spend whatever they can get in revenue whether that spending is worth it or not." ... [R]educed revenues should be the goal of any tax plan so that politicians have less money to spend on needless programs. To talk about taxes in terms of their revenue impact is once again for politicians of Ryan's ilk to give the impression that our nation's deficits actually have something to do with a lack of revenues. That is wrong, and it wrecks the debate.

* TAMNY MAKES A GOOD POINT!

Ryan cheerleaders, and there are many on the right, will trot out the usual clichés about how "politics is the art of the possible", that myriad special interests make an actual reduction in the size of government very difficult, and that Ryan should be cheered for being a less greedy tax collector for the welfare state. All that may well be true, but it also misses the point. Politics is also about negotiation, so rather than ask for very little in order to get much less, Ryan might have asked for massive reductions as a way of achieving substantial ones.

* AGREED!

Rather than talk about the supposed pain and sacrifice of budget cuts, Republicans must mention constitutional principles first that necessitate major spending cuts, and then they must remind voters that the real pain and suffering is the work they put in to support an expensive and overbearing government.

April 13, 2011 at 1:12 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?category=&type=Project&proj_id=4449&action=Headlines%20By%20TCS

* TAXPAYERS FOR COMMON SENSE REVIEWS THE BOEHNER "DEAL"

1) Almost $18 billion of the cuts – nearly half of the total – result from “changes in mandatory programs,” or CHIMPS in budget parlance. While these are real cuts in FY2011, this is mandatory spending - like Social Security or Medicare - that is not controlled on an annual basis by Congress.

(This means that these cuts are temporary, and higher spending levels will resume in FY2012, limiting the future deficit reducing power of these cuts.)

2) Uses the balance in the Crime Victims Fund - which is earmarked for use only to compensate victims of crime, is funded entirely with non-taxpayer funds such as forfeited bail payments, and whose payments to victims are capped so as to ensure ongoing balances in future years – as a $4.9 billion “cut.”

(This is akin to saying you are debt free because your mortgage payment could cover your credit card balance, but ignoring the fact that the mortgage is due in a week.)

3) Cuts $630 million in orphan earmarks, so-called because they remain entirely or largely unspent a decade or more after they were passed.

(These funds were never going to be spent anyway, so it’s unfair to call this a cut in any real sense of the word.)

4) Cuts $6.2 billion from the “Periodic Census” account in the Commerce Department.

(Reducing funds to the Census Bureau as it winds down operations after taking its once a decade census is about as non-controversial as a cut could be.)

* IN OTHER WORDS...

(Since the cuts in this CR are based on FY2010 levels, the year the Census actually took place, any budget would rightly reduce the funds for the Census since the government won’t be going door to door and counting everyone up.)

5) Earlier versions of the Continuing Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2011 rescinded $25 billion in budget authority from the renewable and fossil fuel technologies - excluding nuclear - but today’s version leaves the existing budget authority fully intact.

6) $630 million in unused transportation earmarks get wiped off the book...[however...] it’s not a cut in any sense...

(These funds weren’t going anywhere, so you can’t really call this a cut.)

7) The "cuts" include a zeroing out of the Surface Transportation Priorities account, which was nothing more than a transportation slush fund.

(The entire program was earmarked!)

8) [Though] this CR reduces funding for the Civil Works budget of the Army Corps of Engineers compared to FY2010, Congress yet again boosts spending above the President's budget request.

* STILL COUNTS AS A CUT... STILL IS A CUT - A REAL CUT... A CUT FROM THE 2010 BASELINE. THAT SAID, AS TCS NOTES, THESE CLOWNS IN CONGRESS HAVE ACTUALLY ADDED TO OBAMA's BUDGET REQUEST RATHER THAN SUBTRACTED FROM IT!

April 13, 2011 at 2:19 PM
William R. Barker said...

TWO-PARTER... Part 1 of 2)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703625304575115691871093652.html

Mitt Romney insisted in a [March] interview on "Fox News Sunday" that "our plan is working well"...

* REFERRING TO ROMNEYCARE...

...and he defended his state's right to create its own plan.

* AND I DEFEND A STATE'S RIGHT - AS OPPOSED TO A ONE SIZE FITS ALL (EXCEPT OBAMA ALLIES WHO GET WAIVERS) PROGRAM MANDATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

* THAT SAID...

[Romney] also said in his book "No Apology" that because of the plan everyone in Massachusetts now has access to "portable, affordable health insurance."

Not exactly.

(*SNICKER*)

While Massachusetts' uninsured rate has dropped to around 3%, [a full] 68% of the newly insured since 2006 receive coverage that is heavily or completely subsidized by taxpayers.

* OOPS!

While Mr. Romney insisted that everyone should pay something for coverage, that is not the way his plan has turned out. More than half of the 408,000 newly insured residents pay nothing, according to a February 2010 report by the Massachusetts Health Connector, the state's insurance exchange.

(*SMIRK*)

Another 140,000 remained uninsured in 2008 and were either assessed a penalty or exempted from the individual mandate because the state deemed they couldn't afford the premiums.

(*RUEFUL CHUCKLE WHILE ROLLING MY EYES*)

Mr. Romney's promise that getting everyone covered would force costs down also is far from being realized. One third of state residents polled by Harvard researchers in a study published in "Health Affairs" in 2008 said that their health costs had gone up as a result of the 2006 reforms. A typical family of four today faces total annual health costs of nearly $13,788, the highest in the country. Per capita spending is 27% higher than the national average.

* OOPS!

A 2008 study by the Massachusetts Division of Health Care Finance and Policy found that the state's most expensive insurance mandates...

* STATE MANDATES... GOVERNMENT MANDATES...

...cost patients more than $1 billion between July 2004 and July 2005.

(*DRUM ROLL*) WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT...

The Massachusetts health reform law left all of them in place.

(*BANGING MY HEAD DOWN ON THE DESK*)

* To be continued...

April 13, 2011 at 3:33 PM
William R. Barker said...

* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 2)

[I]nsurance companies are required to sell "just-in-time" policies even if people wait until they are sick to buy coverage. That's just like the Obama plan. (There is growing evidence that many people are gaming the system by purchasing health insurance when they need surgery or other expensive medical care, then dropping it a few months later.)

(*SHAKING MY - NOW BLOODY - HEAD*)

Some Massachusetts "safety-net" hospitals that treat a disproportionate number of lower-income and uninsured patients are threatening bankruptcy.

* HEY... RIDDLE ME THIS: HOW MANY PATIENTS DOES A CLOSED HOSPITAL - CLOSED BECAUSE IT WENT BANKRUPT - TREAT?

(They still are treating a large number of people without health insurance, but the payments they receive for uncompensated care have been cut under the "reform" deal.)

The Bay State is also suffering from what the Massachusetts Medical Society calls a "critical shortage" of primary-care physicians. As one would expect, expanded insurance has caused an increase in demand for medical services. But there hasn't been a corresponding increase in the number of doctors. As a result, many patients are insured in name only: They have health coverage but can't find a doctor.

(*SNORT*) CAN'T WE SIMPLY "MANDATE" DOCTORS INTO EXISTENCE...??? (*SARCASTICALLY SCRATCHING MY HEAD*)

Fifty-six percent of Massachusetts internal medicine physicians no longer are accepting new patients, according to a 2009 physician work-force study conducted by the Massachusetts Medical Society. For new patients who do get an appointment with a primary-care doctor, the average waiting time is 44 days, the Medical Society found.

(*SARCASTIC CLA-CLAP-CLAP*)

The difficulties in getting primary care have led to an increasing number of patients who rely on emergency rooms for basic medical services. Emergency room visits jumped 7% between 2005 and 2007. Officials have determined that half of those added ER visits didn't actually require immediate treatment and could have been dealt with at a doctor's office - if patients could have found one.

* I NEED A DRINK...

Three of the four major health insurers in Massachusetts showed operating losses for 2009.

Faced with soaring medical expenses, Gov. Deval Patrick, Mr. Romney's successor, wants to cap insurance rate increases at 4.8%, not the 8% to 32% increases the companies have requested for April 1. (If their rates are capped, they say they'll be forced to cut payments to health providers, putting further pressure on doctors and fragile hospitals.)

(*SIGH*)

April 13, 2011 at 3:33 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/12/quinn-matney-unc-student-_n_848372.html

The University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill's Department of Public Safety has determined that a report of alleged aggravated assault filed by a [gay] student last week is false and the university will not be reporting it as a hate crime to the federal government.

* THAT'S MIGHTY BIG OF THEM, HUH?! (*LAUGHING*) THEY WON'T FILE A FALSE REPORT. CUTE... (*STILL CHUCKLING*)

UNC freshman Quinn Matney claimed that he was branded on his wrist by a unknown male on campus April 4.

Matney, who is gay, said that the man approached him near his dorm and pressed a metal brand into his wrist while uttering a gay slur.

The student said the third- and fourth-degree burns from the brand caused him to lose feeling in his fingers.

Winston Crisp, vice chancellor for student affairs, confirmed to the Daily Tar Heel that Matney falsified his report. “The aggravated assault did not take place,” Crisp said, adding that he believes no one other than Matney acted dishonestly.

* WILL MATNEY NOW BE EXPELLED? IN FACT, WILL MATNEY BE CHARGED WITH MAKING A FALSE POLICE REPORT?

Officials did not comment on why Matney falsified the report, but said the student will probably be charged for his actions.

* PROBABLY...???

Matney remains enrolled at the university.

(*SNORT*)

April 13, 2011 at 3:34 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/13/501364/main20053556.shtml

The Pentagon revealed for the first time Wednesday that U.S. fighter jets have continued to strike Libyan air defenses after turning the mission over to NATO.

* NICE, HUH...?

Pentagon spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said the jets were assigned to NATO and are operating under NATO command.

(*SNORT*)

[T]he U.S. has said that since the Libyan mission was turned over to NATO last week, special requests must be made for American fighters to conduct airstrikes to protect civilians. Lapan said there have been no requests for that kind of help.

(*HEADACHE*) IN OTHER WORDS... AS WITH HIS OBAMACARE WAIVERS... RULES ARE PROMULGATED AND THEN UNILATERALLY IGNORED - IGNORED BEHIND A VEIL OF SECRECY UNTIL NOW!

* FOLKS... ONCE AGAIN... THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS CAUGHT HAVING LIED TO US...!!!

CBS News National Security correspondent David Martin reported the missions, announced in an "oh-by-the-way" fashion by the Pentagon, have involved a handful of F-16s that have dropped a half-dozen bombs.

* ALL WITHOUT ANY AUTHORIZATION FROM CONGRESS BTW.

April 13, 2011 at 3:42 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.lvrj.com/news/air-ambulance-lands-at-reno-airport-while-air-traffic-controller-sleeps-119778219.html

[A]n air ambulance carrying a sick patient was forced to land without guidance from a sleeping air traffic controller at the Reno-Tahoe International Airport early Wednesday.

* YEP... GOTTA LOVE THOSE HIGHLY PAID, PLATINUM-PLATED BENEFIT RECEIVING FEDERAL "CIVIL SERVANTS!"

"The medical flight pilot was in communication with the Northern California Terminal Radar Approach Control and landed safely," according an FAA statement. "The controller, who was out of communication for approximately 16 minutes, has been suspended while the FAA investigates."

* AHH... INVESTIGATING...

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said he is "totally outraged by these incidents. This is absolutely unacceptable.

* UNACCEPTABLE... BUT TAKING PLACE ANYWAY!

(*SNORT*)

Federal transportation officials are moving to add air traffic controllers to 27 towers... The additional controllers will staff overnight shifts where only one controller is scheduled.

* UM... WOULDN'T IT BE A HELL OF A LOT CHEAPER TO JUST INSTALL CENTRALLY MONITORED CAMERAS AND LOUD ALARMS THAT COULD BE CENTRALLY ACTIVATED SHOULD MONITORS CATCH AN AIR FRIGG'N CONTROLLER SLEEPING ON THE FRIGG'N JOB...?!?!

FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt echoed LaHood's remarks, saying he "will not tolerate sleeping on the job.

* BULLSHIT! BY HIRING "BUDDY" AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS IN SITUATIONS WHERE ONLY ONE (HIGHLY PAID... PLATINUM BENEFITS...) AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER SHOULD BE NEEDED THESE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS ARE SIMPLY REWARDING THE UNIONS (MIS)USING TAXPAYER MONEY!

In Washington, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the lapse shows the need for additional funding.

(*SNORT*)

* FOLKS... LIKE I SAID... THIS AIN'T ABOUT SAFETY - IT'S ABOUT ENRICHING UNION SUPPORTERS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PART WHILE IMPOVERISHING THE TAXPAYERS WHO FUND THIS POLITICIZATION OF AIR SAFETY POLICY.

April 13, 2011 at 4:39 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/bizarre/inhofe-scared-crap-out-airport-workers-192645

* FILE UNDER: "WHAT AN ASSHOLE...!!!"

Newly released Federal Aviation Administration documents and audiotapes shed a scary new light on a bizarre incident late last year during which [Republican] U.S. Senator James Inhofe landed his Cessna on a closed runway at a south Texas airport, scattering construction workers who ran for their lives as the politician’s plane hopscotched over them and six vehicles.

The FAA material, provided in response to a TSG Freedom of Information Act request, details how Inhofe, 76, chose to land on the main runway at the Cameron County Airport on October 21 despite being aware that it was closed and had a large ‘X’ on its threshold.

In a [seemingly successful] bid to avoid “legal enforcement action,” Inhofe, who has a commercial pilot’s license, agreed to “complete a program of remedial training,” according to an FAA letter sent in January to Inhofe, a third-term Republican senator from Oklahoma. Inhofe is pictured at right.

Shortly after Inhofe landed, Sidney Boyd, who was supervising construction on the closed runway, called the FAA to report that Inhofe’s plane, a twin-engine six-seater, initially touched down on the runway and then “'sky hopped' over the six vehicles and personnel working on the runway, and then landed.”

During the call, which was recorded by the FAA, Boyd said Inhofe’s antics “scared the crap out of” workers, adding that the Cessna “damn near hit” a red truck. Referring to the vehicle’s driver, Boyd added, “I think he actually wet his britches, he was scared to death. I mean, hell, he started trying to head for the side of the runway. The pilot could see him, or he should have been able to, he was right on him.”

Boyd also said that Inhofe showed little contrition following the close call. “He come over here and started being like, 'What the hell is this? I was supposed to have unlimited airspace.'”

Another recording captured a transmission from an air traffic controller who offered a concise account of Inhofe’s antics flying his 1978 Cessna (tail number N115EA): “N115 Echo Alpha landed right in the middle of them doing their work on runway 1331 and damn near killed somebody out there.”

* I GENERALLY APPLAUD INHOFE's POLICIES AND OFFICIAL ACTIONS AS A SENATOR, BUT BY GOD, THE MAN SHOULD HAVE HAD HIS PILOT'S LICENSE REVOKED AND HE SHOULD BE CENSORED BY THE SENATE AS WELL!

April 13, 2011 at 4:40 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/flashback-cantor-beyond-comprehension-li

* AS ALWAYS, I CAUTION... THIS IS FROM CNS NEWS. WHILE I HAVE NO REASON TO SUSPECT IT CONTAINS FALSE INFORMATION, CNS IS NOT WHAT I CONSIDER A "MAINSTREAM AUTHORITATIVE" SOURCE.

* STILL... IT ALL JIBES WITH WHAT I "THINK" I ALREADY KNOW!

On Feb. 4, 2010, when the House of Representatives [,then controlled by Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats,] voted to increase the legal limit on the national debt by another $1.9 trillion (lifting the limit from $12.394 trillion to $14.294 trillion), not one Republican voted for the increase.

Then-Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) rose on the House floor that day and declared that it was “beyond comprehension” and “a travesty” to talk about raising the legal debt limit to $14.294 trillion.

(*PAUSE*) (*DEEP BREATH*) (*ANOTHER PAUSE*) (*EXHALE*)

Last week, the Republican House leadership agreed to a deal with President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) to spend $3.7555 trillion in this fiscal year...

* TO REMIND YOU FOLKS, OMB ACTUALLY FORECASTS SPENDING TO RISE TO $3,818,819,000,000 BEFORE ALL IS SAID AND DONE.

* NOW... PAY ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING... RE-READ SEVERAL TIMES IF NECESSARY...

In the first six months of this fiscal year (Oct-March), according to the Treasury, the [national] debt increased [by] $708.492 billion.

(*PAUSE*)

Even if you subtract $38.5 billion from that number - to account for the $38.5 billion Republicans say the new spending deal will cut from the current annual federal spending level - the federal government would still be on a pace to increase the debt by about another $670 billion in the remaining six months of this fiscal year.

* AND THAT'S ASSUMING WE'RE TALKING "ONLY" SPENDING OF $3.7555 TRILLION AS OPPOSED TO $3.8189 TRILLION..

(*PAUSE*) AGAIN, FOLKS... READ THIS PARTICULAR NEWSBITE OVER A FEW TIMES IF NECESSARY; A LOT OF NUMBERS ARE BEING THROWN AT YOU.

Simply put: To consummate the spending deal the Republican House leaders cut with Obama and Reid on Friday, the Republicans would need to lift the debt ceiling by hundreds of billions just to let the government borrow the money the Republicans have already agreed to let the government spend between now and Sept. 30.

* DO YOU GET THAT, FOLKS?! DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS CNS ANALYST IS GETTING AT? WHAT HE'S SAYING IS THAT BY AGREEING TO THIS BUDGET DEAL, REPUBLICANS HAVE ALSO COMMITTED THEMSELVES TO VOTING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE DEBT CEILING!!!

April 13, 2011 at 4:56 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/cbo-budget-deal-cuts-this-fiscal-years-deficit-by-just-353-million-not-38-billion-touted/2011/04/13/AFFJnkWD_story.html

* FOLKS... IT'S NOW WEDNESDAY. OVER THE PAST COUPLE DAYS (BETTER LATE THAN NEVER) ELEMENTS OF THE MEDIA HAVE SLOWLY BUT SURELY BEEN RELEASING INFO VERIFYING WHAT I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU ALL ALONG CONCERNING THIS SO-CALLED "BUDGET DEAL" BROKERED BETWEEN BOEHNER, OBAMA, AND REID.

* THIS LATEST... FROM THE WASHINGTON POST!

A new [CBO] budget estimate released Wednesday shows that the spending bill negotiated between President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner would produce less than 1% of the $38 billion in claimed "savings" by the end of this budget year.

* AGAIN, FOLKS, TO REITERATE... THERE NEVER WAS $38 BILLION IN SAVINGS... THERE WAS NEVER $38.5 BILLION IN SAVING... $39 BILLION IN SAVINGS... $61 BILLION IN SAVINGS... $100 BILLION IN SAVINGS. THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN LYING TO US ALL ALONG.

The CBO estimate shows that compared with current spending rates the spending bill due for a House vote Thursday would pare just $352 million from the deficit through Sept. 30.

* FOLKS... (*SIGH*)... EVEN THAT IS WRONG. THERE ARE NO SAVINGS! NONE. ZERO. ZILCH!

The budget deficit is projected at $1.6 trillion this year.

* I'LL STICK WITH THE $1.65 ESTIMATE... BUT TIME WILL TELL!

The CBO study confirms that the measure trims $38 billion in new spending "authority," but many of the cuts come in slow-spending accounts like water-and-sewer grants that don’t have an immediate deficit impact.

* WHAT A FRIGG'N JOKE, HUH? WHAT A SICK, PATHETIC JOKE...

A separate CBO analysis provided to lawmakers but not released publicly says that $5.7 billion in savings claimed by cutting bonuses to states enrolling more children and reducing the amount of money available to subsidize health care cooperatives authorized under the new health care law won’t produce a dime of actual savings. CBO believes they are simply cuts to spending authority that is unlikely to be used anyway.

* DRIP... DROP... DRIP... DROP...

[T]hose cuts to mandatory benefit programs, while producing no deficit savings, can be claimed under budget rules to pay for spending increases elsewhere in the legislation. All told, $17.8 million in such savings is claimed but just a tiny portion of it would actually reduce the deficit.

* YEP... LYING BASTARDS...

* FOLKS... I KNOW SOME OF THIS INFO IS REITERATION FROM EARLIER NEWSBITES, BUT I TRULY BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN'T HEAR OFTEN ENOUGH HOW YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO - IF ONLY TO CONVINCE YOU THAT BOEHNER, CANTOR, AND MY MY (OUR) OWN CONGRESSWOMAN SUE KE... er... NAN HAYWORTH SIMPLY CAN'T BE TRUSTED.

(ACTUALLY... IT MAY JUST BE THAT NAN IS IGNORANT. AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO BELIEVE.)

April 13, 2011 at 5:25 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53072.html

* FOLKS... (*SIGH*)... IF POLITICO IS REPORTING THIS... (*CLENCHED JAW*)

[The official Secret Service kept visitor] logs are missing the names of thousands of...visitors to the White House, including lobbyists, government employees, campaign donors, policy experts and friends of the first family, according to an investigation by the Center for Public Integrity.

* I'M NOT SO CONCERNED ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES OR FRIENDS OF THE FIRST FAMILY... (*PAUSE*)... BUT LOBBYISTS...?!?! CAMPAIGN DONORS...?!?!

[The] logs routinely omit or cloud key details about the identity of visitors, whom they met with and the nature of their visits. The logs even include the names of people who never showed up. These are critical gaps that raise doubts about the records’ historical accuracy and utility in helping the public understand White House operations, from social events to meetings on key policy debates.

* AGAIN, FOLKS... (*PAUSE*)... THIS IS POLITICO - aka: "DEMS ARE US!" - REPORTING THIS!

The “event” description in the logs is blank for more than 205,000 visits, including many that involved small meetings with the president and his key aides.

Five junior staff aides together received more than 4,440 visits. By contrast, then-chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, famed for his workaholic schedule, is listed as having fewer than 500 visits.

* NAH! NOTHING IN THE LEAST SUSPICIOUS ABOUT THAT! (*SNORT*) (*LAUGHING OUT LOUD*)

Less than 1% of the estimated 500,000 visits to the White House in Obama’s first eight months - a time when the new administration was bustling with activity - have been disclosed, according to the Center’s analysis.

* NOTE:

The White House website proudly boasts of making available “over 1,000,000 records of everyone who’s come through the doors of the White House” via a searchable database.

(*CHUCKLE*)

* FOLKS... THIS IS A THREE PAGE POLITICO NEWS STORY. WHILE I HATE TO USE THE WORD, THIS STORY IS INDEED... er... "TROUBLING."

April 13, 2011 at 5:53 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)