Monday, February 23, 2009
They need to be kicked to the curb!!
Sunday, February 22, 2009
That's the heading at Right.Org's website and it's legit. A new grassroots website is calling on Congress to stop the bailouts and has started a video contest to help with their efforts.
You are probably as upset about the bailouts as we are. Well, Washington isn't listening, so let's turn up the volume. Come up with an idea, grab a camera, and send us your best 30-second video opposing government bailouts.
Be creative. Make us laugh. Teach us. Above all, make us oppose the bailouts. The person or team that submits the "best video" will win $27,599 - one person's personal bailout burden.
first place: $27,599
second place: $2,759
5 runners-up: $275 Apple Store gift certificates
Video length: 30 seconds
Theme: "Why you oppose the bailouts."
Competition time frame: February 23 - May 25 (3 months)
Judging criteria: a panel of judges will select the winner from among the top 20 most viewed videos (more details soon)
Submission: upload through Right.org's video upload application,
available February 23rd
Friday, February 20, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
A board of members whos chairman will be appointed by Obama, who can tell an inspector general to lay off certain sensitive subjects? This guy is unbelievable..
You’ve heard a lot about the astonishing spending in the $787 billion economic stimulus bill, signed into law this week by President Barack Obama. But you probably haven’t heard about a provision in the bill that threatens to politicize the way allegations of fraud and corruption are investigated — or not investigated — throughout the federal government.
The provision, which attracted virtually no attention in the debate over the 1,073-page stimulus bill, creates something called the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board — the RAT Board, as it’s known by the few insiders who are aware of it. The board would oversee the in-house watchdogs, known as inspectors general, whose job is to independently investigate allegations of wrongdoing at various federal agencies, without fear of interference by political appointees or the White House.
In the name of accountability and transparency, Congress has given the RAT Board the authority to ask “that an inspector general conduct or refrain from conducting an audit or investigation.” If the inspector general doesn’t want to follow the wishes of the RAT Board, he’ll have to write a report explaining his decision to the board, as well as to the head of his agency (from whom he is supposedly independent) and to Congress. In the end, a determined inspector general can probably get his way, but only after jumping through bureaucratic hoops that will inevitably make him hesitate to go forward.
When Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, a longtime champion of inspectors general, read the words “conduct or refrain from conducting,” alarm bells went off. The language means that the board — whose chairman will be appointed by the president — can reach deep inside a federal agency and tell an inspector general to lay off some particularly sensitive subject. Or, conversely, it can tell the inspector general to go after a tempting political target.
“This strikes at the heart of the independence of inspectors general,” Grassley told me this week, in a phone conversation between visits to town meetings in rural Iowa. “Anytime an inspector general has somebody questioning his authority, it tends to dampen the aggressiveness with which they pursue something, particularly if it’s going to make the incumbent administration look bad.”
After all the talk of regulating our airwaves and internet and now this, I end up asking myself "What has happened to our country?"
According to The Oklahoman newspaper, an officer pulled over Chip Harrison last week because he had in his car a sign that said, "Abort Obama, not the unborn."
The officer confiscated the sign and handed Harrison a slip telling him he was under investigation, even though Harrison argued that the sign only meant he wanted Obama removed from office.
The officer thought Harrison was threatening to kill the president, according to the article. But the department later explained that the officer misinterpreted the sign.
That didn't stop Harrison from getting a visit from the Secret Service. They interviewed him at his house and determined he was not a threat to the president, according to the report.
How can anyone conscrue "Abort Obama, not the unborn" into threatening? He's obviously talking about abortion and wanting Obama out of office. What has happened to our free speech in this country? I can remember several instances where people were setting pictures of George W. Bush on fire, as well as standing on and setting the flag on fire. Were'nt these threating? I mean these are just a few of many hateful things that have happened during Bush's presidency and although I dont agree with them, they do have the right to free expression thanks to our 1st Amendment. I guess things are different now and this is just more of the "change" we have been promised..
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009
"There's not a hoax," ... "Might I be ridiculous? Might my career in music be laughable? Yeah, that's possible, but that's certainly not my intention"
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Michelle Obama has ended a period of relative seclusion to grace the cover of Vogue magazine and detail her new life as “Mom-in-Chief”.
In an extensive and at times gushing interview, the First Lady talks about her young children’s schooling and her desire to open up the White House to a new generation of hip-hop-loving youngsters.Although Vogue has photographed every First Lady since Lou Hoover in 1929 — except for Harry Truman’s wife, Bess — Mrs Obama is only the second to have graced the cover. The first was Hillary Clinton, in December 1998.
The Washington Times and New York Daily News, among other news outlets, have reported that, as a member of Congress, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel received rent-free accommodations from Representative Rosa DeLauro for five years, raising the question of whether Emanuel properly complied with gift rules for House members and whether he should have paid taxes on the imputed income of the gift.
Last summer, liberals went after Republican Senator Norm Coleman for paying an allegedly below-market rate for his Capitol Hill apartment, with the George Soros-funded Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) demanding an ethics committee investigation.
The big media bias question regarding Emanuel is whether his longtime friend, ABC chief Washington correspondent and host of This Week George Stephanopoulos, knew about the arrangement with DeLauro and her husband, pollster Stan Greenberg — who worked alongside Emanuel and Stephanopoulos in the 1992 Clinton campaign.
Is Rahmbo's Five year rent free "gift" worth investigating whether he should have paid taxes on it? Do you think the IRS would have any concern? If this was a Republican you know they would be all over it. What's up with wealthy liberals not paying their taxes, Hopey Changey?
Monday, February 9, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
I love the show Rescue Me which is soley based on the life of FDNY fire fighters and the after effects of 9/11. It's quite sad but surprisingly not shocking that a hollywierdian would buy into this crap..
A coming episode of the acclaimed FX drama “Rescue Me” will tackle what may sound like a far-fetched plot line: that the attacks of Sept. 11 were an “inside job.” The actor who espouses the theories on camera, it turns out, also subscribes to them in real life. In the episode, Mr. Sunjata’s character delivers a two-minute monologue for a French journalist describing a “neoconservative government effort” to control the world’s oil, drastically increase military spending and “change the definition of pre-emptive attack.” To put it into action, he continues, “what you need is a new Pearl Harbor. That’s what they said they needed.”
Mr. Sunjata surprised some of the TV reporters when he said that he “absolutely, 100 percent” supports the assertion that “9/11 was an inside job.”The alternative theories “seem to me to make a lot more sense than the ones that are popularly espoused,” he said, calling it admirable that the conversation was allowed within “Rescue Me.”