-
RSS Subscribe
-
Books
Luis Palau
Hillary’s $100 Generosity (in theory)
Subtitle: “Let them eat cake.” Hillary and her entourage visited the Maid Rite Restaurant in Toledo, Iowa this past Thursday and ran up a $157 tab. This tab was settled by a credit card of the campaign and the campaign has provided a receipt of the card charge to prove it. What it doesn’t prove is that the $100 tip claimed by Clinton was ever made.
Anita Esterday a waitress at the restaurant that served Mrs. Clinton and her guest said she chatted and exchanged pleasantries with Mrs. Clinton and might even vote for her but that Mrs. Clinton failed to leave a tip. Hillary even used the encounter in a campaign speech. I suppose it was about the raw deal the working people are getting in this country with minimum wage or health care or something like that. The campaign went in defense mode and insisted that a tip was left on the table for $100. When Ms. Esterday said “why would I lie about not receiving a tip,” the campaign repeatedly said that “well we left the cash.”
This was somewhat of a change from their perspective that they understood the tip to have been added to the credit card. The manager says that their card processor doesn’t automatically add a tip to any charge. He also says that there was no cash tip left at the table at which Hillary was seated. The manager stated that all of their waitresses are long term waitresses (25-30 years) and that there isn’t one that would pocket someone else’s tip.
Later a campaign staffer apologized to Esterday and gave her a $20.00 bill and my question is where is that $100 that was avowed? So their tip generosity was $100 (64%) when they could simply assert it, but when it came to actually taking their own money and paying it, it is only $20.00 (12.7%) which is substandard. So this illustrates how HRc claims to be the champion of the “little people” but as it turns out she is the oppressor (I guess we can’t say she is the “man”).
Of course none of my conjecture is accurate, because what actually happened is Clinton stiffed the waitress and the rest is spin control amplified by increasing intensity of their lies which I believe is clear. MORE
Obama and the Flag and Now the National Anthem
A PICTURE IS WORTH 1,000 WORDS: I know it’s an old story that Obama has removed the US flag pin from his lapel after wearing it following 911 and he justified this by stating: “I am less concerned that what your are wearing on your lapel than what is in your heart.” He also stated that he has abandoned the pin in favor of actions that would be more meaningful in demonstrating his patriotism. Snopes confirms HERE that this picture is an authentic picture from Time magazine of the candidates (note Richardson & Hillary) at an Iowa steak fry.
Now I am not critical of Obama not wearing the lapel pin, I don’t wear one myself, but his overt decision to take it off and make a statement gives pause, but not a terrible lot of pause until you add this to the question: what is the statement that this action in the picture above demonstrates where he sort of stoically flaunts protocol designed around national respect (hand over heart) in context of his own standard that he would take actions that would more meaningfully demonstrate the authenticity of his patriotism. I’m not ready to conclude the Manchurian Candidate thing, but I am not sure he is rising to a reasonable credibility level about his true viewpoints with these actions. He raised this issue himself and we can only measure him by his own statements, standards and actions.
UPDATE COMMENT: This may be one of those “read my lips” moments…..steve
$1,000 for your vote!!!!
Do you remember when George McGovern ran for President against Richard Nixon in 1972 he promised to give every American $2,000? Talk about pandering and having the taxpayer pay for what amounts to campaign financing. (This would have increased federal spending by about 50% for this plan alone……..no wonder he was 100% behind having Senator Eagleton on the ticket as V.P. originally before he fired him……..Wiki Eagleton if you want in on this bit of humor :)
Well now we have it again with Hillary offering to set up everyone a 401-K with the Government kicking in $1,000 per plan. Gee thanks, just write me the check and forget the bureaucratic costs. Lets see, you have had the Republicans saying (along with myself on a few NSL posts) that private retirement accounts are the only solution for solving the Baby Boomer retirement equation.
I think this proposal is a defacto admission that no form of modification (short of changing the retirement age to death + 1 year) of the Social Security System will keep the program solvent. But wait………..now we have them also proposing a system that basically turns the money that employers and workers put in retirement savings over to those nasty Wall Street boys, and get this, along with taxpayer money as well. I wonder if Harry Reid will immediately jump on this and accuse her of having retirement savers put their money in a “risky” stock market scheme like he accused Republicans of when proposing private accounts. (you don’t think that the 401-K managers will simply purchase Treasury Bills do you?)
Now here is the sweetest part of all. She is talking about financing this through a modification on the Estate Tax laws and according to her statement at a campaign stop in small–town central Iowa she is going to tax Estates over $7,000,000 to fund this program and again according to her own statement that from each estate exceeding $7,000,000 5,000 families would get the matching funds of $1,000 (i.e. $5,000,000). Wow, that sounds generous of her…….and to think she can do all this with only taxing estates at the rate of 71.4%. Although she didn’t admit it out loud you can see that if a single estate of $7,000,001 would fund $5,000,000 (5/7 = .714 - that is 5,000 families at $1,000 per family) you end up with a confiscatory estate tax rate of 71.4% at the Federal level alone plus what ever the state accesses.
I wonder if this proposal will last any longer than last month’s little bit of pandering where she stated at an address to the Congressional Black Caucus that she wanted to give every child born a $5,000 baby shower gift from Uncle Sam which could be used to pay towards college or a first home. Her office claims that she has now given up on that proposal, but not until after (I am sure) it obtained its desired impact on impoverished and black communities relative to their support for her candidacy.
I am sure she took pains to calculate at what threshold she could put the Estate Exemption (less than $7,000,000) so as not to disturb or rattle the majority of Iowa farmers that have land values not exceeding that amount with those exceeding being a small percentage. For additional information on this latest and greatest from the geniuses in the Clinton camp, check HERE.
As it turns out the Daily KOS is “the man”
File this in your “do as I say………..file.” From the Drudge Report HERE referencing the New York Times we come to find some shady illegal stock insider activity by one of the founders of the Daily KOS. This is activity that is only suitable for Republicans don’t you remember? He neither denies nor admits the charges, but apparently was willing to pay $30,000 to settle the problem. I guess sort of a Nolo Contendere on the order of Spiro Agnew. At least Spiro had the decency to step down as Vice President. Wonder if he will do the same with the KOS or MYDD.com? This is in addition to last years scandal involving KOS in an alleged Pay to Play scheme with Democratic Candidate hiring the KOS boys as political consultants HERE for KOS support of candidacies.
DAILY KOS CO-AUTHOR FINED $30,000 FOR UNETHICAL STOCK TOUT.
Prominent liberal blogger Jerome Armstrong has agreed to pay nearly $30,000 in fines in a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission over allegations that Armstrong touted the stock of a software company, without disclosing that he was being paid to do so, the New York Times reports.
Armstrong is the co-author of Crashing the Gate: Netroots, Grassroots, and the Rise of People-Powered Politics, with Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos. He is also the founder of the Democratic activist site MyDD.com.
Under the agreement, Armstrong neither denies nor admits to the allegations. “It is good to see the matter finally end,” Armstrong said in an e-mail message to the TIMES.
ChickenHawk Fervor
With much amusement I have been reading some blogs and articles about the ChickenHawks in the Bush administration, Bush Supporters or Neocons in general. Here they mean Bush, Crystal, Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle, etc. This general slur refers to leaders that are in favor of deploying the military in war but never served themselves. They never reference the unending list of Democrats (including most of the current Presidential Candidates) that are ChickenHawks. And need I remind you of the biggest ChickenHawk of all Mr. William Jefferson Read more
Cheney Pushes Bush to Act on Iran
A well-placed source in Washington said: “Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo,” right out of the mouth of the Guardian HERE and I guess that Administration reports suggest that Iran will continue the negotiations dance and it will be still in process with no end in view in January, 2009. They are obviously playing out the clock looking for a more fertile administration to intimidate. Bush doesn’t trust any of the candidates in either party to deal with them. So we may well see if Iran has those 600 missiles actually aimed at Israel or if Israel has 5 aimed at Iran. You got to appreciate the fact that Bush is not making decisions based on their latest internal polls like a few of the candidates are (at least one). But I suppose most grown-ups really do understand that Iran cannot be left to continue with this pursuit of nuclear arms and festering a war in the Middle East with Israel and their surrogates Hezbollah, and now Hamas as well as Syria. If the Iranians really want to head this thing off I’d say now is the time for “Regime Change.” Now don’t get too excited, it looks like no action will be taken till 2008.
This is really going to PO the leadership party in Congress. I guess it was Clinton, Pelosi and Reed that said that Bush shouldn’t attack Iran before he gets permission from Congress. Now that is one bet you can make and win if you put your money on the “I don’t think so” side of the wager. We’ll just have to stay tuned.
The Fairness Doctrine
To bring you up to speed on this controversial issue that the Democrats so artfully call the “Fairness Doctrine” (an interesting title much like the serpent in the Garden so subtly misrepresented the mandate of God to Eve). This is a policy that had been in force throughout most of the era of the FCC which was established in 1934 by an act of Congress. The Fairness Doctrine was a “regulation” of the FCC to require Broadcast licensees to present controversial issues of public importance in an a) honest, b) equal, and c) balanced manner. Let me pause here to state that the FCC like the IRS establishes “regulations” in order to effectuate their interpretation of the law and good public policy. Regulations are not laws and can be challenged on the basis that they are not in conformity with the law. I have done this myself in the context of the IRS only to initially lose but eventually be vindicated in the Federal Court of Appeals that the particular IRS regulation did not serve the purpose of the IRS Code but hindered it.
In the same matter the FCC voted in 1987 on a 4-0 ruling to overturn the long standing “Fairness Doctrine” on the basis that the regulation had grown to inhibit rather than enhance debate. This position of the FCC followed a 1986 DC Appeals Court ruling that stated that Congress never made the so called doctrine a “binding requirement” of the FCC. This decision is understood to be operative and accepted by all sides of this issue.
The Conservatives considered this FCC ruling a victory and opening in the otherwise Liberal Domination of other media outlets such as Newspapers, Cable New, Network News and Read more
Gore on World Terrorism & Saddam
What a good week for videos. This HERE at breitbart.tv is another must see where Al Gore is berating George HW Bush for failing to recognize the threat Saddam poses for the world with his support of terrorism, use of weapons of mass destruction and constant pursuit of nuclear weapons. In this September, 1992 speech Gore condemns President Bush for “blatant disregard for brutal terrorism, a dangerous blindness to the murderous ambitions of a despot.” This is another MUST SEE; however, Read more
Dennis Miller Goes Nuclear on Harry Reid (must see)
Well folks, it’s Miller time again. We (Susan & Me) were up pretty late last night watching Fox News and Dennis Miller came on Red Eye with what I believe to be his BEST RANT EVER in the ”The Buck Starts Here” segment. He is going nuclear on Harry Reid with the prose that only Dennis Miller can deliver. We just looked at each other with our jaws dropping when Read more
The Most Honest, Ethical & Open Congress (ever)
The Club for growth news is reporting that the Democratic Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee David Obey (D-Wis.) is going to keep all earmarks (pork spending) out of the spending bills so the conservatives won’t have the opportunity orchestrate a grass roots effort to squelch them (so much for Democratic government). This is to frustrate the likes of Jeff Flake’s (R-Arizona) effort last year to stand against earmarks embarrassing Democrats and even some Republicans.
But don’t worry he will be re-inserting this pork spending into the conference report that will be immune from amendment and deliver all the pork he cares to order up. I hope the President has his veto pen nearby. And just think, this all while we were promised “the most honest, ethical, and open Congress in history” by Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Isn’t this special……..?