Political Donors - Still the Big Guys

The Sen. Barack H. Obama continues to convince his gullible minions that his campaign does not accept contributions from Political Action Committees (PACs) or Washington lobbyists. He declares that his campaign is fueled by individual, small donors, not big, deep pocket, corporate donors. Then the Sen. Barack H. Obama makes the audacious declaration to the even more gullible that the entire Democrat party will not accept PAC, lobbyist, and corporate big money.

The dirty little secret is that none of this squares with the actual filings and records that are maintained on political contributions. A list of top 10 political donors since 1989, compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics (see the list at Human Events), reveals that most of the big money given by organizations and corporations goes to the Democrat party.

I've done the math for you... Of the $305,777,033 cited in the list, $243,532,628 have gone to the Democrat party. That's 80% of the total amount given by the top 10 donors!

Of the top 10 donors, six are union organizations. Instead of giving these hundreds of millions of dollars away to politicians, couldn't they use this money to actually serve their paying members? How many foreclosures and utility shutoffs could have been prevented if they had allowed their members to actually keep the money they earn instead of paying for benefits for politicians? Remarkable, isn't it?

Don't forget, think logically and vote responsibly.

National and International Security

Just applying my old school lessons of compare and contrast...

*****
...On NBC's "Meet the Press" last month, Sen. Joe Biden was asked whether he would support military action against Iran if the Iranians were to go "full-speed-ahead with their program to build a nuclear bomb."No, of course not. There is, Biden said, "no imminent threat at this point."

...On "Meet the Press" last Sunday, Sen. Biden lightly dismissed the North Koreans, saying their "government's like an eighth-grader with a small bomb looking for attention" and that we "don't even have the intelligence community saying they're certain they have a nuclear weapon." -- Ann Coulter, "Liberals: Born to Run," Human Events, 7/19/06

*****

*****
...Still, it was Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican widely touted as a possible future president of the United States, who may have been the most blunt about the implications of the developing crisis in the Middle East. Appearing on NBC's Meet the Press in April of 2006, McCain warned that "there's only one thing worse than using the option of military action, and that is the Iranians acquiring nuclear weapons.' If Iran gets the bomb, he says, "I think we could have Armageddon." -- Joel C. Rosenberg, Epicenter, Tyndale Press, 2006, p. xiv.
*****

America and the world has faced tons of "no imminent threats" before with all equal results: devastation. The bad news is that the first strike devastation from all those "no imminent threats" out there keeps increasing.

I want a warrior, not a lawyer, as my next president.

A Joe Biden Sound Bite

"You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent, I'm not joking." -- Sen. Joe Biden, while campaigning in 2006 (MCT, "Biden is seasoned politician," 8/24/2008)

The Democrat Dynamic Duo

As everyone probably knows by now, Sen. Barack H. Obama finally quit playing coy with his fans (I know who I have selected, but I'm not telling anyone yet) and named his running mate - Sen. Joe Biden.

Yep, the "gonna change Washington & America & the world" presidential candidate chose a typical long-time liberal Washington insider. Just one of the many ways, I suppose, that Sen. Barack H. Obama is going to bring about new hope and change.

Change...

I figure that's about all we'll have left after this dynamic duo gets done with us.

Russian Imperialism

"Russia has invaded a sovereign neighboring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people. Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century." -- President Bush

In response to American opposition to the Russian invasion of Georgia, Big Media immediately demonstrates their lack of support for anything that smacks of defending freedom. Ed henry, CNN, "What's the difference here between the Russians doing what the United States did after 9/11, moving into a sovereign country like Iraq?" (8/13/08)

Amazing. Leave it to liberalism and America's enemies to try to make Russia-Georgia and America-Iraq equivalent. America did not invade a sovereign nation; Russia did. Iraq surrendered its sovereignty when it invaded the sovereign nation of Kuwait. At that moment, Iraq was no more sovereign than Nazi Germany. Accepting a cease fire after watching its crack Iraqi divisions disappear, Iraq submitted to treaties that were specified through U.N resolutions. Iraq then proceeded to violate these resolutions and treaties. When it did that, it also once again vacated its sovereignty.

I'm all for world peace, but I don't care to be anyone else's vassal to attain it.

(photo: Russia invades Georgia)

Global Warming - The Solution Revealed

"...So, those who believe disaster is around the corner face a dilemma: while they’re educating their fellow citizens and demanding governments regulate believers and non-believers alike, the problem continues, and the date of the world’s doom draws ever closer. But there is a solution. It’s relatively simple, can begin immediately, and will change the dynamics of global warming overnight. Instead of continuing to preach to the rest of us, the true believers need to step forward and set an example. I’m not talking about recycling Evian bottles; I’m talking about giving up cars and moving into smaller houses or apartments, or even forming communes where people can live simpler, more Earth-friendly lives. Yes, I’m talking about living the kinds of lives they want all of us to live.Such a movement could literally start tomorrow. It would need a leader, of course; someone who could inspire others to choose a more spartan lifestyle. The obvious choice would be Al Gore, who already has a loyal following. If he would eschew large homes, gas-guzzling cars, private jets and the consumption of meat, millions more would likely do the same. If enough people joined the cause, Mr. Gore and his followers would be able to demonstrate the results of this new way of living in very short order. They could lead by example. They could create a movement. They could have uniforms and badges and secret handshakes. The could have their own reality TV show. In short, they could become a major force for change. Carmakers would be driven out of business or forced to dramatically alter their products to meet the demands of this eco-friendly Gorian tsunami. Companies of all stripes would, similarly, have to adapt or perish.

Once the rest of us saw the presumed reversal (or at least slowing-down) of global warming, it would do more to convince us than any lecture or study signed by UN scientists, and it would likely add millions more to the cause. So what if you can’t get one-hundred percent co-operation initially? Wouldn’t half (or a third or a quarter) of the population make a huge difference if they made substantial sacrifices? You could argue it wouldn’t be fair to have some of us going on abusing the planet and leading our lives of consumption and gluttony while others are putting aside the trappings of modern life, but this isn’t about fairness; it’s about survival.The time for talk is over. The time for action is now. Just think of millions and millions of committed Americans making the personal sacrifices necessary to demonstrate their resolve to combat man-made global warming. And, most important, thanks to their efforts, theory would be replaced by fact. It’s much easier to argue about a study than it is to refute the demonstrable results when the temperature drops and the ocean levels stabilize. When future generations write of the sacrifices of these men and women, they’ll use words like “inspirational” and “heroic”.

And so, I urge the advocates for change to embark on this important mission. Do it for the children. Godspeed." -- Pat Sajak, "A Solution to Man-Made Global Warming"

Questions for Global Warming Alarmists

Here are some questions for global warming alarmists:

1. What is the perfect temperature?

2. Just what is the average temperature of the earth?

3. What factors have led to global warming in the past, and how do we know they aren’t the causes of the current warming trend?

4. Why is there such a strong effort to stifle discussion and dissent?

5. Why are there such dramatically different warnings about the effects of man-made global warming?

6. Are there potential benefits to global warming?

7. Should such drastic changes in public policy be based on a “what if?” proposition?

8. What will be the impact on the people of the world if we change the way we live based on man-made global warming concerns?

9. How will we measure our successes?

10. How has this movement gained such momentum?

Thanks to Pat Sajak for asking.

Why Leave a Workers’ Paradise?

I’m watching some Olympics and enjoying the coverage on extra channels. Getting to see some of the contests not normally shown, like boxing. So, I really perked up during a bout that included a fighter from Cuba when the announcers commented that the Cuban team lacked the international experience of the other teams because they were not allowed to go to the world events for fear of defection.

Defection? From the workers’ paradise of Cuba? The land of health care and government benefits for everyone? Why would any Cuban want to defect from there? I don’t get it.


(Photo: Amateur standout Guillermo Rigondeaux, right, tried defecting from Cuba in hopes of pursuing a career as a professional boxer -- and was punished severely for it.)

The Obama PAC

The Sen. Barack H. Obama has enjoyed crowing about his campaign’s refusal to accept money from Political Action Committees (PACs). The Sen. Barack H. Obama declares that he and his entire party will not be beholden to anyone except the “American citizen.” No corporate or political fat cats will derail his drive for “hope and change.” (No PAC money? Really? Consider this pro-Obama PAC ad.)

It turns out, though, that the Senator has no qualms about using his own PAC to influence Washington politics. What? You never heard about the Sen. Barack H. Obama’s PAC? Funny how that seems to be overlooked by both the Senator and Big Media. Turns out that the Sen. Barack H. Obama established a PAC called the Hopefund.

*****
Hopefund is what is known as a “leadership PAC,” a frequent target of campaign watchdogs because it can raise money in much larger bundles than individual candidates. The Candidate of Hope from Illinois followed the example set by Senate and House members who establish such accounts to raise money and then spread it around to other politicians in the hopes of gaining new best friends. Legally, such PACs are supposed to operate independently and cannot coordinate with any campaigns of their owner.
Now that Obama is running for president, he's handing out the bulk of Hopefund money to politicians and groups who happen to be in early presidential voting states, as the Washington Post's John Solomon noted the other day. The pace of giving has increased in recent months and this has led to some remarkable coincidences. – Andrew Malcolm, “Turns out, some Obama PAC money comes from PACs.” (See also “Obama Campaign Worker Discussed PAC Donations,” Washington Post, 11/30/07.)
*****

Because of the complicated, convoluted methods of political campaign funding, virtually none of the Sen. Barack H. Obama’s “American citizens” have a clue about how his and his Democrat party’s campaigns are funded. It’s too hard to figure out. How many of you aren’t already looking cross-eyed by now, if you have read this far? The sad result, though, is that the Sen. Barack H. Obama can make his public declarations without very much worry that his cheering minions, who are also forking over dollars they need to pay for mortgages, food, healthcare, and transportation, will ever have a clue who the Senator will be paying back.

Consider the Service Employees International Union, which “spent over $9 million during a crucial three month period to help the Big O secure the Democrats’ nomination.” (William Tate, “Obama, the PAC-Man,” The American Thinker, 7/10/08.) The article goes on to disclose that “…SEIU’s PACs have paid for such campaign essentials as door-to-door canvassing for Obama, voter identification and registration, and even bus rental and food for pro-Obama rallies.” Ironically, Federal Election rules require that “independent expenditures” by political committees be limited to communications.

Sadly, with Big Media rooting for the Sen. Barack H. Obama, these complex revelations will remain largely buried. But, I guess we can all take small solace in knowing that if the Sen. Barack H. Obama is elected as our next president, he really won’t be any different than anyone else who would be on the ticket. So much for “hope and change.”

(photo: Obama plays the crowd)

More from the Depressed American Economy

Another weekend, another good report about this summer’s highest grossing movie. Yes, “The Dark Knight” remains on top at 26 million dollars. So far, it has box-office receipts of 441.5 million dollars. According to the Monday (8/11/08) AP entertainment report, the top 10 movies pulled in 106.6 million dollars over the weekend.

Maybe I’m beating the dead horse here, I don’t know. And I really don’t have anything against a Batman movie – although how many times do we have to see Batman beat the Joker? No, my point really doesn’t have anything to do with the movies, other than they are entertainment and, therefore, a use of discretionary spending. In other words, after we have paid for our mortgage or rent, utilities, food, clothing, transportation, and any legal debts, then we can pay to go to the movies. Or a concert. Or MP3 tunes. Or the golf course. Or Disneyland.

Yet, headlines scream that the American economy has tanked. Without the “change and hope” plan of a particular political party’s candidate (why is my mind clanging “switch and bait?” Freudian slip?) to correct all of the disastrous policy decisions of the current administration, Americans are doomed to the Greatest Depression. Foreclosures, record gasoline prices, increasing food costs, business failures, layoffs, unaffordable health care. We’re doomed! DOOMED, I tell you!

Until you turn from the front page of the NY Times to the entertainment section. There, once again, we breathe a sigh of relief, for all is right with the world. At, say, $12 per ticket, about 37 million Americans have been able to see “The Dark Knight.” Thank the government for our tax rebate check. Those Big Media front pages had me worried there for a minute. No matter how far behind we are with the house payment, we can by golly still escape nasty reality and plunk the food money down on Big Entertainment. Big Oil hasn’t won yet! They’re gonna have to do better than this!

Friends, before you start your panic mode over the American economy – which is certainly not in the greatest shape right now by any stretch – take a look at the entertainment section or wait for the entertainment report on CNN, etc. You know we’re in trouble when there are no lines for movies or iPhones or tennis shoes or whatever silly fad is drawing us like moths to a flame. Panic does us no good; rational thinking and common-sense decision-making do us a lot of good. Meet your necessary financial obligations first – including a savings plan – and then go spend some on fun. Or help out someone else in real financial trouble. Try this, and you will probably weather most financial storms that come along. And don’t forget TNSTAAFL – There’s No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

The photo? Waiting in line for the movie. What else?

Unseasonably Cool in a Globally Warmed World

I know that global warming alarmists reply to weather reports like this with comments about how local conditions do not negate global warming trends. In fact, they have cornered the market on all meteorology & weather conditions by being allowed to blame every weather phenomenon on global warming: floods, droughts, record high temperatures, record low temperatures, active hurricane seasons, inactive hurricane seasons, ad nauseum. So I know that the weather report I received for my area today does not validate any argument against global warming.

*****

Tonight our low will drop down around 60 and by Saturday our high will be just 79 degrees as a large area of high pressure moves into Indiana. This time last year it was very hot and muggy for state fair goers, but that won't be the case this year. This weekend we'll have perfect weather for the fair as it's looking to be nice and dry with unseasonably cool temperatures. -- "Is This August?," Chief Meteorologist Chris Wright, WTHR, Indianapolis, Indiana, 8/7/08

*****

So, fair enough; this local report does not refute global warming. But, why then, is it legitimate for global warming alarmists to point to weather patterns & reports in localities experiencing extended & record heat waves? If local areas experiencing below normal temperatures are invalid in the global warming debate, then are not local above normal temperatures just as invalid?

And, I admit to a lack of understanding how, in a world that is warming, there can continue to be new record low temperatures? I mean, yes, there will still be periods of cold temperatures, but should they not be higher instead of lower cool temperatures? So how are we in Indiana privileged to these cooler temperatures in August in a world of rising temperature?

Economic Depression - American Style

See the people waiting in lines? Given the tanking American economy reported by Big Media, we might think that these poor folks hope to receive help for food, mortgage, gasoline, or some other necessity. After all, home foreclosures, job losses, high energy costs, the falling value of the dollar overseas, and other economic maladies are wrecking the American dream today. This is another Great Depression era brought on by the failed policies of the Bush administration.

Oh, wait! These are people in line for consumer goods; specifically, the Nike Hyperdunker athletic shoe (left) and the Apple iPhone 3G (right). The line for the iPhone began forming a week before their availability! The Nike shoe sells for $110.00 a pair or more.

Over the weekend of August 2-3, 2008, the “Dark Knight” Batman movie grossed 43.8 million dollars. This is in addition to the more than 150 million dollars it brought in during its debut weekend. Its 17 day total is nearly 400 million dollars. Over the first weekend in August, movie patrons spent about 145 million dollars on the top ten grossing movies (AP entertainment reports 8/4/08).

According to liberal progressives everywhere, Americans are living in poverty with no hope for their future unless we receive government health care, government-subsidized energy, government mortgage relief, government minimum wage laws, and about government-everything-else. Americans are suffering and need government bailouts. Americans need hope and change!

Actually, what Americans need is some fiscal common sense and the opportunity to be left alone to succeed. Not much more than these simple ingredients built the most powerful and the most charitable nation in the world. Need to pay the mortgage? Pay forty bucks for a decent pair of shoes and use the rest to pay bills. Need health care? Quit going to movies every weekend and plan for the future. There are Americans in financial distress, so voluntarily donate to causes that ease the distress and provide new hope (hint: it ain’t from the government).

As long as the news is filled with reports of American waiting in lines for brand shoes and phones and entertainment, the American economy is not tanking. It’s the victim of stupidity as people try to violate one of any economy’s fundamental truths: There’s No Such Thing As A Free Lunch (TNSTAAFL).

Olympic Games in Beijing

My, my, my. As the days count down toward the opening festivities of the Olympics in Beijing, reports are filling the airwaves about how we can “all get along.” “See,” we seem to be told, “if only those nasty American conservatives would stop insisting that America has enemies, we could all get along and live in peace.”

Of course we can all get along – if we simply ignore human rights abuses and threats to world stability and peace. Take this MSNBC report, for instance:
*****
The Olympic Games have become the occasion for a broad crackdown against dissidents, gadflies and malcontents this summer. Although human rights activists say they have no accurate estimate of how many people have been imprisoned, they believe the figure to be in the thousands.
The crackdown comes seven years after the secretary general of the Beijing Olympic Bid Committee declared that staging the Games in the Chinese capital would "not only promote our economy but also enhance all social conditions, including education, health and human rights."
Now, human rights have been set back rather than enhanced, activists say. – Edward Cody, “Defiant Chinese harassed, jailed before Games,” 8/2/08
*****

As the Olympic torch made its way around the world, it was met with so much protest over human rights abuses by China that even the route was changed to avoid some protestors. The Chinese government condemned such protests as “deliberate disruptions… who gave no thought to the Olympic spirit or the laws of Britain and France…” Yes, we can all certainly get along… if it just weren’t for those pesky people who insist on human rights and dignity.

Although it will not happen at these games, there was a threat of international boycotts against the Games. Such a move, of course, strikes me as unfair to the athletes who have trained so hard to legitimately compete in the Olympics. So if boycotts are not the right solution, what is?

I think the right solution is for the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to find a spine and stand up to totalitarian regimes in the first place by refusing to award the Olympics to any nation that does not honor its citizens’ liberty. Let the totalitarians squawk. Let them pull their athletes, if they want. I could care less. Instead, like the United Nations, the IOC for some perverted reason believes that they can promote world stability and peace by rewarding tyrants. Baloney.

(image: from Burma Digest)