Senator Gillibrand on voter concerns
Written by Michael Vass
The race for the New York junior Senate seat is considered likely to go to a Republican in November. Part of that is due to the lack of knowledge about the appointed Senator Kirsten Gillibrand among voters in New York State. But there are other reasons that are even more the cause.
In August of 2009 the nation was filled with concern about the Health Care Reform and what it might mean to their lives. Democrat supporters across the nation had a choice to make, face their constituents in town halls and explain why they supported the Bill or hide from the masses. Senator Gillibrand chose to hide, along with Senator Charles Schumer.
Given that choice, I sent a letter to Senators Gillibrand and Schumer on August 11th. In that letter I asked 21 specific questions about the Health Care Reform Bill that they were supporting in the Senate. The simplest of those questions was
“Have you personally read and understood all 1000+ pages of the proposed Health Care Reform Bill?”
On September 10th I received a response from Senator Gillibrand. Not one of the 21 questions asked of Sen. Gillibrand - from a member of the press and a constituent - was answered by the reply. The full VERBATIM response can be seen at http://www.mvass.com/2009/09/17/senator-kirsten-gillibrand-responds-to-michael-vass/. That link will be very important in a moment.
The response, while hardly worth the time it took to cut and paste I suspect, was at least a response. A subsequent letter to Senator Gillibrand, on Sept 16, 2009, requesting a reasoning for her vote in favor of the now defunct ACORN went unanswered.
Since that time the debate over the Health Care Reform Bill continued unabated. The length of the Bill grew almost in proportion to the public sentiment against the Bill. In December of 2009, Senator Gillibrand along with Senator Schumer voted to pass the Senate version of the Bill, even before a final written copy of the Bill existed.
On February 20, 2010 as President Obama prepared to present his compromise Bill on the Health Care Reform to the public, I again wrote to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Senator Schumer. I reiterate that I am both a member of the press and a constituent, being a resident and business owner in New York State. The letter in Febrary contained 4 questions for the Senators. The most simple questions being
I ask if you have read the final written version of the President’s modification that will be offered for reconciliation?”
On March 8, 2010 I recieved the answer from Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. The response, arriving at 5:29pm came from Senator@Gillibrand.senate.gov. This response was an OBVIOUS cut and paste response NOT to the questions asked. This can be verified by the drastically different fonts between the response and the signature portion of the email.
Far worse is the fact that the response on March 8th was a VERBATIM COPY of the exact response sent to me on September 10, 2009. The March 8, 2010 letter can be seen at http://www.mvass.com/2010/03/09/senator-kirsten-gillibrand-responds-to-vass-letter-on-health-care-reform/
Today at 10:30am I contacted the New York City office of Senator Gillibrand. I requested an on the record official answer as to why Senator Gillibrand sent out a cut and paste copy of a response from 6 months prior. I requested an official response to why, as a member of the press and a constituent of Senator Gillibrand, I received a response that failed to address, to even consider, the questions asked of my representative in the Senate. And I requested an offical response as to why throughout 7 months Senator Gillibrand seemingly willfully refused to answer the most simple of questions - if she has read ANY version of the Health Care Reform Bill that she ardently supports against the will of voters in New York State.
I was asked (by the press liason) which office I had sent my letters to [several went via regular mail and email to both the New York and Washington D.C. offices of Senator Gillibrand], as if that was a reason for the copied boilerplate response. I was told that there was no answer available for me for any of those points. I was further told that I would receive a response via telephone. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s office was notified that I would publish my post shortly after 5pm today. As of this post I have received no response, via email or telephone.
While I do not advocate for any candidate for the junior Senate seat of New York, I present this for the consideration of the voters in New York State. The question voters should ask themselves is if they want a Senator that is willing to go against their views in Washington D.C., and at the same time unwilling to answer even the most simple question that constituents might have. Do the voters in New York want an elected official that cares seemingly so little that they recycle 6 month old boiler plate responses rather than address a single concern, or even updating the boiler plate response.
America has a representative democratic government, yet the responses of Senator Gillibrand seems woefully in opposition of that style of governance. I would suggest to blogs, organizations, and other members of the press (outside of the major media conglomerates), as well as voters, to ask questions of their elected officials as well. I will be more than happy to publish ANY verified authentic question and the VERBATIM response of the elected official. Because elected officials ARE accountable to the public.
As always, I will provide ANY and EVERY response from Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Senator Charles Schumer, and any elected official that I may speak with or chooses to respond to any item that I write. Those responses will always be VERBATIM.
I invite Senator Gillibrand to contact me to explain the emails that have been sent, the failure to respond to a member of the press and constituent, and to address any issue facing the residents of New York State and the nation (in that order).
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand responds to VASS letter on Health Care Reform
Written by Michael Vass
The following is the VERBATIM response received on March 8, 2010 from Senator Kirsten Gillibrand via Senator@Gillibrand.senate.gov. This letter was in response to a letter sent to Senator Gillibrand and Senator Schumer on Febrary 20, 2010.
I want to point out that this letter from Senator Gillibrand is a VERBATIM COPY of the letter sent by Senator Gillibrand on September 10th, 2009.
March 8, 2010
Dear Mr. Vass,
Thank you for writing to me about the current state of our healthcare system. I appreciate your point of view and share many of your concerns. I believe that it is vital that we act now to bring forth health care reform solutions that will lower costs for those currently covered by private insurance, strengthen Medicare for seniors and allow every American to access quality and affordable health care.
Our healthcare system is currently badly broken. Over the last ten years, health care premium increases have far outpaced earned wages and forty-seven million Americans, including three million New Yorkers, are currently uninsured and an additional 25 million are underinsured. With our current economic situation, many Americans are losing their insurance coverage when they are laid off from their jobs. Even people who thought they were adequately covered with the health insurance they purchased later learn that they are not when facing a catastrophic diagnosis. This is unacceptable. No family should be one health care emergency away from bankruptcy. Congress must act to provide stability in the health insurance industry.
Quality care for the patient, affordability for families and small businesses, and patient choice are all important considerations in reforming our health care system. We need a plan in place that Americans will be able to afford, as well as allow them a true choice between competing health insurance plans. Having a public option, similar to a Medicare-for-all program, would create competition and result in lower health care costs across the board. If you are happy with the coverage you currently have, a public option would also allow you to keep it.
I have been a strong supporter of affordable, quality health insurance for all. I am committed to addressing this important issue and will work with my Senate colleagues on a bipartisan solution.
Thank you again for writing to express your concerns and I hope that you keep in touch with my office regarding future legislation and concerns you may have. For more information on this and other important issues, please visit my website at http://gillibrand.senate.gov and sign up for my e-newsletter.
Sincerely yours,
Kirsten Gillibrand
United States Senator
My response to this letter will follow.
Former Rep. Eric Massa
Written by VASS
There is no lack of buzz in the political world right now over the resignation of Eric Massa from the House of Representatives. But the main questions that should be asked are generally avoided at this moment.
Eric Massa was a freshman to the House of Representatives. He was also opposed to the Health Care Reform Bill that continues to move forward as a partisan Bill without the majority support of the public. His resignation has been attributed to health concerns, inappropriate comments to a staffer, and now machinations within the Democrat leadership.
This may be an example of sour grapes. A means to get back at those that have not supported Massa as he was ushered out of office in disgrace. But another picture also exists when looked at from the landscape of New York politics and the Health Care Reform Bill.
Currently Representative Charles Rangel (D-NY) is undergoing investigation for multiple ethics violations. This is a process that has been in the works for 2 years. Rep. Rangel has repeatedly misreported hundreds of thousands of dollars in income, property ownership, and potentially misuse of Congressional power. This has caused Rep. Rangel to step down as head of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, temporarily at least, but not forced him to vacate his seat. Rangel supports the Health Care Reform strongly.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand also supports the Health Care Reform strongly. The junior Senator for New York was not elected to her seat, but was appointed by Governor Patterson (who also holds a position that was not elected). Senator Gillibrand is seeking re-election, and has had all Democrat challengers removed by the Democrat leadership.
Governor Patterson is also familiar with scandal. He has decided to end his campaign to be re-elected as Governor of New York. Currently he has strong opposition to his continuation as Governor, led by New York Democrat leadership. He has been accused of tampering with a witness, and abusing the power of his office in securing Yankee tickets. It is also known that Gov. Patterson angered the White House and Democrat leadership by seeking re-election.
Without addressing the innocence or guilt of any of the elected officials involved, there does appear to be a pattern. That pattern is one in which those that support the Obama Administration and its policies are sheilded while those that are opposed are out of favor and subject to the harshest criticism. Massa claims this is exactly why he was forced out. Which is not dissimilar to comments made by Harold Ford Jr. initially about his decision to not seek the Democrat ticket for the junior Senate seat for New York.
Politics is never a clear path. There is almost always in-fighting and battles over power, clashes of political favor vs political support, and variances of political views in each Party. But the current problems in New York State seem to suggest that active manipulation in favor of political agendas, over the concerns of the public, are in play.
If that is even true in part, it is a violation of the core principles of the nation. It also raises the concerns of what is happening in other parts of the nation.
Eric Massa will be appearing later today on the Glenn Beck program. Far-left blogs are sure to attack every aspect of this program as they regularly do to Beck and Fox News in general. But the question is bigger than a dislike of a news commentator or a news organization. It is what is happening to elected officials, if even part of what Massa says is true.
If true even in part, what does this mean about the Health Care Reform? How does this reflect on the “Lousiana Purchase” (Sen. Landrieu’s $300 million deal to vote in favor of the Senate version of the Health Care Reform Bill) and the “Cornhusker Kickback” (Senator Ben Nelson’s deal for Nebraska). What does it mean in terms of the actions of Rahm Emanuel in enacting legislation? Is there a connection to the repeated swift voting on Bills in the House and Senate, even before many of the Bills have been finished being written? Worse yet, what else might be done as an act of persevation of the political status quo versus the views and opinions of the constituents across the nation?
These are troubling questions. This is a troubling time for America. Eric Massa may just be full of sour grapes. This may just be a cover for his own actions and the repercussions they have brought. But if it is even slightly more than that, if it is accurate… what does this mean for America?
Congressional term limits
Written by VASS
Congressional term limits is a subject that rarely ever gets discussed. Obviously Congress and the 2 major political Parties are less inclined to alter their power bases to any substatial degree. But it is a subject I have discussed before. I believe it is an issue well past due. It is something we can alter.
I would love to hear the response of any and all elected officials on this subject. I cannot imagine a reason that Congressional term limits should not apply, but I am open to hear them. Specifically I would like to hear them addressed to the following 8 items. [I did not create this Congressional Reform Act of 2010 but having received it, and read it, I do agree with it.]
Congressional Reform Act of 2010
- A. Two Six year Senate terms
- B. Six Two year House terms
- C. One Six year Senate term and three Two Year House terms
- A congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
- All funds in the Congressional retirement fund moves to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, Congress participates with the American people.
- The American people did not make this contract with congressmen, congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Regardless of personal political leanings, I believe we all can agree on the above. If you do, please pass this on to others. We can make it happen, because We The People are the power of America.
Send it to your elected officials and let’s see how they respond.
Senator Gillibrand on New York State economy
Written by VASS
Yesterday Senator Kirsten Gillibrand was in Binghamton to discuss that small businesses might survive in the current economic downturn. There were several ideas that Sen. Gillibrand suggested
Senator Gillibrand was also recently on the radio (WWRL) to furhter expand on her ideas to help Upstate New York.
Let’s think about just the business aspect of what Senator Gillibrand has said. Keeping manufacturing in New York and the creation of tax credits and loans.
A tax credit is a great idea, if you have the money. It was one of the key concepts of the Obama Stimulus. That businesses would be able to offset part of the cost of new employees with tax credits, making hiring more affordable.
Loans were another idea of the Obama Administration. It too was part of the Obama Stimulus. Billions were put in place for banks and credit unions to give loans to small businesses so they could expand.
Thus the net of the ideas of Senator Gillibrand appears to be more of what has already been put in place since February of 2009.
That concept, in effect for a year, has had a definitive effect on New York State. Unemployment increased to 8.6% as of December 2009 in the Broome County area alone. As of the most recent report, unemployment currently stands at 9.7% for Broome County. For the State the figures are (after being seasonally readjusted) 7.1% January 2009, 8.9% December 2009, and 8.8% January 2010. Comparing 2008 to 2009 the unemployment rate for the State increased by 58.1% to 813,400 in 2009.
Perhaps the most telling stat is the number of underemployed which counts total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers. That figure works out to be 14.3% for New York State in 2009 versus 9.6% in 2008, and 8.1% in 2007.
Somehow, businesses are not improving and many have left the State. Loans have been created, funds allocated, grants granted. Why has there been a net reduction if the plans that Democrats, Senator Gillibrand, and President Obama have championed are so great?
Maybe the fact that taxes continue to increase is a factor. Drawing more money from businesses of all sizes just to pay taxes leaves less for expansion or even staying even. Add to that the fact that to get a grant or loan a business must meet specific government restrictions, and fill out more than a few forms that are hardly simplified, then survive and wait for approval if they will receive it. Thus making the number of people that qualify a small pool, and those receiving the money even smaller. Add to that the fact that tax credits require upfront money that the government does not help with, as mentioned above.
Another item that Senator Gillibrand failed to mention was her support of the Health Care Reform Bill and Cap & Trade. The Health Care Reform Bill increases taxes on businesses, as well as taking funds out of the pockets of citizens mandatorially. The Cap & Trade Bill proposed to skyrocket energy costs by 150% or more, for businesses and individuals. Which then limits the funds to hire workers, plus limiting the funds consumers have to buy the higher priced goods.
Faced with one of the highest taxed States in the nation, proposed increases in energy costs, potentially iminent increases in costs due to the Health Care Reform, and fewer purchases from a growing number of consumers that are underemployed and thus incapable of buying, do loans and tax credits sound like a stimulative action?
Senator Gillibrand sounds positive. The ideas sound like they can have an effect. But when you stop to really look at what has been proposed and the effect it has had in the past, the question becomes why do more of the same?
Your pets cause global warming so eat them
Written by Michael Vass
Maybe it’s me but I wonder what PETA is going to say about a recent article by AFP on how pets are the next global warming (or are they using the new ‘climate change’ slogan) problem that needs to be solved?
Don’t believe me?
Combine the land required to generate its food and a “medium” sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) — around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4×4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car.”
So this theory, backed up by John Barrett at the Stockholm Environment Institute, indicates that dogs, and cats, are more dangerous to the environment than cars. Of course hamsters and even goldfish were not left out of the analysis. In each case it was found that a pet is an additional burden to the planet.
What’s the solution proposed? PETA and animal lovers will really get a kick out of this.
“But the best way of compensating for that paw or clawprint is to make sure your animal is dual purpose, the Vales urge. Get a hen, which offsets its impact by laying edible eggs, or a rabbit, prepared to make the ultimate environmental sacrifice by ending up on the dinner table.
“Rabbits are good, provided you eat them,” said Robert Vale.”
Taking this “solution” to its logical end, it means that ANY pet is only worth having if you eventually eat them. And I’m not reaching on that conclusion. Mr. Vale wrote a book on his conclusion titled Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living. Do you get his point?
I admit that I have never believed in global warming. Nor global cooling a couple of decades before that. Nor the latest trend/fad of climate change (a true act of verbal idiocy - the climate is constantly changing and has been since before man existed).
But I would never condone the views that Vale and potentially other eco-fanatics will inevitably present. Pets, of all kinds, are not meals. They are members of families and valuable companions.
Perhaps it is just me, but I feel that a pet is far more important than some questionable science that is politically based and factually proven to have been manipulated and promoted for self-interests.
Where are the animal lovers? Where is PETA, a group that has no problem attacking virtually every group they consider even marginally against animal rights? I mean they went after the Pet Shop Boys just because of the band’s name, and I have yet to see anything about this - which I feel is far more serious in its implications.
I may not agree with all the tactics and thoughts of PETA, but I respect the fact they have strong convictions. I love dogs, and I really fear the thinking Vale and others have for this political fantasy dressed as science. PETA and pet lovers need to say something. Because in a world of “Change you can believe in” I guarantee that at some point Al Gore will get in his private jet and tell some political group across the world that pet levels need to be reduced worldwide and it will help feed the hungry too.
Don’t believe me, but already the Government has said that CO2, our exhaled breaths, are a danger to the planet. Which means the Government will want to regulate that CO2, and if a pet is more “deadly” than a SUV or car… well you can imagine what happens next.
Time runner-up for Person of the Year 2009 - Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Written by Michael Vass
TIME has come out with the person of the year for 2009. But before I comment on that, I want to review the thinking of TIME. In looking at their runner-up House Speaker Nancy Pelosi I think we can see exactly what TIME was trying to do. Make a political statement, not shared by the majority of Americans.
TIME notes about Speaker Nancy Pelosi
“Those with whom she has tussled over the years, and there have been many, have by and large been banished.”
Not exactly a blushing endorsement, as it seems to be a clear indication of what I believe most liberals would love to say.
“You can say or do anything, as long as it’s exactly what we (liberals) agree with.”
But let’s look at what she has done as Speaker so far:
“Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain”
- the surge worked
Selected videos of Speaker Pelosi in action
Ok, I think the point is being made.
Suffice to say that if this is the 2nd choice for Person of the Year of 2009, either TIME is advocating for the extreme left or our nation is about to slam into a wall of problems and discord like never before. If Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a far-left, math impaired, greener than grass, socialistic, big government, malcontent is the second choice, I would have to believe TIME is selecting the Worst Person of the Year for 2009.
Car salesmen are more ethical than Congress
Written by Michael Vass
Oh the shock of it. Gallup just released a new annual poll that asked who is more ethical and trustworthy. Choices included nurses, doctors, policemen, stockbrokers, lawyers, car salesmen and politicians. One guess who was at the bottom of the list.
Yes, Congress scored the lowest rating. It would seem that America views those in Congress as the least ethical and trustworthy people in the nation. Even despised lawyers and car salesmen scored higher, and they actively screw people every day for a living. It just reflects the great job Government is doing.
I mean just look at all the great things done this year alone. Congress (Democrats to be fair) rammed the Obama Stimulus through without reading a page. Now they are preparing to spend another $150 billion to do the things they promised the Obama Stimulus would do. Maybe if they actually read the law they might have had a clue. Though only the truly unethical and untrustworthy would look the public in the eyes and say the Obama Stimulus has done a great job as 4 million more people are out of work since it was created. Only a politician would have the balls to say that they created a job as the unemployment numbers reach 26 year highs.
How about Health Care Reform. Congress (again Democrats are the focus here) refused to speak with the public on the proposed Bill en masse. They approved version after version as the public got more and more upset the more they found out what was in the Bill. But Congress, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid, has stated clearly and in no uncertain terms that they will pass the Health Care Reform no matter the opposition. There’s a way to build confidence - let the employees tell the boss (the public) what job they will or won’t do.
Then there is the ultra-secret Cap & Trade Bill. Moved along with little fanfare, this Bill enacts the goal of President Obama to “necessarily skyrocket” energy prices. That’s like a car salesman selling you a car and then charging you 2x the price extra, because you want 4 wheels on the car.
Yes I can see why 55% of those polled found Congress to be untrustworthy. As for unethical, well you can look at either Party and find more than a few politicians that have sold political favors (Blogovich is one example), accepted bribes, pushed political agendas for financial gain (Hello Pelosi - how is the stock in wind power companies doing lately?), and backed organizations that have actively sought to defraud the Government and incite crime (Thank you for supporting ACORN Senator Gillibrand).
And don’t think this is just among Republicans. Democrats and Independants agree that Congress is now the home of the lying scum of the Earth. In fact, since 1977 - at least - there has never been a wider gap between those that still trust Congress and those that understand how 2-faced Congress is.
Just think, considering how trustworthy Congress has been in the last year and the fact they are about to ram through even more spending and Bills that the public does not want, what might be the new record low next year. Then again there is a ray of hope.
The 2010 mid-term elections might be a chance to do something about this. To take politicians like say Senator Gillibrand, that care more about the political clout of ACORN than keeping brothels out of the neighborhoods of constituents, and vote them out of office. To tell members of Congress like Senator Schumer and Harry Reid that they have been in charge for far too long, especially when they don’t read the Bill they make laws from.
That’s the choice that faces America next year. We can go back to the car salesman that ripped us off with a lemon, or find a new one. In fact, the poll makes it clear that most people trust the shady car salesman more than their representatives in Congress. Tell me it’s not time to get fresh blood in D.C., no matter the Party affiliation.
President Obama says Stimulus 2 will cost at least $150,000,000,000
Written by Michael Vass
Another thought I had about the new $150 billion proposal that President Obama has just announced (see Cash for Refridgerators is as bad an idea as Obama Stimulus version 2 for more) - which is an Obama Stimulus part 2 in all but a name. President Obama spent a great deal of time discussing how a huge part of the new money will be spent on infrastructure jobs. Building roads, bridges, and such. Does that sound familiar to anyone?
In fact that’s EXACTLY what President Obama said about the Obama Stimulus that was rammed through Congress by Democrats in February. The argument was that by re-building infrastructure new long-term job growth would be acheived. And roughly less than 10% of the entire Obama Stimulus was spent on this “vital” part of the recovery plan.
Yes, infrastructure was so important that it was virtually ignored. Most of the infrastructure jobs won’t even happen until some point in 2010 or later. This was so important, we must conclude, that it was obviously underfunded and delayed by at least a year. Because a road really brings in revenue to all sorts of families. Nevermind that President Obama plans to “skyrocket” the cost of energy so driving will not be an option. Nevermind that jobs bring in revenue and a road once fixed does nothing more than allow people to get from point A to B.
A similar realization can be made about tax cuts for small business. They also recieved a pittence from the Obama Stimulus, roughly $2 billion as I recall. Such a small amount, portioned out over 4 years and most not happening until 2010 at the earliest, obviously had no effect. So President Obama is now focusing more money on it. Suddenly it’s a priority.
But again there is an issue. If you own a small business what exactly are you supposed to do? The tax cut is temporary, lasting just 1 year as currently proposed. That means that after that year, small businesses will be faced with not only the current tax burdens, but all the goodies that will kick in for 2011.
Rememeber that the Health Care Reform that is being shoved through Congress by Democrats alone (and due to the Democrat super majority cannot be stopped or affected by Republicans) will create a NEW tax burden on businesses. Plus there is the proposed increase in capital gains taxes. Plus the increase in income taxes for anyone who is successful enough to earn a living in their business. Plus there is the increased cost of energy (some 150 - 200% by some estimates) due to the Cap & Trade Bill that President Obama promised would “necessarily skyrocket” energy prices. Plus, yep there is more, there is the loss of the Bush tax cuts.
If you are a small business owner like me, does the potential gain for 1 year in small business tax cuts outweigh the multitude of tax increases that are waiting for me once we hit 2011? How much growth must my business have to offset all those increased costs in a year, while the economy remains sluggish and unemployment remains in the 11% -10% range - as stated by White House economists - for the next 5 years?
Seriously, who is President Obama kidding. Who does he believe is buying all this? Perhaps all those acedemics at the Job Summit. You know the people in the Obama Administration that never held a private sector job, all 92% of them.
I’m sure this all sounds fantastic on paper. I bet this is an exciting experiment on a purely theoretical and cerebral level. But sadly my business, like those of thousands of others, does not operate in a theoretical world nor is it backed by Government spending. I suppose if I could rely on the ability to print money on demand I would be all for this, but I don’t. Do you?
So in thinking about all the aspects that have been proposed in this renamed Obama Stimulus 2, I come to a conclusion that seems apparent. President Obama, along with the Democrat led Congress, have no clue about the economy or business. They have every intention to sound like they have a plan, and in a speech without details it sounds nice. But in the world where citizens have to pay the taxes to fund this hair-brained idea, and to operate a business and employ people, none of this works for me.
The Obama Stimulus is a complete failure. If it weren’t, none of this would be necessary. That’s $787 billion down the drain for an acedemic think-tank experiment. Now President Obama plans to shove another $150 billion down the same drain. I can only hope that some Democrat politician can do math (not the Government math that creates and “saves” jobs in congressional districts that don’t exist) and votes against this along with Republicans. Otherwise it will pass like the first one did.
Anyone want to bet on how many Democrat read this one?
What England is saying about playing team USA
Written by Black Entertainment USA
Well it only took a second before fans of the US soccer team felt a twinge of pain today. Once we found out that were were playing England in the first match of the World Cup group play the plan became who else might we have a chance against in the group.
But there was huge commentary across the world. Well likely not about the US or our chances to win (though 66-1 is the best odds I ever recall for a World Cup), but about all the various match-ups. One thing I noticed was how British sports commentators were reacting to the news (I don’t pay attention to American sportscasters when it comes to soccer).
It seems that Team USA is giving some in England a pause, if only momentarily. Which might be the 2nd best result that could have happened. The best of course being an overly confident boasting - which there is still time for.
There just isn’t anything better than hearing anyone consider the American futbol team and use terms like tough and out-muscling. It’s not as good as over-powering and strategic, but I take what I can get.
But is this fear they are speaking of, or just a low scoring match?
(Video contains the pre-group odds as well as commentary and dates of play times)
546 days and counting
Written by Michael Vass
So after much thought I’ve come to conclude this about President Obama’s speech at West Point. In one of the shortest speeches ever uttered by President Obama (including during the 2007 - 2008 election cycle) the world was told
I realize that adding 30,000 troops is no minor action. But at no time was there any comment that rose to the level of ‘this is the war we need to fight’. A theme that was use constantly to berate President Bush’s stance on Iraq, and seperate then candidate Obama from the pack of Democrat hopefuls. Instead we have been given a well worded set of reasons why President Obama is taking the political middle ground (and preparing to lose).
This speech took less time than 1 minute for each day that president Obama delayed in giving it. Considering the impact of sending American troops into harm’s way I would have expected a speech that would have lasted at least as long as any of those given (repeatedly) to justify/support the Obama Stimulus, Health Care Reform, Cap & Trade, getting the Olympics to Chicago, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, taking over the auto industry, and explaining why police were wrong in arresting his collegiate colleague. But I suppose any more time would have required details, a subject that President Obama is remiss to give the public on any subject.
The emphasis of the speech was not on victory. it was on how America was wrong in Iraq and will leave Iraq and Afghanistan as soon as is politically possible. I cannot name a single conflict in the history of the world that was won where a definitive timelime to the cestation of aggression was first stated. Not one. And I cannot imagine victory if such a timeline had been attached to WWI, WWII, the Civil War, the Independance War and so on.
This speech was thus political - implying the decision on the troop levels and deployment was as well. It was an appeal to the far-left political base of President Obama. It seems to have been meant to console those that oppose any conflict with American troops (an isolationist viewpoint) while holding on to those that support our military and the reason behind this War through the 2010 mid-term elections.
President Obama filled the speech with distractions, and laid the seeds for a retreat from Afghanistan. President Obama blamed President Bush, the Afghan political structure, and the Afghan people for what will come in 546 days or so. He gave up on victory and used the political prop of the economy to justify his inaction.
And I want to review something here. President Obama stated that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost over $1 trillion in 8 years. He made it clear that such a cost was too high to continue. Yet since his inauguration President Obama has spent $787 billion on a flawed stimulus package that no one read and has since failed. He spent upwards of $60 billion dollars to buy the auto industry. He spent $3 billion on new car purchases. He created a budget that spends $3.5 trillion and is guaranteed to place the nation into $9 trillion in debt (by his own estimates). Which does not include the $1.2 trillion for a Health Care Reform that the public overwhelmingly does not want and no politician can explain (and cannot even live up to the purpose it was created for as stated by the CBO). It also does not include the costs associated with Cap & Trade, the greenhouse gas emmission reductions he wants to impose on the nation, and the long-rumored 2nd Obama Stimulus (which again I expect to fail).
Spending money that the Government does not have is NOT an issue for President Obama.
Overall the speech, made at West Point to score political points with military families, was well-worded. Yet it failed to inspire the public on a war that is in question but championed on the campaign trail. It showed a lack of confidence in our troops, something that allies and enemies alike will not fail to notice. It stomps on the campaign promises and high ideals promoted just a few months earlier this year. Worst of all it manipulates national security and the lives of our soldiers for political juggling games.
I cannot see how this response to a request for 40,000 (to 60,000 at the maximum) troops to be deployed in Afghanistan in 2009 required 4 months of delay that was classified as “deliberation”. Remember that this was a deliberation that took place as the President flew to Copenhagen to talk about the Olympics. It was a delay that sat while the President went golfing. It lay dormant as President Obama went on fundraising trips for Democrats and himself. There were of course other issues of the natio that did occur in the time that went past, but there is no denying that there were as many days with nothing being done and no reason for inaction either.
I recently stated that I felt the delay in giving a response to General McChrystal showed President Obama as mostly gutless. After listening to this speech 2x and long thought I believe I was right. This is not a speech that troops across the world would want to hear. This is not a rally call for support to our allies. This is not a statement of victotry that can drive fear into the hearts of our enemies. This can only be called a speech that makes President Carter look courageous by comparison (and if you weren’t alive to know, ask those that were).
America has 546 days left. In those days we can either prepare for a complete loss and the return of our soldiers in shame since they were not allowed to do their duty, or we can reshape the planned failure as outlined today at West Point. No matter which choice is finally made, there isn’t much time left.
The Obama Stimulus - now it makes sense
Written by Michael Vass
I have for some time now been a critic of the Obama Stimulus. I have stated in no uncertain terms that I consider all $787 billion dollars of our tax money (yet to be earned) to be a complete waste and a danger on huge levels. I have followed the massive waste of the programs funded with this money to date, and I have noted the absolute failure of the Obama Stimulus to create or “save” a single job.
Throughout all of this I have tried to understand how anyone with a calculator and about a day of expereince in the private sector would believe any of this would work. I have tried to understand how anyone could be begiled into accepting a theory like ‘we will spend our way to success’ outside of an econmics class (high school level). It lead me to my post Democrats admit they know nothing about economics where I stated
“Since the Stimulus has been passed, even as the Obama Administration proffered the idea of success, the unemployment rate has risen dramatically. The economy has sagged. More people are in danger of losing homes and jobs than ever before. And the most optimistic reports from the Obama economic team now forecast this situation to continue to get worse for perhaps another year before any real improvement occurs…
Do we need another stimulus plan? If Democrats and the Obama Administration had any clue about finances, the promises they made, or the actual state of the economy the answer would be an emphatic no. But this is a group of legislators that prefer to grandstand on blaming someone else for what they did. A group of Congressional lawmakers that achieved the least possible with the most press coverage of them assailing everyone else for their failures. This is a Democrat plurality in Government that is the equivalent of a dim bulb that someone forgot to turn on.”
But perhaps I missed it. I didn’t understand the real root of the problem. I overlooked the cause and was focused on the symptoms.
Here is the answer that I think says it all.
There you go. Out of 432 Cabinet members - including State, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Interior, Labor, Transportation, Energy, and Housing & Urban Development - not even 10% of President Obama’s people have expereince in a real job. They have no idea of working in the real world. They are predominantly acedemics and dreamers that, more and more openly, think that socialism is an answer. Too bad none of them have lived in a socialist nation, nor apparently spoken to anyone that had to live under such a duress and then came to America to escape it.
Yes, I think this is the real problem the ultimate cause of our current economic malaise. No President Obama did not create the problem of today. But it is his plans, and spending, and waste, that is making the situation worse faster than ever before. Congress and Government have never understood how to actually live on a budget, given. But the implications of what is currently being sown by Congress and the Obama Administration is untenable even by standards of Government.
I wish I could take solace in the thought that I did not vote for President Obama. But that will not protect me, my house, or my investments and business. Nor does the fact that some of my readers did or did not vote the same protect them.
We are all not without a voice and a choice in this though. In the 2010 mid-term elections you can make your voice heard by your vote. If you think that Congress is wrong to pass Bills without reading them, vote against those that passed the Obama Stimulus. If you think that the economy is worse and the debt is higher, vote against those that made it so. If you think that doubling your electricity and gasoline costs is bad, that a job summit will not get you off unemployment, that taking more money out of your pocket for a health care Bill that will not do what its purose is, that apologizing for every action America has ever done is wrong - vote and change those in charge.
I did not vote for President Obama because his record and speeches told me this would happen. In 2010 I will be voting in the mid-term elections, and I recall that Senator Schumer and Senator Gillibrand, and Rep. Hinchey all voted for the Obama Stimulus, are trying to pass a Health Care Reform Bill without even paying attention to the questions of their constituents, and some have even supported ACORN after receiving commitments of financial backing even as the organization faces charges in several states and blatantly broke the law.
Will you recall all of this? Will you remind the President and Congress of who they work for? Will you vote to enforce the thought that the real world is not some classroom experiment for a group of acedemics? Or will you vote to get more of the same “Change you can believe in”?
Glenn Beck asks - win or leave Afghanistan
Written by Michael Vass
For some time now I have been discussing the indecision of President Obama in regard to our troops in Afghanistan (as well as Iraq with President Bush). I believe I have made my views very clear on this issue. America needs to take a strong position and fight to win this war, or we must run away in retreat. There is no other option.
I am not one for defeat. I do not believe that our soldiers, that have volunteered to fight on behalf of the nation (right or wrong regardless), have done so with the thought of loss at the hands of Osama Bin Laden or anyone else. As a Marine, I believe in removing the enemies willingness and ability to continue to fight. I have no doubt, that if allowed to do so - without political naysayers holding our troops back - America can win in any battle or war against any foe.
At this point I believe it is obvious that President Obama does not share this same belief. I believe it is clear that President Obama does not have the personal conviction to lead our military on a course for victory, however a politician might define that.
Yet at the same time President Obama is unwilling to have history mark him as a coward that fled from a fight. That he is fearful of the political ramifications of retreat to his political party and to his hopes of re-election in 2012. That his agenda of change cannot be completed with the citizens of the nation seeing him as far less than the leader he propped himself up as during the election campaign where he boasted of wresting victory from Afghanistan.
But my voice is not as powerful as others on this subject. I may reach 125 countries every month, but I do not have the marketing power of a MSNBC or Fox News. Blogging may involve 15% of all internet traffic, but it is still not (yet) the equal of cable or broadcast news. Many still prefer to hear these very same words from someone on a television rather than read the words (or watch a video commentary) on a blog. And so I present the following video for those individuals.
Other than about 1:30 of Glenn Beck discussing the national debt (which is skyrocketing and is as much the fault of President Obama as President Bush) I have not altered this. It is broken into 2 parts to meet the time constraints of Youtube. And I agree fully with the opinion expressed here. In fact, you can browse VASS and find similar statements (with my personal bias towards winning) going back months, if not years.
I suggest to everyone, pass this on to those you know. No matter their political opinion I think it is clear at this point. America must either decide to fight or retreat. The indecision of President Obama over the past months benefits neither Party nor any American.
Music Video: Beyonce and Lady Gaga - do I need to say more?
Written by Black Entertainment USA
By now I’m sure many have seen the new music video by Beyonce that features the popular Lady GaGa. Of course I’m sure there are just as many that might not have seen it yet considering how few music videos get played on MTV these days. But this video is special and I think even reviewers have missed the joke in the video. Read on and tell me if you get it too.
The song is called Video Phone. It’s a very Lady Gaga song in that it is simplistic in the vocals and catchy at the same time. I’d also say that the major influence in the video comes from Lady Gaga and her people. It is a new direction for Beyonce, from what I saw. But like the song, the video works.
Of course, movie buffs (and others) like myself may find the video interesting for far more reasons than just the look and the eye catching colors. Then again there are more than a few that have issues with the video (though they missed the big thing - or were too embarrassed to mention it if they did get it).
and
I see their points, (though Beyonce is just a normal Black woman that doesn’t conform to the Hollywood fetish with anorexics) but I saw a whole lot of other things. First though, here is the video. [Sorry for the ad at the bottom of the video, but this is the video with the least obtrusive ad I could find]
Ok, so now you have seen it. Did you catch all the apparent homages in the video? Did you figure it out?
There is the Quentin Tarantino Resevoir Dogs shot, with a bit of the Cray 8’s from Kill Bill. Then after a bit it gets all fetishy with the Zentai hoods and male bondage. It gets way more BDSM, in clothing, as I believe both ladies are in Rubber or Latex neon day-glow outfits with matching boots, and the Latex halter that Beyonce wears. Which makes sense if the thought is to show female dominance over the men in the video, and that explains all the guns plus the Tarrantino references.
But there is also a bit reference to Betty Page. Often seen on WWII bombers, it is also a reason for the guns, I suppose. By the way, the weapons are in dayglow colors to be PC and not promote guns - I think. It would make sense that the record label would want to avoid some liberal nutjob from making such an allegation and potentially losing anti-NRA viewers. And it prevents any connection of this video with the violence normally promoted in rap and occasionally hip hop. [Oh, the rifles are not AK-47's, they are AR15's also known as a M-16. Though I've never seen one with a silencer before. And Lady Gaga has a .45]
But what is the big secret? What does this video mean (at least visually)?
The director was thinking hard on this video. I mean he went all the way out there. The ghettofabulous Betty Page homage, the further reference to WWII with the Rising Sun flag based bikini and the gestapo styled hat - no idea why she is carrying a bow in those scenes though. But I suppose that explains the guy with all the arrows in him. Well that and the fetish of BDSM - inflicting pain but not killing the guy (he does move later in the video).
So here is what I think.
Actually I think the whole thing is just a big fetish video cleverly disguised, with obvious inspiration to Quentin Tarrantino (who seems to have a foot fetish himself), hidden in an innocuous song. Everyone is so busy watching Beyonce pop and somewhat exposed, plus trying to get a glimpse of any extras on Lady Gaga, that the rest of it just flies past everyone.
I like this video ever so much more now. It’s the biggest joke, that everyone will be watching this and yet NO ONE will likely figure out what it is that’s going on. I’m sure the director will be rolling on the floor with laughter as review after review misses the obvious yet praises the video; not realizing they are praising BDSM publicly. That’s just hillarious.
Ok, so if you agree, do me a favor and pass around the word that I figured out the video first. I can’t wait to hear the response once we spread this around the net.
Is Newsweek sexist?
Written by Black Entertainment USA
The big question of late is all about Sarah Palin. Her book, if she will run in 2012, if she can win. And then there are the controversies.
Newsweek really set things aflame with their cover of Mrs. Palin. And the claims of the cover photo being sexist and insulting have been raised. But are they right?
Well the best way to answer the question seemed obvious to me. Compare the cover photo (taken from an image used by a running magazine some time ago) to a similar photo of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Or Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Except that no such photos seems to exist. None.
I searched through 500 images of Hillary Clinton on Google looking for a single legitimate image of her with exposed legs. Couldn’t find any. In fact I was hard pressed to find photos of Secretary Clinton in a dress. I know hardcore lesbians that show more cleavage and legs than Clinton has over the decades. (As for Speaker Pelosi, I’m sure there might be a photo somewhere that shows off her legs, but I’m too scared to see it)
So it would seem that compared to her the general media is sexist. They have directly sought to make her an image that is more of a tart than a political figure. And I have to wonder why any woman would allow that without complaint.
Basically isn’t Newsweek saying that a mother and independant woman is worthless if she is cute and/or doesn’t agree with the editor’s views. They are saying that a woman who has achieved success in business and politics - she did run a major State after all - is about as important as a bikini model. Which I would think Secretary of State Clinton might find insulting. (And don’t expect N.O.W. to stand up for a woman that exemplifies many of the ideals they are supposed to support)
Newsweek says the image is fair. Ok, then show me a similar photo that was on their cover of Nancy Pelosi, or Hillary Clinton. I couldn’t find one. How about Michelle Obama? Why don’t they have an image of Michelle Obama in a bikini on the cover while the story in the magazine is about say healthcare. Would anyone find that sexist?
I know, how dare I use examples of the First Lady and Secretary of State (and the Speaker of the House). They are Liberals and Democrats after all. It’s a taboo to speak of them as anything but powerful women that are political leaders. Yet, Mrs Palin IS a political leader too. So what’s the difference?
If it isn’t sexism, then all that is left is a political bullying that says you better think the way we want you to think or else. Is that what we have come to expect from the media? That the ideas they like are the only ones we should have? That the only people we should vote for or listen to are the ones they approve of?
I recall another time when the media told people what to believe. They told people directly to buy only the versions of songs that Elvis sang and not the Black original versions. They said that African Americans didn’t need to vote, or to sit in diners, or enter buildings through the front door. I recall when the media claimed that all Japanese in America were spies and traitors. I recall when the media was so afraid of politicians that McCarthy had everyone looking over their shoulder in case they were called a Communist and would be blackballed from their careers.
I thought we were past the days of yellow journalism. But it would seem, as Newsweek has proven, that we haven’t moved forward at all.
Television Review: The Prisoner (2009)
Written by Black Entertainment USA
The following television review of The Prisoner (2009) may include some spoilers for some fans or those that have not seen the first episode.
I just finished watching the AMC network premiere of the revisioned The Prisoner, with James Caviezel and Sir Ian McKellen. It is certainly an interesting television program.
The television show starts off in many ways just as the original The Prisoner did in 1967. We are introduced to a man and immediately we are in the middle of questions. Who is he? Why is he there? What is going on?
These are questions the man we learn is called Six yearns to know answers to as much as we do. And there is the basis of the whole thing. What are the answers? Though we are given lots of clues, we are also given more than a bit of misdirection and confusion. But always, in the commercial breaks, we are given the hope that all things will be revealed at some point. Which would be a letdown, I think.
In this first of 3 nights, we get to learn that The Village is all there is. It seems that everyone has no memory of anything else. Well almost. Some do have recollections of other things and facts, like about the universe, but yet there is no connection from one fact to another.
From the onset I was let with a recurring thought. This isn’t happening, it’s the result of a torture. Some kind of hallucination brought on due to a hypnosis or psychological treatment meant to break Six and reveal something that he has yet to even consider.
But this is not something Six does not consider. At the same time we are given every reason to believe it is really taking place. People die, others disappear. And everyone fears Number Two.
There are things that can be gleaned from watching this first episode. We know that there is a corporation, where Six worked. It was in New York. Six resigned from it suddenly and with a bit of dramatic flair. And they are not willing to let Six walk away, at least not without knowing something they fear he learned. That is, if the corporation are his captors at all.
We know that the Towers are meant to symbolize NYC. Possibly meaning an end to innocence, or the extent of desperation some may fanatically follow. We know that control of thought and action are predicated on medications, likely mixed into wrapped foods that are the only style of meal available. We know that fear is a motivation that keeps the few that have any inkling of separate thought quiet and hidden.
But what does this all mean? Why is all of this being done?
One thing is clear, everyone is being watched all the time. Big Brother exists, just not as a Government entity. And that extends from the Village to your home right now. Perhaps only death is the means of ultimate escape.
I think that many of the people in the Village are familiar to Six. He has watched them and their actions in his work in New York. Thus they exist now, but without clear meaning.
I think that all the numbers are critical. 313, 2, 6, 147, 93, 17, 16, and especially 11-12. They all have a significance I cannot now fathom. It is a clue that Six himself states, though in a flashback to the world. It’s a hidden message of some sort.
I also believe that the reference to underground is important. Something is happening under the surface, literally, at the Village. It’s something that is happening in the subconscious of Six. It is the answer to our questions, I believe.
I think that this is all happening ala Total Recall. The mind of Six is trying to make sense of torture and information, but so far cannot come to grips with the reality of it all. I could be wrong but the way Six appears at most places, how things change, how they interact with his memories of the world, leads me to believe this.
Stepping away from what has been shown, taking into account several things stated by Sir McKellen and the nature of Hollywood these days, I believe this is all a reaction to the evil of not his corporation but another. Someone else wants to know the secrets he uncovered in his work. This is corporate espionage.
So I conclude with this. This revisioning of The Prisoner is interesting. It has more than enough clues and distractions to cause those who actively watch to be curious as to what happens next. It has enough purposive loopholes to make it unclear of what is a writing mistake and part of the storyline. At this point I doubt anyone can out guess what the writer’s intended with assurance.
The acting has been well done. We can sympathize with Six. We too can see reason to fear Two. We can understand the dread that comes from the Clinic and the sense of claustrophobia that permeates the idyllic scenery.
Thus this is a good program. It is the high end of what television can provide, when it tries. This is not The Prisoner of 67, yet it is a worthwhile experience. It is captivating and allows time to roll by without notice. It easily inspires discussion and questions. It easily makes you believe in the experience being given.
Television rarely reaches for such lofty goals as entertaining the mind as much as the eyes. But in this case they have succeeded, and I look forward to Monday nights episodes.
Television Preview: The Prisoner (remake)
Written by Black Entertainment USA
Over the years I have consistently warned my viewers to stay away from ‘revisioned’ fare on television and movies. Almost invariably such efforts are refuse best avoided than partaken in. But sometimes there comes an exception.
So far the previews of The Prisoner look like it has captured the essense of the original British show from 1967. Keep in mind the words essense. Because like all revisions, this one has been adapted to the sensibilities of our current time. And that likely will be the flaw of the program.
The remake will star Sir Ian McKellen and James Caviezel. Both are fine actors of high note. I believe both bring real credibility and substance to the program. There should be no question of how compelling they both can make their respective characters.
The setting will be interesting too. Filmed primarily in South Africa, the landscape - as much as there will be any considering it takes place in the confines of a desert - should add to the overall theme of the program. Desperation will be something not just discussed but also seen.
But the heart of the television show has never been the actors or the scenery. The Prisoner is enirely about what is said and done. It is about ideals. It is a surreal reflection of the world around us.
In the 1960’s the world was in flux. Governments were trying to adjust to changing views in their societies. War was on the horizon, and even larger global conflicts loomed while internal strife was everpresent.
Thus the 1967 show focused on freedom. Individual freedom versus the oppressive nature of large Governments of all types. Of the ability to be unique in a world striving to ensure every peg fit perfectly into a pre-conceived hole.
It’s a topic that could easily fit into the world today. A theme that sounds as true in 2009 with government-run healthcare, forced restrictions on energy usage, and plans for government to determine what is free (and/or fair) via the internet as it was for the world of the 60’s. But that isn’t where this show will go.
Instead this will be an attack on capitalism. The easy target of the day and the preferred evil of Hollywood. Yes it is capitalism that the prisoner Six (Caviezel) will be seeking to escape. Or so Sir McKellen has stated
“Capitalism offers you freedom, but far from giving people freedom, it enslaves them,” he says. “That’s part of the show’s message.” http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091111/ap_on_en_tv/us_ap_on_tv_prisoner_mckellen
I don’t agree with this view, as much as Hollywood (an institution only possible under capitalism) likes to insist it is true. But that does not mean that the show will be bad. Depending on how strongly this theme is reinforced will ultimately determine how much it can be enjoyed. Unless the viewer is just vacantly watching the program, and then it wouldn’t matter if this were the revisioned V series or static snow.
So the premise is this, can you escape your Village (capitalism)? Do you even want to? What does it cost you to stay right were you are?
But that leads me to a series of questions I don’t think the program will delve into. Can we escape the other alternative being pressed upon us (Government oppresiveness)? What cost of our freedoms does craddle to grave government oversight take? Isn’t escaping one Village to only join another just as futile?
Deep questions. Likely not something that most television viewers expect for the ITV box in their living room. But The Prisoner is a show that never strived to just keep viewers mindlessly enthralled like American Idol. So if nothing else this remake might just succeed on that level too.
On Sunday we will all have the choice of actively allowing ourselves to be held, members of a Village far larger than the one we will see onscreen. For that price I think we will be rewarded, to some degree, with a unique experience. The only question is if it is worth the price paid.
234 years of service
Written by Black Entertainment USA
Today is a day not unlike any other day for most Americans. People will get up and go to work, take care of kids, go to school, and so on. And just like so many days prior we will be able to do so because long before this day started, before we woke up and long after we go to sleep there are Marines making sure that it will be just another day.
234 years ago, before there was an America, the Marine Coprs was created. There was no pomp or ceremony to the creation. In fact it took place in a bar. Such is the humble beginings of a vital piece of America.
Overall the Marine Corps maintains about 200,000 in active service when not in an active war. While many hope to be part of this small brotherhood, few are selected and even fewer make it through training. There is a reason why the commercials correctly state
“The Few. The Proud. The Marines.”
Compare that for a second to the roughly 1.1 million or so in the Army, 900,000 in the Navy, and 600,000 in the Air Force. Marines can do aspects of every other sevice, are active across the globe, and are the smallest portion of the active military of America. We are also some of the best known to our allies and feared by our enemies in the world.
That is not to take away from any other serviceman or woman in the U.S. military. It is just what the Marine Corps is and has been for 234 years.
I know this about the Marine Corps because my father was a Viet Nam Marine. I too served in The Corps. And like so many before and after us, the Marines will remain a beacon of what is America and a wall that protects the nation night and day.
To our allies, Marines have always been there with you. If there is any question you need only ask the French why the Germans named us Devil Dogs. Look to history to understand where our sword came from and why we sing about the halls of Montezuma and the shores of Tripoli.
To our enenmies, remember this and dread
“The purpose of EVERY Marine is to be a basic rifleman. The mission of EVERY Marine is to seek out the enemy, and through superior firepower and manuever remove their willingness and ability to fight.” Senior Drill Instructor Sgt. Williams 1986 Paris Island
I know what it is to be a Marine. I understand what we volunteer to give for our nation. And I too thank our Marines for the service they provide without question or glory.
But today is the Birthday of the Marine Corp and I celebrate my fellow Marines, in active service or not, with us today or not, in peace where possible and in combat where not.
Because once a Marine, always a Marine.
And for those that have never known a Marine, or never tried to join us, or misunderstand what we have pledged to give to our nation, I share the following videos to give you a small taste.
To be a Marine is not to seek glory, nor reward. It is a calling. It is Semper Fidelis.
Ft. Hood - Maj. Hasan: 12 dead, 31 injured, no answers yet
Written by Michael Vass
I know that some of my readers may be wondering why I have not covered the news of the Ft. Hood shooting before now on VASS or Black Entertainment USA. The only reason I can give is that I was confused.
For hours there has been swirling reports, rumours, and imprecise information. Even at this late hour information is just being learned. So I will mention what is clear at this time.
There appears to be a single shooter. Early reports of multiple shooters seem to be incorrect. The main suspect is a Major Hasan, an American who has served in the military for 20 years. It is unclear exactly what role Maj. Hasan had, though he was a psychiatrist and may have been called to serve in Iraq/Afghanistan.
Maj. Hasan is believed to have killed 12 people, and wounded 31 others, mostly military personnel. Early reports of his suicide and/or death via shots from police are also incorrect. Additionally, a police officer initially believed to have been killed while shooting Maj. Hasan is in fact alive and out of surgery.
At this time no other names have been officially released, though Ft. Hood is no longer under lockdown.
Those are all facts, as is best understood at this time. But in no way do they answer the many questions that have plagued me and so many others all day.
I cannot fathom why an officer, especially of high rank, would strike out in such a manner. There is nothing that makes sense about this.
I have heard the rumours that Maj. Hasan was a sleeper agent. I do not agree. In 20 years of service Hasan would have had ample opportunity to act out before this. In addition, religious radicals tend to seek situations with the potential for far greater bodycounts than this. Plus the fact that being a military officer Hasan had the chance to potentially acquire far greater firepower to inflict higher casualties if he was simply a religious nut.
I have heard Maj. Hasan was suffering from PTSD. Again I refute that. He, to the best knowledge available now, has never served in combat. His duties seem to have kept him stateside his entire career. As a psychologist he heard stories from those that actually suffer PTSD, but that is not the same. Of all those I have known that have suffered PTSD not one has ever suffered this because of something they heard others experience.
Lastly, the other major cause has been rumoured to be discrimination and harrassment. Which I think is absurd. First because as a Major the number of people even capable of doing this are very few, and the repercussions of them doing so is extreme. Second, while I know there is some discrimination/prejudice in the military I can say firsthand that such is not on the level to cause this kind of outburst. I can understand a fistfight due to such a cause, but not a mass murder. In addition, the level of discrimination some may experience today is no where near the levels from back in the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s and so on. And even then, with a national bias in place, such actions as those of Maj. Hasan never occured.
Seperate of all this I have heard Maj. Hasan called a “good American”. This was meant to prevent blanket accusations and hate filled actions against Muslims. Which I can understand, but 2 things need to be clear.
1) The insane and terrible acts of any individual are NOT representative of a group of similar people. All Whites are not represented by the KKK or neo-Nazis. All African Americans are NOT Snoop Dogg. All Asians are not the Virginia Tech killer. And so on.
No Muslim should ever be judged by the acts of some other person, or a fanatical group. And no responsible American should ever act against someone due to such a false and bigoted reason.
2) There is no way anyone can be described as a “good American” at the same time they are the key suspect in a mass murder. I also have a problem with such a label being applied to a soldier, who volunteered to join the military, served 20 years, and who then balks at being stationed in or near a war zone (if that is accurate). They joined the military, with full understanding of its purpose, and took an oath that leaves no questions. If there were any disputes with the responsibility that goes with such service, they could have resigned and or gone to jail as a concientious objector. The murder of innocents is never something to be confused with or even mentioned along with the words American or U.S. military.
I am glad that Maj. Hasan is still alive. That means the questions we all have can be answered. If in fact he did do this, and acted alone or with others, I look forward to his death by firing squad. If there are others involved I believe they deserve the same fate.
But the biggest thing that I have in my mind right now is my fear that this is the Columbine of the military. I fear that far too many, merely seeking a quick way to earn money for college might follow this twisted path. I hope that Maj. Hasan can be used as an example of why such actions should never be undertaken.
As more becomes clear I will speak about it further at VASS
The winds of change
Written by Michael Vass
It has been a very interesting night so far. Already pundits are working up a sweat as they set the stage for the polispeak whirlwind that will be the headlines of the morning.
While there is no question that Republicans and Conservatives won strongly in races for Governor, Democrats are busy trying to play down what has happened. I have already heard one pundit refer to the wins in Virginia and New Jersey as merely ‘a historically recurring event continuing to take place’. And I expect to hear a lot more of that kind of talk in the days to come.
Gov. Corzine even tried his best at preserving the push by the Obama Administration and congressional Democrats to radically change the nation. Gov. Corzine said that
‘Even though this election may not reflect it, Democrats across the nation believe in the efforts being made right now.’
Right. That’s why so many Democrats came out to vote, and why the number 1 issue from exit polls everywhere say the same thing: the economy is the issue. Because increasing taxes on people that may or may not have a job the next day is always a winning strategy.
Of course one thing is true, this is not a referendum on President Obama. It is a clear indication that the public is aware of the fact that political promises by Democrats have been forgotten since the 2008 election. It is clear that the public is saying that without improvement hollow polispeak, even from an orator as good as President Obama is not enough. That mere words cannot refute actions that impact us all everyday. It is clear that the 2010 mid-term elections will involve more than just the smile of President Obama to assure election.
That is not to say that all Democrats should or have been voted out of office. In Binghamton NY I am happy to note that Mayor Matt Ryan won his re-election race. That is likely due to the fact that jobs have been created and new businesses have been encouraged in Binghamton. In fact Binghamton is part of Broome County New York, an area that recieved some $4 million in Obama Stimulus money, yet was unable to create a single job with it - due to the terms and limitations of the package. Yet Binghamton created jobs, while dealing with a crisis that no city or town should ever experience.
I will note that part of my opinion of Mayor Matt Ryan is influenced by the fact that I spoke with the Mayor back in April after the tragic events of that month, and I have interviewed him recently. He made a strong impression on me, and I have no qualm admitting that.
Still this is less the rule and more the exception when looking at many Democrats in Congress right now. Senators Gillibrand and Schumer still have yet to discuss why the Health Care Reform Bills are worthwhile. Sen. Gillibrand has still refused to speak with me or respond to my emails and letters. Sen. Gillibrand still has not publicly explained her support of ACORN.
So I believe that like with the multiple visits of support given to Gov. Corzine and Creigh Deeds in Virginia, President Obama smiling and saying that a fellow Democrat is great will not be enough. Not with unemployment going up, and the artificial boosts to the economy (Cash for Clunkers et al) used up.
So I tell my readers to brace themselves for a whirlwind of polispeak in the coming days. Look for the White House to distance itself from its very public losses. Look for many congressional Democrats to suddenly shy away from Health Care Reform and a second Obama Stimulus. But don’t be fooled.
There is a difference between a politician that gets the job done, like Mayor Ryan, and those playing the political polls and Party favoritism. If those that are just spinning their heads don’t remember who their bosses are, we won’t need a referendum. We will just vote.
Threats against President Obama strain the Secret Service
Written by Michael Vass
A recent report leaked to the Boston Globe just caught my attention and seriously disturbed me. The report is about the Secret Service, and questions whether the Agency can continue to protect the President and other high-ranking officials, while at the same time investigating financial criminals.
The key point that stood out in this report? That threats against president Obama are straining the Agency. Ronald Kessler, who recently wrote a book about the Secret Service, noted that threats against President Obama are 400 percent higher than against President Bush. It’s a troubling purported fact.
I should also mention that the Secret Service issued a stament
“In the longest and most expensive campaign in history, the Secret Service has proven it can maintain its dual mission of both protecting individuals and conducting criminal investigations,” the spokesman said. “The Secret Service had asset forfeitures totaling $140 million and investigated the largest data breach in history. There were also zero arrests at the largest inauguration ever.”
Still the fact that, as expected, prejudiced and biased nutjobs are planning and/or attempting to kill President Obama is disturbing. It’s a reality that has been apparent since the Secret Service started watching his back during the 2007 campaign. A reality few have wanted to discuss.
I realize that part of what I just said was a leap. There is no way of knowing if all or even some of the wakos threatening the President are racists. They could just as easily be dellusionally opposed to his policies. But I believe that 99% of the people that disagree in part or whole with the policies of the President are not violent. And to date there has been no act of violence among people of that mindset to change my opinion. But there have been arrests of pathetic radical racists.
I realize that America has yet to resolve the issues of race that are just under the surface of our society. The fact that our wars in the Middle East involve people of color only add to this problem. But our President is just that. As President there is no color or religion or anything else. To assign such attributes is to miss the point.
I am an outspoken opponent of many (ok, just about all) of the policies of the Obama Administration. I am very passionate and vocal in my dissent on these issues and their ramifications. But even with that, there is no question that I would do whatever it would take to protect the President of the United States. Something that I believe every American should agree with.
Our nation is great because we do not settle differences with violence. We are great because we do not change political policies with guns. We are great because we embrace the Freedoms this nation was built upon. And the President is the living embodiment of these great things.
I have no doubt that all of my readers agree with my view on this. I have no doubt that not one of my readers would seek out violence nor choose that as a means of debate. But there is always the chance that those few challenged people that have these twisted beliefs might read this. And I hope that if they do read this they are compelled not to enact violence for any cause or belief they might hold. It is not to the benefit of the nation, or any part therein, to use violence.
There are always those few mentally deranged individuals that threaten a President. But to see that the number of threats has increased so much means that either psychosis is spreading or long seated issues of race are coming to a head. I can only hope that such issues can be resolved with words and calm minds. For the sake of us all.
Transcript of interview of Mayor Matt Ryan
Written by Michael Vass
The following is the full transcript, as seen in the video and post commentary, of the interview of Binghamton, New York Mayor Matt Ryan and Michael Vass.
It’s Matt Ryan, how are you doing?
MV : Oh, how are you Mayor Ryan?
Matt Ryan: Pretty good.
MV: I know you don’t have a whole lot of time so I want to thank you first of all for giving me the time to speak with you today, I know that you have a lot going on with your duties at work and also the re-election campaign. So I’ll try not to take too much of your time here. Basically let me just jump right into it… One of the things I wanted to speak to you about is as you remember back in April we had the incident [shooting] in Binghamton. This was for a lot of people across the nation the introduction of Binghamton to the rest of the world. That we joined places like Seattle and Virginia Tech in dealing with this kind of tragedy. What would you say has changed… that you’ve noticed has changed since that time and more importantly perhaps is what hasn’t?
Matt Ryan: I think a lot more hasn’t changed, this was a total aberration from what Binghamton is really like. Binghamton is a community that’s honored its immigrants for many many years and it’s why the Civic Association existed for so many years. And to have this happen was unfortunately something you would never expect to happen in this community and once it happens you realize it could happen anywhere. but you know we got through this. Obviously one of the things that’s changes is that we have tried to reach out to our immigrant population to try to figure out ways to make sure that there are ways that people who are having problems in those populations how we can reach them, how we can offer them better services.
MV: Ok
Matt Ryan: Because Mr. Wong was a mentally ill person who slipped through the cracks and if we had better ways to deal with those with mental health problems in the immigrant population we may have been able to prevent something like this.
MV: No, I agree. I agree with everything that you said. And that’s part of the reason why I want to do this. To revisit this 6 months later, is because I think that to a certain extent people have gotten the wrong impression of Binghamton. Having been here now 5 years, I know you been here all your life, it doesn’t give a accurate reflection. And I think there should be another view, another look at who we are and what places like Binghamton, Columbine, everywhere these events have happened, we’re not just that event. there’s more to the people beyond that.
Matt Ryan: Right.
MV: Let me ask you, in terms of … and this is going, this might be slightly different. Looking at, since the Obama stimulus has taken effect, looking at all the laws that have been coming out, has there been anything that addresses this kind of situation; where maybe there funding for catastrophic events? Is there additional funding out there for helping people, the immigrants or anyone, who has this kind of stress? Is there anything that we see out there?
Matt Ryan: There been some money flowing in the State [NY] at the time of the incident that gave us an influx of money for help, and professionals to deal… dealing directly with the tragedy with the family and friends. But out of the stimulus money I’m not aware of any money that would have addressed these issues. Certainly any time something like this happens you try to redirect your services to make sure the crime victims assistance and all those things were very helpful in reaching out to the families and to continue to be helpful to those who suffered through this tragedy. But as far as stimulus money I can’t think of money that came available because of a tragedy like this. The State, like I said, stepped up. [State] Senator Malcolm Smith made sure we got the money to bolster our capabilities in that regard.
MV: ok, that’s a good thing. It’s just interesting that its a question that no one asks. So its worth asking to find out if there is something there.
I notice that you did a lot and i don’t think a lot of people understand what it is to be a Mayor in such a situation. i know we spoke shortly after that event. I could see the stress that you were going through at the time as anyone and everyone was. For the city to have gone from that moment, which i think was a critical point; it could have a turning point for the city, negatively, and in fact had not been that. As you said, and I agree, life has returned essentially, in most aspects in almost every major aspect, to normal for the entire population. That has a lot to do with the Mayor, with you and your guidance and the people as well. How is that? how do you deal with that? how do you get thru that? how did you bring everyone in the city past that?
Matt Ryan: As soon as it started to happen we got together some people and said, ‘We cannot let ourselves be defined by this because this is not who we are. And was gratifying by Monday morning we had put out all the accolades that had already been put on Binghamton the last couple years - nice greenest city, real estate values actually going up instead of down like most of the country. Just all the different things that’s been said nice about Binghamton, the University, all these different things.
When I went on Montel Williams, I was the first one to appear on his radio show that Monday morning after the tragedy after and he said, “are you there” and I said “yeah”, and he said I got to do a little lead in and I’ll get back to you in a minute. he said that there is a city in the United States that and he read of the whole litany of things we had put out that, he said “You know what city that is? Binghamton NY.”
It was so gratifying to see that was the message that was getting out about our community. So I think it was just a conscious decision to say “this is not going to define us. We are not going to. We’re going to show a calmness and strength that this community has even in this difficult time. We’ll move on and we will get past this.”
MV: I think that’s really a defining moment . It’s a definition of leadership. Rudy Guilliani is a great example with 9/11 where he was that rock for the city to lean upon or look towards as everyone tried to sort through that. In all the interviews I saw with you, in speaking to the nation, I think you provided a lot of that for us.
Matt Ryan: I think the police Chief did a great job too. he was rock solid. Everybody stepped up to the plate and portrayed our community the way I think we really are. we had 2 historic floods, and now this in my first term, so unfortunately I’m time-tested and understand how you can never be sure of anything and you have to be ready for everything.
MV: That’s for sure. Let segue slightly and ask you… I know you’re up for re-election right now. It’s true you’ve have a very difficult time as a Mayor for any location but especially in Binghamton. As you mentioned there was the 2 floods, which were once in a hundred years floods. There was obviously the incident at the Civic Center. But there’s also the fact that prior to the Civic Center there was only 1 in the year prior. crime has gone and I say that not only because of the statistics but I’ve actually, before speaking to you I’ve been speaking to people throughout the city and I know in the 5 years I’ve been here it’s gone down. We’ve seen businesses come in, slowly but steadily and as you mentioned in the second quarter of this year, I believe Binghamton was one of the top 10 cities of the entire nation with property values going up instead of down.
Right
MV: That has a lot to do with what you’ve gone through. So looking forward, what are you looking forward to in your second term? A little bit more of peace and quiet?
[laughter]
Matt Ryan: That would be nice, but as I said you have to be for anything. We’ll continue on. We started with an idea of getting more people involved with Government, streamlining Government, with trying to make sure we are sufficient as possible. We inherited 1970’s technology in City Hall. it takes a long time to turn the ship around, to get it going in the right direction. But know we’re very hopeful I’ll get another term so that I can to put into practice so many things that we developed the first 4 years . Like Enius [unclear] software for all our financial operations. We can cartograph all our DTW operations. There will fundamentally change how we deliver services and save money. We’re very proud of that.
I want to focus the study about the lean 6 sigma that some certain cities have followed, the management of assets, we couldn’t even have thought of until we upgraded the technology in City Hall to have the capacity to communicate with our citizens better, they can interact with the website now.
MV: I’m sorry. What is the website that people can find about Binghamton?
Matt Ryan: It’s the cityofBinghamton.com . It’s our city website, and through there you can now all the information. you can see our bottom-line budget, you can pay bills online, you can search for your assessment, you can check property values if you’re interested in property though our assessment systems. we have GIS which you never had before, it was ridiculous but now we have it once we made that commitment to do that. There so much more you can do online and learn about your Government and be part of your Government. You can make complaints to the Department of Public Works and code and have them tracked. These are the things that allow people to trust their Government, to realize we are working for them.
Like I said we put total transparency in the City hall by posting every number, every budget line, see where the money is and how it’s being spent.
MV: Well there aren’t a lot of politicians that are doing that these days. So that stands out in and of itself. You have been very much out there to let people know what’s going on, which is also highly commendable. I think that when my readers hear about this, when they hear this conversation they are going to want to, more than a few of they will want to actually learn more about you, learn more about your re-election campaign.
I know that you are a native of Binghamton, NY. That you went to college in NYC.
Matt Ryan: I graduated from Binghamton University. First started at Wagner College and transferred to Binghamton university. You know I took some time went and travelled, but I graduated from BU and I went to law school at CUNY Law School in New York City.
MV: That’s right, it was CUNY. Yes. You’re an environmental lawyer?
Matt Ryan: Right. Well, I’ve taught environmental law for 10 years at BU when I came back from law school. I haven’t really practiced environmental law, but it definitely is an interest of mine. That was my undergraduate work, it definitely does impact how I look at my job. That’s another thing we are trying to do, is to make sure our carbon footprint is reduced in the city. try to be as green as possible, try to save as much money as we can for our constituents and our Government. Right now we’re looking at different ways to save money on out energy costs. Hopefully we can get [unclear} I we might be a model for how to have our infrastructure work more efficiently, and reduce our carbon footprint there.
MV: Ok. I that for those looking to find out some more information about you, they can go to MayorMattRyan.com/binghamton , is that correct? Is that the best one for them to find out more information about you?
Matt Ryan: Yeah, they can just google Matt Ryan and it will take them to our website for what we’re trying to do with the re-election.
MV: I thought that was the main one, but I just wanted to double check. Hang on just one second.
6 months after tragedy in Binghamton, NY
Written by Michael Vass
You know what I hate? Well among other things, the hit and run nature of the major media. It’s something that really has always annoyed me. The way they swoop in and get a few headlines but never really get the full story, or follow-up. Its a bad change from just a decade or so ago.
Take for example the Civic Center shooting in Binghamton, New York. It was a dark day for the city and tragic. I recall getting a call and a text from friends concerned about me when they heard the news. That’s how I found out what was happening 6 blocks from my house. And of course I went to cover the breaking news.
It was a cold rainy day. I spent hours getting photos and finding out whatever I could. The number of rumors that day was incredible. Many thought it might have been a terrorist attack early on. But as I continued to seek out facts the situation became more clear. It was the deranged actions of a single troubled man.
There was of course lots of news media around. They traveled from Ithaca, Syracuse, and I recall a few from New York City in the day or so afterwards. But it was just a day or so before they were all gone, moving on to other stories. Which would be fine, except it nagged me that in all the stories almost none of the media bothered to find out what Binghamton was like before the shooting.
I let it go, expecting that at some point there would be some kind of follow-up. Yet it has never happened. Binghamton was marked as a place with a potential danger or some kind of scarlet letter. And while most people in the nation may not thnk of Binghamton’s shooting, when the name comes up it has been something they recall. Which I can’t abide.
So I have sought out to tell a bit of the real nature of Binghamton. The city that I have called my home for 5 years now. A city that is small but filled with a diversity of people from across the nation, and more than a few countries. Its a place that is perhaps the safest place I have ever lived, and generally filled with good people.
Part of my desire is to set the record straight. Part of it is as a minor member of the press (I’m no CNN) I believe that the positive side of Binghamton deserves to be shown. And of course part of it is the fact this is where I call home.
Thus I start my ongoing coverage with a 15 minute interview with Mayor Matt Ryan. We discussed some of the events of that day. The difficulties that the local authorities had, and how they were resolved. We discussed what has changed in Binghamton, and more importantly what has not. Overall we spoke about the strength of a community and the ability of its people to overcome adversity.
Thus I present my interview with Mayor Matt Ryan of Binghamton, NY
I hope that this helps complete the part of the news cycle that never got finished back in April. I will have more on this soon.
It’s not a stimulus. It’s just extra money before you vote.
Written by Michael Vass
It’s a bit early in the morning, but I had to comment on this news. Democrats have figured out how they can buy the 2010 mid-term elections. And the best part is they won’t even have to use the word “stimulus”.
President Obama is currently proposing that Congress spend $12.5 billion in 2010 (right in time for elections) to give 50 million people receiving Social Security $250 each. Again, that’s not a stimulus. It sounds like a stimulus, and costs like a stimulus, but it’s not. It is proposed to be an increase to adjust the the cost of living increase, that does not exist as the cost of living has dropped in this economy (the Obama Stimulus is doing such a grand job).
President Obama said
But to be really fair, President Obama also wants just a bit more money to include those receiving veterans benefits, disability benefits, railroad retirees and retired public employees who don’t receive Social Security. By the way, don’t notice that this is a huge block of voters that consistently show up in mid-term elections. Don’t pay attention to the fact that this won’t be considered until 2010, and thus means the money won’t show up until the middle or late summer, just as political re-election ads hit their peak.
As a bonus, President Obama assured that no a dime of this money would come from Social Security. Not that it could anyway, since SS will be short money for at least the next 2 years in a row. But saying a fact like it was optional really does go over well with voters. Especially when they have a check in hand.
Oh, by the way. The money that is being proposed is exactly what was given to this same group this year. Though this year it was called the popular and ‘only hope to avert disaster and rampant unemployment’ - Obama Stimulus.
But here is a question no one seems willing to ask the President. Where is this money coming from?
Nah, never mind that. Probably not important.
Of course I have to say I do recall something about a 2nd Stimulus… I mean extra money to voters just before a critical election for no reason besides the huge heart of Democrats.
They will make sure that this next time around everybody (and I’m including illegal aliens – or undocumented workers if you prefer) will get a check in the mail. And then they will waste no time in reminding everyone that they gave you just enough money to cover your mortgage for 1 more month, while you still don’t have a job. Because that will get you to vote for them. Not that Democrats would stoop so low as to buy votes. They like to just make campaign promises that never happen (like the 73% of promises that President Obama has completely ignored to date [Update - President Obama has kept exactly 9% of the 515 campaign promises he made as of writing this post]).”
I know. It’s not a stimulus; of course neither is the Obama Stimulus package. But if you don’t think it’s an attempt to buy votes…
President Obama vs. Fox News - bias or not?
Written by Black Entertainment USA
So the White House is upset with Fox News. The President just doesn’t like the coverage he gets there. Because they must be less than legitamite since they criticize his Administration. Are they serious?
Now I have no problem with anyone that wants to critique the major news media. There are multiple issues I have, ranging from the disproportionate representation of people of color in television shows to the subliminal reinforcement of stereotypes in news coverage and advertisements. I write about it often. But to be realistic, there is no one major media outlet that is far and away worse than all the others.
Of course when we focus only on the news media I begin to see the situation. Considering that virtually all the news media fawns over President Obama, Fox News actually doing there jobs must be a pain in the ass. They are the one place that reality sinks in, and rockstars prefer groupies to critics.
Think about it. ACORN has abused the system, promoting criminal activities and corrupting votes across the country. It took over a week and a preponderance of evidence before the rest of the media even noticed there was a story there. Hmm, political corruption on a national level. Sounds like a job that the news media is supposed to do.
What about officials in the Government. Besides telling the public about people in positions of power that have less than reputable backgrounds (Van Jones is a great and obvious choice) isn’t it the job of the news media to mention the problems (like failing to pay taxes - which almost everyone in or proposed to be in the Obama Administration has failed to do) in our Government? Isn’t that what most of the media did non-stop against President Bush?
And those are just 2 examples of many. The fact that a President is a rockstar does not mean they are above critique or observation. It’s part of the job. And President Obama has had many things to critique, just check my political blog VASS to see what I mean.
When President Bush was in office, didn’t he get hammered with tough questions every time he spoke to the press? Wasn’t MSNBC treating President Bush even worse than Fox is accused of treating President Obama?
The media is not perfect. They all have agendas and preferences. But for the White House to attack one organization for doing its job - that smacks of abuse of power. How dare anyone question President Obama. How dare anyone question obvious flaws in policy. They have to be solely stooges for political adversaries and racists. Except that would be a lie to say.
Notice that the White House has not stated any materially important facts that were wrongly reported or commented (ie correcting the name of the city of an upcoming Olympics is not materially important). Notice that there is nothing that wasn’t true. They didn’t like it, but that does not mean it was false.
No, the White House would prefer that the public either drools with excitement (like some at MSNBC seem to do) if President Obama speaks, or completely ignores the news of the day. It’s much easier to pass legislation that no one has read if no one pays attention.
Fox News is not perfect. I have had issue with some of the statements and coverage it has presented over the years. I have disagreed, strongly at times, with the opinions of Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Sheppard Smith. Yet I watch the channel every day because even when I disagree, the quality of the news and commentary is consistently far superior to other channels. And it is because I watch everyday that the silly internet bashers that misquote, and the bullying of the White House stand out for what they are.
Simply put, if an Administration is hell bent to make sure you don’t see something it stands to reason that you should pay attention. Put another way, if this was President Bush telling you not to watch a news channel many would flock to see what he disliked and why. The fact that President Obama is Black and a rockstar politician doesn’t change that reasoning.
