A question about Paul Ryan

Longtime readers of this blog know that I'm for fiscal conservatism and letting the free market be responsible for itself, without government interference. Meaning that among other things that I've never thought anything favorable about government bailout programs.

A few days ago Mitt Romney, the assumed Republican candidate for President, announced that Paul Ryan would be his running mate in this fall's election.

Paul Ryan is being touted as a "Tea Party conservative".

Okay, well then...

Why should this blogger, or anyone else for that matter, vote for a Romney/Ryan ticket when Ryan:

- voted for the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP)

- voted for bailouts of $14 billion for General Motors and Chrysler

- voted for bailouts of Bank of America, BB&T, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, and other banks

- voted for bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

- voted for the insanely expensive Medicare Part D

?

The auto industry bailouts alone have honked me off to no end. As they should every citizen of this country.

So I'm sincerely asking supporters of Paul Ryan: how is his voting record indicative of someone who holds to financially conservative and responsible values? More to the point: why should I or anyone else vote for Ryan based on his record?

Don't even bother offering up bullcrap about "You're voting against Obama". I am not now or ever have voted for Obama. I need to know why I should vote for Romney/Ryan.

Read More

General Motors files for bankruptcy, taxpayers having to bail it out

Read about it here.

So... who's gonna be the first to buy a car manufactured by the U.S. federal government?

(crickets chirping...)

Read More

Is Obama Admin punishing Chrysler dealers who donated to Republicans?

Longtime readers of this blog know without me having to remind anyone: party allegiance doesn't exist in this dojo. Personally I'd rather see a country full of citizens who are beholden to no political parties at all. And I like to think that one of the end characteristics of that drastic un-affiliation is that this blog and its peculiar proprietor are equally hard on both Democrats and Republicans.

But I also believe absolutely in the right to expression, whether in speech or belonging to the party of one's choice, if one chooses to belong to one at all. I just try to do my best to encourage people to think about it before they commit to something, but that's beside the point of this post...

WorldNetDaily was the first to report that there is apparently a disturbing pattern among the Chrysler dealerships that have been targeted for closure as part of the company's bailout by the federal government. One-fourth of its dealerships will be shut down... but as WorldNetDaily discovered, 90% of those to be closed were owned by donors of "substantial sums" to Republican candidates.

I'm not going to automatically jump on the "bash Obama" bandwagon on this, 'cuz... well... 'cuz if something like this was politically motivated it seemed too brazen. Then I started hearing about how many of the dealerships scheduled for closing had been some of the most profitable to the company.

And then I discovered that one group that donated heavily to the Democratic Party was getting to keep SIX Chrysler dealerships that it owned while its local competitors who gave to GOP candidates are getting shuttered.

Could Obama's White House be so brazen?

I'm starting to now think... yeah, it could.

This not only merits some formal investigation, it demands it. Like, congressional hearings with everyone involved in this hauled before the lights and cameras. If for no other reason than to apply the scrutiny this incongruity calls for and clear the air one way or another.

Read More

Santelli is right: Time to show the American government who's boss

It's become "The Rant Heard 'Round the World": CNBC's Rick Santelli on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange two days ago, blasting President Obama's mortgage bailout plans and calling for a new "tea party"...

Santelli's impromptu screed alarmed the Obama Administration enough that Press Secretary Robert Gibbs attacked Santelli during the daily White House press briefing yesterday.

Most of y'all who read this blog on a regular basis know what I'm gonna say already: that Rick Santelli is absolutely correct. That the American government is rewarding "bad behavior" and consequently is punishing those who are striving to play fairly by the rules.

At every level, government in the United States is out of control. It has "gone rogue". Our government is no longer of the people, by the people and for the people. It is now an entity unto itself, existing for its own sake, and proven willing to do whatever it deems necessary to maintain its tenuous grasp on the status quo.

This can not go on forever. Sooner or later, it will come crashing down. History is replete with examples of ruined empires that buckled and gave in under their own weight. And at this point, I don't know if it can be avoided, that the United States is on the same track.

But that's why I also find Rick Santelli's rage to be so heartening. Santelli demonstrated sincere vigor and rage at what is happening to this country. His sentiments have resonated so strongly across the blogosphere, that it's not hard at all to see a real movement coalescing around this fury at our government.

Heck, if you ask me, Rick Santelli is showing more real leadership than anyone in the Obama Administration right now. That by itself is reason to be of good cheer! :-)

Read More

Some random musings on things...

A few months ago George W. Bush proposed wasting hundreds of billions of dollars of our money and it was called "bailout" and some politicians approved it. Today Barack Obama is proposing wasting hundreds of billions of dollars of our money and it's being called "stimulus" and those same politicians deride it as unacceptable.

I would like to quote "Oceania is at war with Eurasia, Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia" to the Powers That Be, but sad to say, they most likely wouldn't get it.

And now that he's President, doesn't Obama have better things to do than to get into the proverbial "pissing contest" with a radio commentator who is nothing more than a shameless shill for the "other side"?

Don't we have better things to do than to even care about such a non-story involving two men with apparently arrested development?

Pat Buchanan is right: we have become an unserious people in a serious time.

Read More