January 2012

Argument Fail Of The Day

Posted 1/11/12 at 4:20pm by jamie

Republicans are still pissed over President Obama's recessed appointment, so now they want to take action. Of course that action won't occur until they return from their recess, which is what they are arguing they aren't in.

Sound confusing? Well let me add to that. OK - let's let Republican Congresswoman Diane Black add to it in this statement:

“These appointments are an affront to the Constitution. No matter how you look at this, it doesn’t pass the smell test. I hope the House considers my resolution as soon as we return to Washington so we can send a message to President Obama.”...

“No executive agency should be immune from the checks and balances our founders intended. What’s more, the NLRB appointments were jammed through by the president before the Senate even had the chance to consider the appointees. Their names were only put forward on Dec. 15, a mere two days before the Senate recessed for the holiday. The president is clearly out of bounds here and should not be allowed to skirt the Constitution as he pleases.”

The Constitution gives the President the power to make appointments when Congress is in recess. Black is apparently saying they aren't in recess, yet she says that the names were put forward only two days before the Senate did go into recess. Got it now?

If your head isn't ready to explode by such idiocracy in two little paragraphs then you are a stronger person than I!

The Iran Assassination Bombing: What If We Did It?

Posted 1/11/12 at 3:01pm by jamie

Following up on my previous story about the Hollywood style assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientists, I have been thinking what it would mean if the U.S. actually was involved in it.

First off if we were involved in this bombing there is no way our government would admit it. It would create such a diplomatic nightmare for our country that we have no option but to deny it.

Now having said that, what if we were behind this attack? Well if we were then it shows a difference in policies between the current President and previous one. It would show that George Bush is a man more for a guns-a-blazing, costly war solution, where as Barack Obama is more into the covert, keep it simple and clean approach.

The Obama style approach is one we saw when it came to finally getting Osama bin Laden and when it came to the fall of Gadaffi. The Bush style approach is one we saw in action in Iraq for the past several years. Our country is still paying for that war and almost 4,500 U.S. soldiers paid the ultimate price for.

If I had to make the choice of which way to go, I would take the Obama style any day of the week. It's swift, clean and costs much less in terms of money and life. The other point to make here is that this style of approach may have set Iran's nuclear ambitions back a few years by simply killing one guy. It's not like you can go to Craig's List and just take out an ad for a nuclear scientists. They are hard to come by and now Iran needs to replace this one.

So if the U.S. was behind this assassination, I got to applaud our nation. We finally realized full blown war isn't the only answer to these type of problems. Of course that could change this time next year if President Obama is not given a second term. That's something to think about when heading to the polls this fall.

Hollywood Style Assassination In Iran

Posted 1/11/12 at 1:21pm by jamie

This story is really amazing:

Two assailants on a motorcycle attached a magnetic bomb to the car of an Iranian university professor working at a key nuclear facility, killing him and wounding two people on Wednesday, a semiofficial news agency reported.

The attack in Tehran bore a strong resemblance to earlier killings of scientists working on the Iranian nuclear program.

It is certain to reinforce authorities' claims of widening clandestine operations by Western powers and allies to try to cripple nuclear advancements.

The White House has denied any involvement in this.

You got to admit though that Hollywood couldn't write it any better themselves.

Wingnut Breaks Waiter's Finger Over Bill

Posted 1/11/12 at 12:35pm by jamie

Sounds like someone some serious anger issues:

It's an age-old and vexing question: How much is it fair to shave off the tip at a high-end restaurant to signal dissatisfaction with the waitstaff? Two percent? Five percent? Should you stiff them? For leveraged buyout king John Castle the other night, the answer was easy: Just crack the little fucker's finger.

Castle, 76, is the chairman and CEO of Castle Harlan, a private equity firm. Before that, he was CEO of the investment banking firm Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette. His is a positively Romney-esque tale of the value of raiding companies to extract value—his business acumen has subsidized a lifestyle that included purchasing the Kennedy family's Palm Beach, Fla., compound in in 1995 and hosting magnificently lavish weddings there for his children, complete with Trader Vic's catering and Mar-a-Lago luncheons.

And on Saturday night, according to a complaint filed with the Palm Beach Police Department, he reacted to subpar service by calling his waiter a "schmuck" and breaking his finger. Castle and his wife Marianne, the complaint says, were having dinner at Club Colette, an elite Palm Beach private dining club (restaurants are for poors), when their waiter Paul Kucik made the unforgivable error of bringing them the check. Which is vulgar, I guess? From the report, which was first reported by the Palm Beach Daily News:

Romney-esque? More than you might think. Castle has been donating money to Romney and actually does all his donations to the GOP. Supporting a candidate or even party like that is enough to make anyone angry!

Romney's Win

Posted 1/11/12 at 10:24am by jamie

Mitt Romney's win in New Hampshire last night was a given the pundit world has talked about for months. Interesting enough though many are calling this the end game and now saying Romney is the nominee. I wouldn't count on that quiet yet.

Romney has constantly polled best in New Hampshire of all 50 states. Going into last night's primary his RCP average was at 16.6%, which is eerily close to the margin between him and second place Ron Paul. But Romney's numbers have been dropping in New Hampshire over the past several weeks. It was only in November Romney was seeing numbers giving him a 30+ point lead, so his support has about dropped in half.

Then we have the big factor in the horse race - the delegate count. Last night's contest only accounted for 12 delegates (New Hampshire's delegates was cut in half do to a RNC penalty). New Hampshire is also one of the few states in the GOP primary that isn't "winner take all" in the delegate race. Including last night's race, Mitt Romney now has 23 delegates. Ron Paul comes in second with 10 and Rick Santorum is third with 8. But we still have a long ways to go. 1,144 delegates are needed to win the GOP nomination and we start seeing some bigger states coming up in the next couple of weeks. If those races do go to Romney then I think we can safely say he has it, short of some major fubar on the campaign trail (not that unlikely given it is Mitt).

I Wish I Could Fire People!

Posted 1/10/12 at 2:24pm by jamie

Mitt Romney made a big gaffe yesterday. Sure it ended up being taken out of context, but hey - that's the game Romney likes playing! Here's what Romney said:

“I want individuals to have their own insurance. That means the insurance company will have an incentive to keep people healthy. It also means if you don’t like what they do, you can fire them. I like being able to fire people who provide services to me. If someone doesn’t give me the good service I need, I’m going to go get somebody else to provide that service to me.”

But there is still a problem there, even if we accept it in the context Romney put it. Here's what Aaron Carroll pints out:

The real issue, unfortunately, is that very, very few people have the luxury that Gov. Romney is endorsing. Let’s say that you are self-employed, and lucky enough to have found a company to provide you with health insurance. Then, let’s say you develop cancer. You suddenly find out that your insurance company stinks. So you fire them, right?

Of course not. You’re screwed. Now you have a pre-existing condition. There’s not an insurance company out there that wants to cover you. So you don’t fire them. You scream, and curse, and cry, but you’re stuck. Only healthy people have the luxury of picking and choosing.

And that is a very serious issue and one that the healthcare bill did address, but also a serious issue that Republicans want to keep around with their "repeal" talk. So how does Mitt Romney suggest we fire our insurance companies? Maybe someone will ask him on the campaign trail.

Mitt Romney - Compulsive Liar

Posted 1/10/12 at 12:44pm by jamie

Bob Cesca picked up on this little doozy from Mitt Romney:

“With regards to their ads, I haven’t seen them,” Romney said, after being implored by Gingrich to “calmly and directly” take some responsibility for spots that the former Speaker of the House alleged were “untrue.”

But moments later — in the same response, in fact — Romney made it clear that he hadn’t told the entire truth.

“The ad I saw said that you’d been forced out of the speakership. That was correct,” Romney said.

Get that? Mitt said he didn't see the ad, but then said he did. How can anyone trust this guy to be the most powerful man in the world? Hell his dishonesty is probably enough to turn off a used car salesman.

Quick Site Update

Posted 1/10/12 at 11:52am by jamie

I'm tweaking the site design some, trying to make it more readable in mobile devices. I'm trying to keep with a simplistic approach that leverages the new features of the modern browsers. Things might be a little buggy for a day or two as I keep tweaking, but it should be much better in the long run.

Thanks for your understanding!

What Ya Hiding Newt?

Posted 1/10/12 at 10:32am by jamie

Last week Freddie Mac released Newt Gingrich from his non-disclosure agreement with them. Now Newt's old firm is refusing to do the same:

A lawyer for a consulting firm founded by former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich said he was barring the release of a contract between the Republican presidential candidate and Freddie Mac.

Gingrich said last week it would be up to his partners in his former company, the Center for Health Transformation, to determine whether to release the documents. Earlier, he said he would be happy to release the contract, yet couldn’t make it public because Freddie Mac, the mortgage company now under U.S. conservatorship, refused to waive a confidentiality agreement.

Freddie Mac officials said last week that Gingrich was “welcome” to release the contract, under which his consulting firm was paid at least $1.6 million over eight years for his services.

This goes back to something I've said before. The right constantly wants everything Barack Obama did in college 20-30 years ago made public, yet their candidates can hide things they just did a couple of years ago.

This also shows that Newt has been hiding something about his time consulting for Freddie. Now the media will start digging to find out what that is and once they do the right will start their little girly cries of "the liberal media". Of course it's nothing more than the media doing their actual jobs.

Pages

Comments



blog advertising is good for you

Tip Jar

Monthly archive

Follow Me On Twitter


Follow IntoxiNation on Twitter:
Follow IntoxiNation on Twitter