Yay for Political Wrangling!


I think it was John McCain who was the first in the campaigning process to say that “we have no time for on the job training.”  And how right he was…     

Now… I admit that I am no politician.  In fact, I greatly appreciate that facet of myself.  However, it would seem to little plebian me that if you are going to be appointing people to carry out your agenda and be the face of your message, wouldn’t it make sense to do a background check first?  I couldn’t get a loan for a house if I wanted to because I don’t have enough of a credit history… but some bum $30,000 in the hole to the IRS almost gets made the director of a government office?

On the one hand, I appreciate that President Obama did own up to his mistake on television (the quote Yahoo has says, “I screwed up.”), but finding out whether or not your people are ducking the government shouldn’t be counter-intuitive leadership techniques.  They say you can tell a man by his company… assuming Bill Ayers wasn’t enough of a red flag for somebody, three of Obama’s nominees have all withdrawn their names for personal problems.  T’would seem the DNC has some house cleaning to do……


PS, so much for the “moral high ground”…


~ by xristosdomini on February 4, 2009.

One Response to “Yay for Political Wrangling!”

  1. I was going over some of the news related to this bailout, and found something that has me totally enraged. Pardon, please, while I vent:

    The article was about the new Federal regulation to limit the compensation for high ranking officers in a company that accepts Federal bailout money. Strangely, I don’t think that’s unreasonable, and am mostly OK with this, believing that companies who crawl to the Fed trough really should have a disincentive that affects their mis-managers.

    My hackles were raised, when the reporter said that “average americans” will “probably like” the new regulation. AAAAUUUGH!!!

    I hate that the press, the liberals, the dems foment such hatred of people who manage businesses and profit by hard work, imagination, and deliberately reaching for something better. But that’s only half the issue.

    The term “average american” is not used in a statistical sense – it is speaking specifically of the kind of american who views their work as an entitlement, their level of income as a constant relative to the economy. They work hard, perhaps, but they don’t consider the possibility of energy-fueled-inspiration yielding a dramatic improvement in their own fortunes, unless the lottery hits. They think of us versus them, when “them” are the bosses, who can only be moved to paltry concessions by strikes. They think of us versus them, where “them” are low-wage scabs competing “unfairly” for jobs by simply being willing to work harder for less. They think healthcare is a right, and their goal is to make someone else to pay through voting, not to strive to provide for their own health care by working, saving, investing, innovating, building, living.

    “average american”? Meaning, an american who is devoted to being average, and wants to fix pay inequities by making others average, too. How will America lead the world when dominated by such as these?

    “average americans”. No. I would call them “union americans”.

    If you love your union and are offended, I’m sorry. I challenge you before you flame me to think about whether glamourizing and institutionalizing mediocrity is really a goal worthy of America?

    The dem’s are the kings of “union americans”, and I think its very telling that so many of their leaders are tax cheats.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: