"This was the lead in [Thursday] afternoon's Chicago Tribune story, following the conviction of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich: 'The Illinois Senate voted to remove Gov. Rod Blagojevich from office Thursday, marking the first time in the state's long history of political corruption that a chief executive has been impeached and convicted.' The vote to oust Blagojevich, who is a Democrat, was very close ... 59-0. The thing which struck me about the Trib's lead was the phrase 'the state's long history of political corruption.' What a wonderful legacy to the Republic that its fifth most populous State have a 'long history of corruption.' And how absolutely marvelous that the very state which has that 'long history of corruption' happens to the be the home state of ... Oh, my. Can it be? Yes! President Barack Obama. The only person ever to have served in the Illinois State Senate to have emerged with his robes unsoiled; his hands unsullied; his soul pure. It is as if you cannot just say his name. Angels have to sing it: Baaaaarrrrraaaaack Ohhhhhbaaaaaahhhhma. Well, we'll see. The thing about Blagojevich I have disliked the most is how hard it is to remember how to spell his name. Sort of like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Or Albuquerque. Gray Davis was recalled in California. Elliott Spitzer resigned in New York. And now Rod Blogzoiub;zytch has been convicted of impeachment in Illinois. While they certainly do not have the corner on corruption and bad behavior, it seems to me that Democratic Governors are in a slump." --political analyst Rich Galen

And how absolutely marvelous that the very state which has that 'long history of corruption' happens to the be the home state of ... Oh, my. Can it be? Yes! President Barack Obama.

One thing to remember is that President Obama is not an IL native and he was only an IL senator for a couple years if I'm not mistaken (I know it wasn't very long). So yes, its easy for him to come out of IL "unsoiled". What horrible editorializing to infer that because President Obama came from a place known for its corruption that somehow he must be as well.

---

And how absolutely marvelous that the very state which has that 'long history of corruption' happens to the be the home state of ... Oh, my. Can it be? Yes! President Barack Obama.

One thing to remember is that President Obama is not an IL native and he was only an IL senator for a couple years if I'm not mistaken (I know it wasn't very long). So yes, its easy for him to come out of IL "unsoiled". What horrible editorializing to infer that because President Obama came from a place known for its corruption that somehow he must be as well.

I've never met a clean politician. What's horrible is that no one notices.

---

And how absolutely marvelous that the very state which has that 'long history of corruption' happens to the be the home state of ... Oh, my. Can it be? Yes! President Barack Obama.

One thing to remember is that President Obama is not an IL native and he was only an IL senator for a couple years if I'm not mistaken (I know it wasn't very long). So yes, its easy for him to come out of IL "unsoiled". What horrible editorializing to infer that because President Obama came from a place known for its corruption that somehow he must be as well.

I've never met a clean politician. What's horrible is that no one notices.

Oh, we all notice. Most of us have simply accepted that as a fact of life. Its not wrong until you get caught (not my philosophy, to clarify). Then the fun begins!

---

"This was the lead in [Thursday] afternoon's Chicago Tribune story, following the conviction of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich: 'The Illinois Senate voted to remove Gov. Rod Blagojevich from office Thursday, marking the first time in the state's long history of political corruption that a chief executive has been impeached and convicted.' The vote to oust Blagojevich, who is a Democrat, was very close ... 59-0. The thing which struck me about the Trib's lead was the phrase 'the state's long history of political corruption.' What a wonderful legacy to the Republic that its fifth most populous State have a 'long history of corruption.' And how absolutely marvelous that the very state which has that 'long history of corruption' happens to the be the home state of ... Oh, my. Can it be? Yes! President Barack Obama. The only person ever to have served in the Illinois State Senate to have emerged with his robes unsoiled; his hands unsullied; his soul pure. It is as if you cannot just say his name. Angels have to sing it: Baaaaarrrrraaaaack Ohhhhhbaaaaaahhhhma. Well, we'll see. The thing about Blagojevich I have disliked the most is how hard it is to remember how to spell his name. Sort of like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Or Albuquerque. Gray Davis was recalled in California. Elliott Spitzer resigned in New York. And now Rod Blogzoiub;zytch has been convicted of impeachment in Illinois. While they certainly do not have the corner on corruption and bad behavior, it seems to me that Democratic Governors are in a slump." --political analyst Rich Galen

if he can´t write political analysis which is based on facts, it would be better
if he start to write pure fiction, but not science fiction, he is not that good.

Governors, senators and elected politicians have been selected to do a job, corruption and repetative corruption is the constitutional responsibility. For a nation practicing politics each and everyday, it may be considered reflective of the mechanism and those who scramble to acheive a place among it. Considering that, a changing environment and changing personnel will bring fresh challenges for some who may be/may not be educated enough or bring the right tools to the table. The prime focus for politics of this era seems to be financial equity and its tumultousity. That can be very hectic for a little number of people manipulating larger numbers of people. Blupers and risks...

European parliment has member states that share presidency and operate the decisions on a 'term' of individual presidency. Its transparent nature can be obvious and perhaps the American national inbred identity has not recognised the teething problems of newer politicians coming to the table. America has a special unity of national identity which I believe serves the nation first and formost. Follow the big names, the're not messing about. Everyones got an idea, but, experience counts, and sometimes its better saying less.


My opinion, who is trustworthy, educated enough and caring enough?

Stick with those once the're proven regardless of term duration...

Boss is boss...

Nice show you just put on TV. Where's my dinner and champagne? So much for doing away with earmarks just cuz it's always been done before. Long life the status quo!

---

me@rescam.org

Hope & change:

If there wasn't enough of a three-ring legal circus while her husband was president, now Hillary Clinton has to respond to a legal proceeding, too. On behalf of State Department employee David Rodearmel, the watchdog group Judicial Watch filed suit challenging Hillary's eligibility for secretary of state based on Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution, known legally as the "Emoluments" Clause. Despite Congress readjusting the salary of both the secretary of state and secretary of the interior as a fix to get around the Constitution and allow both Hillary and former Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado to serve, the plaintiffs argue that the secretary of state's compensation was still increased during Sen. Clinton's term in office, which began in 2007, and thus renders Hillary ineligible until 2013. To decide otherwise, argues Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, would be to allow an "end run" around the Constitution.

The case, Rodearmel v. Clinton, is pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on an expedited basis. Given President Obama's track record of selecting scofflaws for cabinet posts, Mrs. Clinton's circumstances aren't surprising.

Hope & change:

If there wasn't enough of a three-ring legal circus while her husband was president, now Hillary Clinton has to respond to a legal proceeding, too. On behalf of State Department employee David Rodearmel, the watchdog group Judicial Watch filed suit challenging Hillary's eligibility for secretary of state based on Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution, known legally as the "Emoluments" Clause. Despite Congress readjusting the salary of both the secretary of state and secretary of the interior as a fix to get around the Constitution and allow both Hillary and former Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado to serve, the plaintiffs argue that the secretary of state's compensation was still increased during Sen. Clinton's term in office, which began in 2007, and thus renders Hillary ineligible until 2013. To decide otherwise, argues Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, would be to allow an "end run" around the Constitution.

The case, Rodearmel v. Clinton, is pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on an expedited basis. Given President Obama's track record of selecting scofflaws for cabinet posts, Mrs. Clinton's circumstances aren't surprising.

And to the above, I say pfft.

---

The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's

Jay Leno:
In Hawaii, a billion-dollar Navy warship has run aground, and they can't get it unstuck. Its name? The USS Economy.

The economy is so bad right now Barack Obama's new slogan is "Spare Change You Can Believe In."

The jobless rate has jumped to 7.6 percent, the worst since 1974, and economists are now worried this could lead to a resurgence of disco.

It looks like more than 13,000 people were caught up in that Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme. You know what a Ponzi scheme is? That's where you throw good money after bad, or as the government calls it, a stimulus package.

It came out today that the House Democratic Caucus spent $500,000 of taxpayer money for retreats at luxury resorts and spas -- though Democrats say that the time was used for "strategic planning for the country." Really? Then what's the Capitol building for?

President Obama, getting very tough now, has imposed a $500,000 salary cap for executives getting federal bailout money. And, listen to this: Now on weekends, they can only play miniature golf.

See, the whole theory behind this salary cap is if you're not performing well, and you're taking taxpayer money, then that should be reflected in lower wages. Of course, under that criteria, everybody in Congress should get like, what, two bucks an hour?

See, the whole theory behind this salary cap is if you're not performing well, and you're taking taxpayer money, then that should be reflected in lower wages. Of course, under that criteria, everybody in Congress should get like, what, two bucks an hour?

The highest political office in the U.S. is the Office of the President, who's wages were recently increased by George W. Bush from $200,000/yr to $450,000/yr, which is still under $500,000/yr as specified by the cutoff.

I honestly don't know other's wages, but are you saying that every person in Washington makes more than the President of the U.S.?

---

What about all of the workers who build jets and pilots who fly jets are put out of work, because the government says corporations can't use corporate jets anymore.
Government meddling in one area always negatively affects another area.

those corporations jets and their workers are concern only to those corporations, not government

See, the whole theory behind this salary cap is if you're not performing well, and you're taking taxpayer money, then that should be reflected in lower wages. Of course, under that criteria, everybody in Congress should get like, what, two bucks an hour?

The highest political office in the U.S. is the Office of the President, who's wages were recently increased by George W. Bush from $200,000/yr to $450,000/yr, which is still under $500,000/yr as specified by the cutoff.

I honestly don't know other's wages, but are you saying that every person in Washington makes more than the President of the U.S.?

I can't speak for Jay leno, but I think he was saying that politicians should get paid what they are worth, which is around "$2 an hour". He is not saying they are making more than $500,000 which they are definitly not.

What about all of the workers who build jets and pilots who fly jets are put out of work, because the government says corporations can't use corporate jets anymore.
Government meddling in one area always negatively affects another area.

Along those same lines, Obie said publically that in these rough economic times people should not be traveling to Las Vegas. Seriously? Is this fair for the people who work there? Why did he single out Las Vegas? Is Obie saying that everyone in Vegas should be laid off? lmao!

I'm not beating the drum, but, for someone who is educated enough to say what its like having 'arse' repremanded, I think they'd agree that $500,000 is more than reasonable payment. And keep your medals.

And sometimes just planting the idea of being sensible is enough for someone to be sensible.

As an advanced economically adept citizen I would consider recession an attack, it could be considered economically good advice to use a financial luxury as a safty mechanism of preventative stature.

A stimulus debate without politics?

By George F. Will
THE WASHINGTON POST

February 12, 2009

The president, convinced that the only thing America has to fear is an insufficiency of fear, has warned that “disaster” and “catastrophe” are the certain alternatives to swift passage of the stimulus legislation. One marvels at his certitude more than one envies his custody of this adventure.

Certitude of one flavor or another is never entirely out of fashion in Washington. Thirty years ago, some conservatives were certain that their tax cuts would be so stimulative that they would be completely self-financing. Today, some liberals are certain that the spending they favor – on green jobs, infrastructure and everything else – will completely pay for itself. For liberals, “stimulus spending” is a classification that no longer classifies: All spending is, they are certain, necessarily stimulative.

At Yale's 1962 commencement, President John Kennedy expressed Washington's recurring confidence in the ability to supplant politics with expertise. As is traditional, Kennedy deplored “traditional labels” and insisted that “differences today” involve not clashes of principles but only “matters of degree.” Kennedy argued that “the practical management of a modern economy” is “basically an administrative or executive problem.” Congress need not intrude. Because policy issues are “sophisticated and technical questions,” demanding “technical answers, not political answers,” laypersons could hardly participate in the debate.

In December 1965, John Maynard Keynes, although 19 years dead, was, as today, enjoying one of his recurring resurrections as vindicator of government management of the economy by manipulating “aggregate demand.” Keynes' visage was on Time magazine's cover and the accompanying story said that happy days were here again and here to stay.

President Lyndon Johnson was embarked on building the Great Society, assisted by policy-makers who, wrote Time, “have used Keynesian principles” to smooth the moderate business cycles and achieve price stability: “Washington's economic managers scaled these heights by their adherence to Keynes' central theme” that a modern economy can operate at “top efficiency” only with government “intervention and influence.” So, “economists have descended in force from their ivory towers and now sit confidently at the elbow of almost every important leader in government and business, where they are increasingly called upon to forecast, plan and decide.” Ten years later, the “misery index” – the unemployment rate plus the inflation rate – was 19.9, heading for 22 percent in 1980.

Today, again, we are told that “politics” has no place in the debate about the tripartite stimulus legislation, which is partly a stimulus, partly liberalism's agenda of social engineering, and partly the beginning of “remaking” the economy. Gary Wolfram of Hillsdale College notes that the size of the stimulus – the House-Senate compromise bill is $789 billion – is just slightly less than the amount of all U.S. currency in circulation, and is larger than the entire federal budget was until 1983. Yet it is said that in the debate about this encompassing legislation – which concerns what government can and should do, and ultimately what kind of regime America shall have – people should “transcend” (so says Larry Summers, the president's economic adviser) politics. What, then, would be left for political argument to be about?

It is said that the negligible Republican support for the stimulus legislation means that bipartisanship is dead. But what can “bipartisanship” mean concerning legislation that concerns almost everything?

John McCain probably was eager to return to the Senate as an avatar of bipartisanship, a role he has enjoyed. It is, therefore, a measure of the recklessness of House Democrats that they caused the stimulus debate to revolve around a bill that McCain dismisses as “generational theft.”

The federal government, with its separation of powers and myriad blocking mechanisms, was not made for speed but for safety. This is particularly pertinent today because if $789 billion is spent ineffectively or destructively, government does not get to say “oops” and take a mulligan. Senate Republicans have slowed and altered the course of the “disaster! catastrophe!” stampede. Still, as Anthony Trollope wrote in one of his parliamentary novels, “The best carriage horses are those which can most steadily hold back against the coach as it trundles down the hill.”

Not yet a third of the way through the president's “first 100 days,” he and we should remember that it was not FDR's initial burst of activity in 1933 that put the phrase “100 days” into the Western lexicon. It was Napoleon's frenetic trajectory in 1815 that began with his escape from Elba and ended near the Belgian village of Waterloo.

---

me@rescam.org

Obie rewards political doners with fat contracts in stimulus bill, go figure...

FEBRUARY 12, 2009, 3:22 P.M.ET
GE, Tech Win Big in Stimulus Bill

WASHINGTON -- High technology and diversified conglomerates that helped shape the contours of the stimulus plan emerged as big winners in the draft bill scheduled for a vote Friday.

General Electric Co., whose CEO Jeff Immelt serves as a White House adviser, will likely benefit from a dozen different provisions in the bill, from appliance rebates to water treatment spending and wind energy tax breaks. Big donors to President Barack Obama's campaign, such as Google Corp. and Microsoft Corp., stand to benefit from billions of dollars slated for technology infrastructure, environmental and educational projects aimed at improving U.S. competitiveness.