ABCnews.com is out with a report raising serious questions about the legalities of faux-newsman Stephen Colbert’s, Doritos sponsored run for the White House.  At first glance it’s hard, actually near impossible to take Colbert’s Democrat and Republican campaign too seriously, but apparently that won’t stop the Federal government.

"The Federal Election Commission doesn't have a great sense of humor," said Massie Ritsch, director of communications for the non-partisan, Center for Responsive Politics.

Federal law bars corporations from contributing to candidates and while media organizations are allowed to cover campaigns, no precedent exists for a televeision network to promote the candidacy of one of their talk show hosts according to Lawrence M. Noble, a former general counsel for the Federal Election Commission.

"The real problem comes in the fact that he actually has his own show, talking about his campaign, paid for by a network," Noble said. "These are the kind of things on slow days you'd debate until the late afternoon at the FEC, but there are serious questions that come up. In theory, he could end up having some campaign finance problems."

This from the same agency that couldn’t that could find any wrongdoing on the part of the infamous Clinton/Gore ’96 campaign that took in bags of cash from poverty-stricken nuns and Chinese donors! 

Maybe instead of spending lazy afternoons worrying about a comedian playing the part of a Presidential candidate, the FEC could be looking into Hillary Clinton’s money laundering scam in New York’s Chinatown, where busboy’s at Chinese restaurants are donating the max to her campaign.  I know, I know, she’s cornered the market of the poor downtrodden busboys, who are struggling to pay New York City rents, but have an extra two grand lying around.

Cleveland Plain Dealer blogger Nark Naymik is out with the story that well-known mystic and actress Shirley MacLaine details Democrat Presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich’s close encounter with a UFO in her new book, “Sage-ing While Age-ing.”

Naymik quotes MacLaine’s recounting of the Cleveland Congressman’s encounter as follows, (Dennis) "had a close sighting over my home in Graham, Washington, when I lived there. Dennis found his encounter extremely moving. The smell of roses drew him out to my balcony where, when he looked up, he saw a gigantic triangular craft, silent, and observing him. It hovered, soundless, for ten minutes or so, and sped away with a speed he couldn't comprehend. He said he felt a connection in his heart and heard directions in his mind."

Not sure why I get the sense that the kooky actress has the series of events in the wrong order; it seems more likely to me that the little green men dropped off the man who’s running for President with the Department of Peace as a main platform item.  I’ll leave the anal probe punch lines to you.

The Congressional Medal of Honor is the highest award for valor in action against an enemy force that can be bestowed upon a member serving in the Armed Services of the United States.

In a White House ceremony early today President George W. Bush posthumously awarded that honor to the family of Navy Lt. Michael P. Murphy. Like all of the recipients of the Medal of Honor who proceeded him, Lt. Murphy's story is a seemingly familiar one; an average guy thrust into an extraordinary situation who disregards his personal safety and rises to feats of heroism.

When you read the stories of these amazing American you get the sense that most would be embarrassed to be labeled heroes; they were merely reacting the way they had been trained and that their buddies would have done the exact same thing under the circumstance.

It is for that reason that the Medal of Honor has risen to the level of reverence it rightfully deserves. There is a specific detailing of the stories and events that led to it being bestowed upon the recipient. The circumstances vary greatly, but the common thread is that of a warrior rising above and beyond the simple call of duty. While the World War Two era soldiers were dubbed The Greatest Generation and a reading of the medal of honor citations reveals that every era has their own greats.

Lt. Murphy's citation reads as follows:

For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty as the leader of a special reconnaissance element with Naval Special Warfare Task Unit Afghanistan on 27 and 28 June 2005. While leading a mission to locate a high-level anti-coalition militia leader, Lieutenant Murphy demonstrated extraordinary heroism in the face of grave danger in the vicinity of Asadabad, Konar Province, Afghanistan. On 28 June 2005, operating in an extremely rugged enemy-controlled area, Lieutenant Murphy's team was discovered by anti-coalition militia sympathizers, who revealed their position to Taliban fighters. As a result, between 30 and 40 enemy fighters besieged his four-member team. Demonstrating exceptional resolve, Lieutenant Murphy valiantly led his men in engaging the large enemy force. The ensuing fierce firefight resulted in numerous enemy casualties, as well as the wounding of all four members of the team. Ignoring his own wounds and demonstrating exceptional composure, Lieutenant Murphy continued to lead and encourage his men. When the primary communicator fell mortally wounded, Lieutenant Murphy repeatedly attempted to call for assistance for his beleaguered teammates. Realizing the impossibility of communicating in the extreme terrain, and in the face of almost certain death, he fought his way into open terrain to gain a better position to transmit a call. This deliberate, heroic act deprived him of cover, exposing him to direct enemy fire. Finally achieving contact with his headquarters, Lieutenant Murphy maintained his exposed position while he provided his location and requested immediate support for his team. In his final act of bravery, he continued to engage the enemy until he was mortally wounded, gallantly giving his life for his country and for the cause of freedom. By his selfless leadership, courageous actions, and extraordinary devotion to duty, Lieutenant Murphy reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

 

 

 

I’m amazed at all of my fellow bloggers who are posting on so-called Blog Action Day.   Today, bloggers around the world are supposed to unite, sing a chorus of Kumbaya and comment on the environment and offer up suggestions to “reduce your carbon footprint.”

 Sorry, but I won’t be participating in adding to the global warming panic created by nitwits like Al “Nobel” Gore; so I won’t be quoting his Web site.

I consider myself to be a common sense environmentalist: I recycle my weekly mountain of newspapers, packaging, bottles and cans.  I plan errands to knock out a bunch of stops in one trip, more to save time than anything else. Plus I do basic winterization of my home, more to save on natural gas bills than any carbon footprint.

These are the kinds of things I think many people do without having to resort to the ridiculous steps of over-priced, death trap, hybrid cars or Sheryl “One Sheet” Crow.

I drive a big honkin’ SUV, love red meat and imported strawberries year round.

I’ve done enough research to see the unintended consequences of radical environmentalism, like millions of deaths caused not by the use of DDT, but from malaria, which could have been curbed except for the banning of DDT.

I’ve also researched the last extended period of warming that the earth experienced, the Little Climatic Optimum where the planet’s inhabitants experienced a positive impact from temperature elevation rather than the catastrophe predicted by the environmental whack-a-moles. 

The LCO occurred during Medieval Times, which leads me to conclude the global warming likely has more to do with the S U N than the S U V.

 

 

 

 

For years I’ve been saying the solution to the illegal immigration problem is easy; simply take away the reason why most of these people illegally cross our border, money. 

We’ve been told by politicians from the President on down that it’s “impossible to deport,” the 12, 20 or 30 million (depending on which report you read) illegals in this country.  I bet the number of companies hiring these criminal aliens is a significantly lower figure and the way to force these law-breakers out of our country is to crack down hard on their paymasters.

The fines against those who hire criminal aliens should start at $5 million and go up from there.  If you have to make a choice between hiring an illegal, saving a few dollars and the chance you might lose your business, then I think most people would choose to keep their livelihood.

So how do we do this crack down?  We start with the long list of “do not match,” files; the laundry list of companies wanting to do the right thing and send payroll tax withholding (social security) to the government, only to find that the social security number given to them by their employee doesn’t match the name on file or the person or number doesn’t even exist.  Many times this is a case of identity theft.

Sounds like a good starting point right?  That is until U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, based in San Francisco (no surprise) steps in with a restraining order preventing the feds from starting just such a long overdue crack down.

The Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security were to send joint letters in September warning businesses they'll face penalties if they keep workers whose Social Security numbers don't match their names.

The new rule would require businesses to sort out any Social Security mismatches within 90 days of being notified by the government or to fire the employee involved.

Judge Breyer said he needed more time for his final ruling and that the restraining order was necessary because "it's clear ... there could be irreparable harm to plaintiffs" if the government went ahead with its plan as it stands.

The plaintiffs fighting against the government are a strange bedfellows mix of the union hacks at the AFL-CIO, the ACLU, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce!

It seems clear that if the judge is so concerned about the irreparable harm to the plaintiffs that he’s not concerned about the harm being done to this country by criminal aliens. 

There isn’t a problem we face in this country that hasn’t been exacerbated by the massive influx of illegals.  The high cost of health care, education, crime and punishment, are just a few of the problems made worse by criminal aliens.

For those of you worried that we’ll be paying $5 for a head of lettuce if we crack down on illegals, you already are; it’s just that the difference is divided up in your school taxes and your health insurance payments.

Until we use common sense and remove the reason they are here and secure our borders then we will continue to be buried in the high costs of illegal immigration.

 

 

 

 

 

Every U.S. citizen could get a 401 (k) retirement account and up to $1000 in matching funds per year under a proposal floated by Democrat Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

According to the AP, “Clinton said she wants to create "American Retirement Accounts" in which everyone could put up to $5,000 annually in a 401(k) plan. The federal government would provide a tax cut to match 100 percent of the first $1,000 for anyone who makes less than $60,000 a year and 50 percent of the first $1,000 for those who make $60,000-$100,000.”

All this sounds oddly similar to the abandoned Republican plan to privatize Social Security, giving citizens an opportunity to pick and choose investment vehicles.

It had me revisiting all of the opposition hoopla against privatizing the so-called social safety net. You know the litany of attacks and out right lies; there’s no guaranteed return, politicians will choose Wall Street firms to make your investment choices, what if the stock market goes down?

Which raises the question; where are most 401 (k) plans invested? Yep, the stock market! So how is the Hillary plan any different?

In the war of words over privatizing Social Security the left droned on and on about what a great success the program has been. Well if it’s so great, so successful, then why would we need Mrs. Clinton’s retirement account?

The answer is really simple; social security is a HUGE government boondoggle, which faces a numbers battle that pretty much doom it to failure in the not too distant future. Even a third grader can figure out too many people taking out, not enough people paying in, you’ve got to wonder why Democrats, Union hacks, and Senior groups don’t quite grasp the problem?

So how will Mrs. Clinton pay for latest re-distribution of of government largesse? Why taxing the “rich,” of course. “At a cost of $20 billion-$25 billion a year, the plan is Clinton's largest domestic proposal other than her plan for universal health insurance. The New York senator said it would be paid for by taxing estates worth more than $7 million per couple and would help narrow the gap between the rich and those who don't have enough savings for retirement.”

The plan raises more questions than it answers. Rather than raising taxes and crippling the economy, why not just allow people to keep their money (or a portion of it, which currently go into Social Security and allow them to invest it on their own? Wouldn’t that solve the issue without creating yet another big government boondoggle?