Sen. Kerry was speaking to a collection of business and civic leaders when he brought up the South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford issue (at the time of his “joke”, Gov. Sanford hadn’t come clean with the affair). While mentioning that no one was really certain of where he was Kerry added “…too bad, if a governor had to go missing it couldn’t have been the governor of Alaska. You know, Sarah Palin.’’

Can we say tactless and crude? Maybe he should have tossed in a rape joke about Willow.

Yesterday, the RNC Chief of Staff Ken McKay sent the head of ABC News a complaint over their special “Prescription for America” asking that they be allowed a segment to provide the viewing public a moment to hear opposition to Obama’s plan to socialize our health care. His request was summarily rejected. There WILL be no opposition.

Dear Mr. Westin:

As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC’s astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.

Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party’s views to those of the President’s to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party’s opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.

In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.

Respectfully,
Ken McKay
Republican National Committee
Chief of Staff

…but the mainstream media ISN’T biased at all…

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney present during questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights?

Apparently now, if you are an armed combatant or terrorist suspect who is intent on killing or harming US Military officials, or civilians you too could be hearing this warning.

It’s nice to know that someone intent on terrorizing my country will have the right to remain silent until we can pay for his council who will most likely just silence the suspect more than they will on their own.

Representative Pete Hoekstra had this to say in response to the desire to Mirandize terrorist and combatants;

“When they mirandize a suspect, the first thing they do is warn them that they have the ‘right to remain silent. It would seem the last thing we want is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or any other al-Qaeda terrorist to remain silent. Our focus should be on preventing the next attack, not giving radical jihadists a new tactic to resist interrogation–lawyering up.”

Democrats are back to their same old tricks, treating terrorism as a law enforcement problem that just needs policing. What’s next, hugs and cookies to make them more comfortable?

THE HUNDRED DAYS: SUPPORTERS INSIST HE IS GREATEST PRESIDENT EVER

I want to hear from these people. If you’re a supporter of this President I want to know how you think he’s doing so far. Do you think he’s the greatest President we have EVER had in the 230+ years we have been the United States of America.

Honestly, in my opinion, while a President is in office, let alone in the first 100 days of his first term, you can’t accurately judge them against the history books and MAKE that call. There are over 1,300 days left in his first term, anything can happen.

So, Obama supporters… I ask you, will your man change Washington politics as it is today? Will he keep his campaign promises? Will we come out in 2012 safer and better off than ever before?

Her latest comments come in the form of a back peddle on her slap on returning war veterans.

“The report is not saying that veterans are extremists. Far from it… What it is saying is returning veterans are targets of right-wing extremist groups that are trying to recruit those to commit violent acts within the country. We want to do all we can to prevent that.

Janet, one question… What’s keeping Left-wing, or any other “wing” extremist groups from recruiting these persuadable veterans to their cause? Is the cause of the “right-wing extremist” just all that more appealing? Is the battle cry from the Animal Liberation Front, Earth Liberation Front, Earth First!, just not all that worrisome to our returning veterans? To dismiss this very targeted scope of our returning veterans as “an assessment of things just to be wary of” is just ridiculous.

To be fair, there IS a little spoken of DHS report from January titled, “Leftwing Extremists Likely to Increase Use of Cyber Attacks over the Coming Decade” but in all honesty is FAR less accusatory than the more recent memo aimed at the other end of the needle.

The private sector in this country seems to be hemorrhaging jobs… construction, manufacturing, and business services losing over 100,000 jobs in February alone, while service providing businesses lost around 375,000. Oddly enough, the government has added some 26,000 jobs in education and health service, and almost 9,000 in other government jobs.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports for 2008 show a net loss of nearly 3.6 Million jobs in the private sector, while government employment has increased by 150,000 in the same amount of time. While not even close to making up the difference it leads one to wonder if, when Obama promised all these NEW jobs, he merely meant government structured employment for the masses, at the expense of the private sector.

Why openly nationalize the private sector… you simply create government entities that mirror those in the red, and provide public employees with an identical job for the feds when their current job dries up. Eventually you won’t HAVE to publicly nationalize private businesses, as they’ll have closed up shop already leaving government as the ONLY option.

Nancy Pelosi and her cronies know full well that labeling their attempts at radio censorship as “The Fairness Doctrine” elicits an almost visceral negative reaction from a large majority of the American public. Thus the typical move from political types… re-branding. If you can’t sell a shit-burger as a shit-burger call it something nicer and the people will eat it up.

Dick Durbin, has issued an amendment to a bill in the Senate in order to “take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest.” They refuse to call a spade a spade, and are wrapping this blatant swipe at free speech in the cozy blanket of DIVERSITY and PUBLIC INTEREST.

Diversity in station ownership is bull squeeze first of all… you can run down the gamut of broadcast stations in the US and dole them out to as diverse a crowd of owners as you want… if they know anything about running a business, they give the listeners what they want and TADA! Nothing changes.

That is where the second caveat comes in “ensuring licenses are used in the public interest”… also known as, “you say what we think is good for people to hear, or we close down your radio show”.

The biggest problem I have with GOVERNMENT using the words “public interest” is that he who is in charge, controls what is in the public interest and that is NOT freedom. The free market as far as AM Talk Radio goes varies WIDELY based on where you’re listening in the country. I know for a fact I had to search for a good 30 min to find a Conservative voice on my radio when driving through Wisconsin and during a week long visit to San Jose, it was equally as hard. Yet in Oklahoma it’s just the opposite.

The markets deliver what their consumers want and because the market for talk radio is in the Republican majority, nation wide… folks like the bride of Skelator feel it is within their right as a majority in government, to interfere with the free market. They’re doing so in all the other aspects of the US Economy, might as well be FAIR, right?

Trust me on this… Congress WILL make a move to silence free speech on radio air waves. I won’t guarantee their success or failure but the cards are already in their deck. So long as they refuse to label it “the Fairness Doctrine” their fearless leader can endorse it without looking like a bald faced liar as well.

BILL PRESS: All they’re talking about is making sure there’s a variety of voices on the radio. God bless America. We’re a diverse country, everybody should be heard.

STEVE MALZBERG: We’re a free country, and everybody has a right to run the businesses the way they want. But let me ask a question…

PRESS: But wait, when they have public airwaves I own?

MALZBERG: Then let me ask you this question: why doesn’t all this apply to television? Why can’t I sit next to little Katie Couric and answer my point of view on her point of view and the reporter’s point of view as they present their stories?

PRESS: You know what? I’m going to be honest with you. I know nothing about the television licenses.

MALZBERG: C’mon, you never watch news?

PRESS: No, no. I know nothing about television licenses. I’m a talk radio host…

MALZBERG: It’s the airwaves though, not cable, but the CBS, NBC, ABC, same license.

PRESS: You can make any argument you want. I know nothing about how television works even though I worked in it most of my life.

MALZBERG: But Bill, that’s the airwaves, too, not cable but the airwaves. It’s public, it has to be the same concept.

PRESS: I’m interested in talk radio, that’s what I do every day…

MALZBERG: That’s all politicians are interested in, very strange.

PRESS: No, it’s not strange to me. I know why I’m interested in it because I get up every morning at 3:45, I do three hours of talk radio every day from six to nine, that’s my life, it’s my business, I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard.

Yes Bill, we ARE a diverse country… but we’re also a Capitalist one were those who are successful thrive and those who aren’t become irrelevant. I know, boo hoo… sucks doesn’t it.

If my town has two auto repair shops and one of them is thriving, I don’t go passing laws to suppress the success of one in order to make things fair for the other. Nothing is different with radio. If you’re not entertaining or are not putting out the content that listeners are willing to tune into you will NOT be successful… so far, Liberals on the radio have yet to come up with a successful way to put their message on the air, and rather than restructure their efforts and give it the old college try, they want to lean on their reliance on government force to silence the opposing side in the name of “fairness”.

Establishing censorship to boost the success of a failed business model is no different than dumping tax dollars into a broken economy and expecting it to just “fix itself”. It doesn’t work and in the end will only succeed in making things worse.

It would be a nice thing to have a one stop shop for ALL my medical records no matter where I happen to be. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve moved and had to shell out hundreds for new dental scans etc. because my old Dentist is unwilling to share his records. That portion of the bill I don’t seem to have much of a problem with.

Then comes the ulterior motive of control. Alongside the provisions to modernize and centralize medical records comes the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology. Yet another red tape bureaucracy formed to monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what they deem “appropriate and cost effective”.

Cost effective? (read: most bang for their buck) Why would they want to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars curing breast cancer in an elderly woman? She’s not going to be a tax paying citizen much longer… instead, help out that cute 20 something that just walked in the door, after all she should be around to milk for taxes for decades to come.

So while you’re sitting at home thinking how wonderful it will be when we climb out of debt by going into debt think to yourself… just how much of my individuality am I willing to give up for all this BS?

Not that I agree with him most of the time… more because he knows how to push people’s buttons and get under their skin. Pissed off people are the best because, like scared people, their true selves show through. He is a MASTER at peeling back the wool and showing people’s true colors.

Towards the end of last week Rush Limbaugh was commenting on the new administration and has been reduced to a sound bite to rile up the masses of Obama worshipers in preparation for their strike on free speech. Here is a transcript of the relevant portion they’re all pissed off about.

I got a request here from a major American print publication. “Dear Rush: For the Obama [Immaculate] Inauguration we are asking a handful of very prominent politicians, statesmen, scholars, businessmen, commentators, and economists to write 400 words on their hope for the Obama presidency. We would love to include you. If you could send us 400 words on your hope for the Obama presidency, we need it by Monday night, that would be ideal.” Now, we’re caught in this trap again. The premise is, what is your “hope.” My hope, and please understand me when I say this. I disagree fervently with the people on our side of the aisle who have caved and who say, “Well, I hope he succeeds. We’ve got to give him a chance.” Why? They didn’t give Bush a chance in 2000. Before he was inaugurated the search-and-destroy mission had begun. I’m not talking about search-and-destroy, but I’ve been listening to Barack Obama for a year-and-a-half. I know what his politics are. I know what his plans are, as he has stated them. I don’t want them to succeed.

If I wanted Obama to succeed, I’d be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he’s talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don’t want this to work. So I’m thinking of replying to the guy, “Okay, I’ll send you a response, but I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.” (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here’s the point. Everybody thinks it’s outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, “Oh, you can’t do that.” Why not? Why is it any different, what’s new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what’s gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don’t care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: “Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails.” Somebody’s gotta say it.

He makes the comparison to the previous eight years under former President George Bush where throngs of liberals made it known daily that they wished similar failure on our President and makes the point that to do so now is suddenly “not cool”.

Were the liberals out there hoping Bush succeeded or were they out there trying to destroy him before he was even inaugurated? Why do we have to play the game by their rules? Why do we have to accept the premise here that because of the historical nature of his presidency, that we want him to succeed?

I do feel he could have made the same point using less dramatic wording but then it wouldn’t be Rush. The man will tell you to your face that he is going to piss you off and then you get pissed off… why are we suddenly shocked?

Congressional Democrats are now making television appearances and have even drafted up a petition to show just how pissed off they are. Grow up people… there’s this small portion of our rights as US Citizens that grants us the right to express what we feel. Too bad if it makes you mad or upsets you, freedom of speech does not entitle you to the right to only hear what you agree with.

Shouldn’t our politicians be more concerned over how many billions of our tax dollars to waste bailing out companies who’s only goals are to waste the money anyway? The only reason they’re setting this example is to pave the way for their push on the Fairness Doctrine and the drive to silence opinions outside their platform on any form of media.

The Fairness Doctrine had a purpose… back when competition was scarce. You had 5 channels MAX on TV and very little to choose from on your radio for news so balancing out what came out of those outlets was necessary. Fast forward to 2009 when people have hundreds of channels on TV, live feeds from both floors of Congress and access to anything and everything in the nanosecond press world online and off. The market of talk radio has pushed Conservative Opinion Radio to the top… it does well because people tune in. Restricting what is aired because you dislike it is a violation of the first amendment to the US Constitution the so called “representative” government is sworn to uphold and protect.

Like it or not, people listen to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and many others… if the population of this country decided enough was enough and stopped listening, their jobs would cease to exist. Government need not involve itself in the situation.