Wednesday, December 9, 2009

A Constitutional Right to A College Football Playoff?

A House subcommittee approved legislation Wednesday aimed at forcing college football to switch to a playoff system to determine its national champion, over the objections of some lawmakers who said Congress has meatier targets to tackle. Read
the rest of the story

The Kremlin on the Potomac is becoming more outrageous every day. How do these arrogant fools interpret a constitutional authority to decide how college football will crown a champion? It seems every day brings a new realm of life that these tyrants believe they can rule.

If you are milling around your opinion of college football's BCS system, the pre-BCS bowl arrangements or a possible playoff, STOP!!! One's personal opinion of college football's methodology is irrelevant. This is about runaway power in the hands of vile individuals who believe they are our rulers.


In a statement before the vote, BCS executive director Bill Hancock said, "With all the serious matters facing our country, surely Congress has more important issues than spending taxpayer money to dictate how college football is played."

The subcommittee chairman, Rep. Bobby Rush, an Illinois Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, said, "We can walk and chew gum at the same time."

I'll believe that when I see it, Congressman Rush. Since you are such a talented individual, maybe you should give this task a try: read the U.S. Constitution. It is obvious Mr. Rush and these other jackals believe they are the masters of all Americans, so he is in dire need of a liberty lesson. Then, maybe Mr. Rush can explain where he obtained the authority to mandate a college football playoff system.

Saturday, December 5, 2009

Barack Obama Doesn't Need Entrepreneurs

Erik Erickson posted this interesting nugget at earlier this week.

A friend of mine told me about a meeting he had with Goldman Sachs’ CEO in Atlanta at the beginning of the year. Someone asked the CEO what he thought of the new Obama administration. The CEO admitted he voted for Obama, but then said how stunned he was at lack of advisors surrounding Obama who had come from the private sector.

In fact, a new study shows Obama has fewer advisors who’ve made a living in the private sector than any other American President in the last 108 years — since the turn of the 20th century when the business of America became business.

This is not to say that the Chief Executive should have private sector experience. And this is not to say that the Chief Executive should employ only people from the
private sector. But it is to say that we should not trust a Chief Executive to know how to fix the private sector or “create competition” in health care when there is hardly a person near him who knows anything about job creation.

That is the key. More Americans than every before are on government handouts and the Democrats intend to take over 1/6th of the American economy — health care. This is an administration that has no understanding of and no commitment to the free market and the private sector, both of which are, at best, academic studies to ninety percent of Obama’s top advisors.

The Republican Party should be able to exploit this issue. The American people, at the end of the day, believe in, work in, and want to support the private sector. Contrary to the Obama and New York Times spin that there is no stigma attached to food stamps, the American people do not want to be dependent on the government for their food, health care, or income.

But that is Obama’s solution. To every problem, Obama offers government. He can offer no other because he has surrounded himself with no job creators, no producers, no captains of industry, and no free market champions. That’s not the change the American people were hoping for.

This played out with Obama's so-called "jobs summit" which was practically devoid of individuals who have ever created a job. There were plenty of academics and union bosses, but few entrepreneurs or anyone else who has ever had to meet a payroll. Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama is brilliant at campaigning and using the fawning Big Media to his advantage. But, this guy has a zero economic IQ. Of course, union bosses may not know how to create jobs, but they sure know how to write checks to the Democrat National Committee and Marxist politicians.

Tigergate: The Crime of the Century?

As I got in my car to head home from work almost every day this week, Sean Hannity was polluting the Sirius Patriot channel with the latest developments in the saga of Tiger Woods' car wreck, non-cooperation with authorities and affair. This story has dominated the media for over a week. Am I the only one who does not care at all about the relationship between Tiger and Tigerette? How can I be so "out of touch?"

  • Tiger Woods cannot raise my taxes.
  • Tiger Woods cannot take away my health care.
  • Tiger Woods cannot regulate my business.
  • Tiger Woods cannot enact policies that stifle job creation.
  • Tiger Woods cannot weaken our national security.
  • Tiger Woods cannot erode the plain meaning of the Constitution.
  • Tiger Woods cannot use his position to redistribute wealth.
  • If Tiger Woods is a Marxist, he cannot force that ideology on my country.
  • Tiger Woods cannot push the United States toward one-world governance.
  • Tiger Woods cannot sacrifice America's economy on the altar of the false god called Global Warming.
  • Tiger Woods cannot adjudicate or legislate attacks on traditional American values.

Do you get the picture? This is a story for Entertainment Tonight, The View, or some other mindless pop culture receptacle. Legitimate news programs should devote, at most, 30 seconds to this celebutard story at the end of a broadcast. It appears those whose job it is to keep the powerful honest will continue to fiddle while Rome burns. Bread and circuses for all!