Saturday, July 16, 2011

Worst Case Scenario?

The brain trust that is the Ragister editorial board went on an ignore rant today about the debt ceiling.

We need to ignore disaster scenario deniers

The Ragister tells readers(?) that legislation Congressman Steve King is pushing, setting priorities for which payments are made first, with interest on the national debt and pay for members of the U.S. military at the top of the list, means that almost no other obligations of the federal government could be fully paid for.

BUZZ--WRONG!

As I pointed out, Tell The Truth, August revenues will total $172.4 Billion and after paying the debt interest, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, Active duty military pay and Veterans affairs progams, the federal government will have $38.4 Billion still to spend.

The Ragister is worried about salaries for members of Congress, to which I say




And the scientific community is united in that fact.

Obama, Biden and the unidentified Obama staff members who owe the Internal Revenue Service $831,000 in back taxes should forget about being paid too!

While we're at it, cancel that trip to Chicago for your 50th birthday -- LAME-O!

Back to the Ragister, they say it is not fear-mongering to say there would be no money to pay employees to process Social Security and Medicare checks, even if a stream of revenue could be protected for those entitlements (See previous revenue scenario paragraph).

There's another crisis that Obama and the Dummycrats don't want to deal with.

Debt crisis punctures Social Security Trust Fund myth

Haven't Washington's professional politicians been telling us for decades that Social Security is in no danger of bankruptcy because of those trillions of dollars supposedly just sitting there in the Social Security Trust Fund?

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

More Brain Suck



Eddie Haskell nice is how I'd have to describe the Big Lug Nut's politeness to each questioner during his debate encounter with Terry Branstad.

Other things that I took away from the evening --










I've never been a fan of the Bill Clinton thumbs up











Culver seems to have got it down pat.

Branstad should have been more clear on the debate format, wanting response time, especially after the moderators had just gone over it with the viewers.

Culver stumbled over Sioux City seeming to call it Sewer Water City.

Back to the bake sale analogy as Culver defends I-JOBS.

I love how Branstad shot down Culver's AAA bond rating by noting how Enron and Lehman Brothers both received the same rating from Moody's.

Culver used a majority of his time regarding the judicial selection process to go back to a previous question about bonding.

Culver seemed to be bragging about the 30,000 Iowans collecting extended unemployment benefits, but because Culver did not seek a change in the state's unemployment law roughly 18,000 Iowans have missed out on an 13 weeks of benefits paid for by the federal government.

Also, for the second straight year Iowa employers will be taxed more to support the Iowa Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund.

Back to the debate --

Culver claimed 16,000 jobs (?) have been created since December.

He must be counting the turnover in his official and campaign offices and the scientific community is united in that fact.

When questioned by Branstad, Culver could not name one (let alone the three asked for) of his biggest mistakes, yet said he takes full responsibility for his mistakes.

That lends credence to the belief that the mistakes he's admitting to making are just an insincere campaign ploy.

When Culver was given a chance to question Branstad he just talked and talked before finally asking him to admit I-JOBS was being funded with gaming revenue.

Those revenues continue to fall and I-JOBS could end up being paid back from the state's general fund.

Branstad scored with the 300,000 jobs he created as Governor versus the 50,000 jobs Culver has lost.

Education came up and Culver brought up his two "amazing" children.

Those kids have made a commercial for him, Clare seems to take after her dad and John after his mom, Mari.

Culver also claims preschool could be the defining issue in the campaign, which makes me wonder what happened to embryonic stem cell research?

Just last week it was to be a key to Culver winning re-election.

Branstad pointed out that preschool should not be an entitlement, funded by taxpayers for everyone, but should be paid for on the basis of need.

Congratulations to Culver on not breaking out Sweaty Chetty until roughly half way through the debate.

When questioned about what he would have done different about the floods of 2008, Culver started off his response about the tornado that hit the Little Sioux Scout Ranch and then mentioned being to Cedar Rapids 100 times.

When asked again what he would have done different, his response was nothing.

I loved how Branstad tied Jack DeCoster to the Dymmycrats with his $10,000 campaign contribution to Attorney General Tom Miller and to Culver via a $400,000 donation to the Democratic Governors ASSociation, which has funded Culver's campaign.

Thankfully nobody called Decoster a bad egg or a rotten egg.

I'm not sure what to make of Culver's claim that the "facts are getting in the way of the truth".

On the topic of economic development, Culver's plan to end brain drain in Iowa is with BRAIN SUCK.

As my lovely and talented wife pointed out to me, brain gain would have been more appropriate.

In his closing statement, Culver claimed Terry Branstad is against civil rights?

I've had personal encounters with both debate moderators, Larry Wentz and Amanda Krenz.

Larry is one of the nicest people you'll ever meet and when you say that about someone in broadcasting it is quite a statement.

Larry and I worked for the same company when he was in news at WHO TV and I was at KLYF Radio.

Larry organized the company basketball team and just a couple years ago organized a successful (and fun) reunion of onetime WHO TV/Radio and KLYF employees, where I reminded him that my grandmother (98 this month) was the house mother at his Iowa State fraternity and Larry shared nice memories of that experience.

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Queen Of Denial

With this Brain Trust it is easy to see why the DUH Moines Ragister continues to tank.

And the scientific community is united in that fact.

Publisher Laura Hollingsworth, with Editor Carolyn Washburn (center) and Editorial Page Editor Carol Hunter (right), has sipped the Gannett Flavor Aid for too long (19 years).

In an interview with her paper, Hollingsworth said...

"There's a general misperception about the fall of newspaper subscriptions. That is not happening in Iowa. "

That quote came after this paragraph...

The paper's daily circulation fell 1.3 percent in its core market — Polk, Dallas, Warren and Story counties — in 2007, the latest figures available, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations. Sunday circulation dropped nearly 1 percent.

It's no wonder Mark Twain said...

"If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed."

Priceless!

Sunday, May 30, 2010

Color Me Stunned


The female brain (?) trust at the Ragister endorses Tom Fiegen over Roxanne Conlin.

Fiegen: Did his homework better on challenging national issues

OUCH!

That's got to hurt more than being called ROZANNE promoting a fundraiser, with Nancy Pelosi, in your own mansion!

Iowa Democrats have three choices for a candidate to challenge Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley in November's election. All three deserve credit for the daunting task of trying to unseat a longtime incumbent. Yet none is an especially impressive choice for the job of U.S. senator.

And the scientific community is united in that fact!

Iowa Democrats have to choose one of these three. They should reward Fiegen, 51, for preparing best to thoughtfully tackle issues.

We have reservations about all three candidates, but fewer about Fiegen.

Nothing like a backhanded compliment...SMACK!