What is it about our “leaders”?  Can they just not get anything right?

 NoPoli is often accused of “discriminating” against Obama and the Democrats.  Not so, folks.  NoPoli is an equal opportunity critic.  It dislikes all lawmakers who put their own agendas ahead of We The People.  Unfortunately, that means just about all of them.

 In this case, the GOP are even bigger jerks than Obama and the Dems.  And that really is not easy to accomplish.

 Perhaps because they’re becoming a little bit anxious about 2012, the left side of the aisle has actually offered a ton of concessions to resolve all of this debt ceiling business.  Enough so that Boener and most of the GOP were prepared to go along and claim a legitimate victory for We The People in achieving these changes.  (Of course, it’s always about the victory, isn’t it, instead of just focusing on We The People?)

 But not good enough for Cantor and the rest of the GOP, who have now forced Boener to recant the agreement he had signaled the other day, and fall back to the typical business as usual political behavior of abandoning the public trust.  No matter the outcome, Boener and Cantor have each made clear that, like Obama, Pelosi and Reid, they too just do not have what it takes to be real leaders.  Too bad because Boener had showed promise.  And, he has a better golf game than Obama, who is really more interested in telling everyone he could have made it in the NBA.

 Perhaps these so called “leaders” would make good poker players, gambling as they do with, and spending, the resources of We The People, but that doesn’t mean they are good leaders.  It is totally wrong to raise the blood pressure of social security recipients who are now worried–unfairly and unnecessarily–that their vital social security benefits may soon be delayed (modest as they are in contrast to the benefits to which Weiner the weasel is now entitled, for his wonderful short-lived service to We The People).  Or to see the credit rating of the federal government impaired, and the cost of our national debt raised even higher than it presently is.  To waste any of our precious public resources on this unnecessary nonsense is just entirely inappropriate.  In fact, it’s truly quite obscene.  And demonstrates–once again–just how morally bankrupt our political “leaders” are.

As 2012 approaches, we really need to focus on sending these leaders home, and finding replacements for them who actually will be willing to serve…We The People.

By the way, California Controller John Chiang had a solution when California lawmakers recently stalled on approving a new budget, as they do every year.  He recently told them he would not issue their next paychecks, then only two weeks off, if they didn’t quit screwing around and do their job.  The new budget, mired in typical politics at that point for some several months, was signed, sealed and delivered in only one week!  How refreshing was that?

When is all this political bunk going to stop?  However, if it did, what would we here at NoPoli have to do?  Somehow…we’re not all that worried. 

Has it just been a particularly bad period for former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger or has it just been still another in a countless list of politician misdeeds on top of politician misdeeds?

Ahnold is clearly having a particularly bad run.

On exiting from office, U.S. presidents and state governors often give their political “buds” a get out of jail free card–literally.  Why does this happen just as these political leaders are leaving office?  Is it because this “customary” ugly exit practice is even uglier than the typical ugly behavior of our political representatives that goes on all the time, and is saved up for when our lame duckers are least accountable?

Just before leaving office, Ahnold reduced the prison sentence of Esteban Nunez from 16 years to seven.  Nunez was a participant in a fatal knife incident in which a young college student was killed.  There was no question of Nunez’ complicity; his sentencing followed a plea of guilty.  Why did the Governator reduce Nunez’ sentence?  Was it because Nunez was old or ill and Ahnold didn’t think he should die in prison?  No.  Was it because Nunez was a stellar citizen who had contributed mightily to society and was deserving of some special dispensation for a solitary weak moment?  No.  So, what was it?

Oh yeah, Nunez is the son of former California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, a politcal ”colleague” of Schwarzenegger.  As Ahnold put it himself, ”Of course you help a friend.”  And “of course” no worries about the integrity of our criminal justice system.  In a complete break from customary practice, the Governor did not bother to consult with the family of the victim or the prosecutors who had brought the case against Nunez–and who are now suing to set aside the sentence reduction.  Our political leaders seem to think that our country is just their special playground, theirs with which to do whatever they please.

And let’s talk about another one of Ahnold’s personal “playgrounds,” the child he and his and (now separated) wife Maria Schriver’s housekeeper managed to produce together–while each was married, but not to one another.  One can only imagine how many times the two of them had to practice their union in order to produce that result.  If that were not enough, imagine that for some ten years thereafer that child was a regular guest in Maria’s home, where ”husband” Ahnold and the housekeeper maintained their lie and allowed Maria to fawn over the supposed child of the loyal housekeeper and the housekeeper’s then husband!

Can you imagine how Maria felt when she finally learned the truth?  No small wonder that Maria moved out, with their own three children, and has retained divorce counsel.

What is it about all of these demented social and fiscal abuses on the part of our political “leaders?”  Is it that only bad people seek political office or is there something about political office that turns our political representatives into bad people?

What’s in a word?  “Politicalization.”  Is that a word?  Not sure.  But it sure seems to fit what’s on my mind today.  So let’s give it a definition.  My definition.

At least for purposes of this blog, “politicalization” will mean the act of making ”political” something that really ought not to be political (ignoring the observation that most everything is “political” to some extent).

Take the “taking out” of Osama Bin Ladin.  How do I feel about that?  I understand, and respect, all the arguments against an act like that.  Against capital punishment.  And perhaps we can debate that another time. But not today.

For now, I feel GREAT about the taking out of Osama Bin Ladin.  Like a breath of fresh air.  A new day.  With no apologies to those who would contend there’s never any justification for capital punishment, sorry (hmmm, guess I did apologize, must be something nagging at me about this), but the execution of Osama Bin Ladin was just a ”great” happenining as far as I’m concerned.

First and foremost, it’s a great moral booster for our troops who are giving their all to protect us.  Talk about ”winning one for the Gipper,” this is a great victory for them, our troops out there in harm’s way, to protect us.  Not a victory for our political representatives, but a victory for our troops.

And great for our country too.  The lives we have given up, and are giving up.  The billions of extra dollars we are spending on national security.  (Just think about the cost in time and money of getting on an airplane today.)  In some small way, this was payback for what Osama Bin Ladin owed us.  Osama Bin Ladin.  I hate even saying the man’s name.  (Was he a “man”?)  From now on, I’ll just say OBL.

As far as I’m concerned, OBL got off lucky.  The only regret I have is that we didn’t take him live.  He got off  WAY too easy.  He ought to have received, first hand, an exposure to justice in our courts of law.  We ought to have given him his day in court, a platform to extoll his “virtues.”  And then locked him away, forever, in a tiny cell where he could extoll his virtues all he might want, forever–to himself.

The ultimate in cave dwelling for this man who supposedly lived in caves–but was finally found living his life in a million dollar compound (mansion?) near the center of…Pakistan!  Pakistan, our supposed ally, but that, too, is another story for another day.

And bringing OBL back alive would have stopped all of the “conspirator” fans who, with the help of the media, are already up in arms, asking, as they no doubt will for years to come, why President Obama didn’t bring back the body so we could verify that the body buried at sea really was OBL.

Oh yeah, and by the way, just a little aside, THIS is how to fight a war against terrorists.  Get in and get out!

But is this a great day for our politicians?  No way!  Not on “my” watch.  We should NOT politicize (now that is a word) this event.  This happening.

What this is NOT–and should not be–is a great day for any of our political representatives.  This should not be about politics.  A well executed execution?  Absolutely.  Kudos to our military and intelligence community that (finally) managed to pull this off, and to pull it off so well (ignoring that they we haven’t heard yet why they couldn’t have brought OBL back alive).

To my delightful surprise, “we the people” seem to have this right.  Preliminary poll results show no significant change in Obama’s approval ratings!  And that’s EXACTLY as it should be.  Nothing here should have any impact whatsoever on the 2012 elections.  Hopefully, we the people will make sure it doesn’t.

          Gee, I must be confused.  For the past two years, I’ve been listening to the Democrats whine how the Republicans are the…anti-party, the party that won’t come to the table, the party that won’t engage in good faith bipartisanship…with the Democrats.  Isn’t that what we’ve been hearing–over and over?

          Well, let’s take a look at a couple of developments in just the past few days:

          1.  Senate Republicans, led by minority leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, first refused to bend on extending the moratorium on earmark and pork barrel legislation.  A funny thing happened on the way to the forum.  McConnell and his Senate Republican colleagues listened to we the people–admitted that they needed to listen to we the people–and reversed engines and voted to extend the moratorium.  Kudos to them for doing the right thing.  And who is it that refused to listen to we the people?  Right, Democratic Senator majority “leader” Harry Reid.  Recently re-elected and safe for another term, he told we the people to stuff it.  He voted to protect pork barrel.

          2.  And then there’s California Representative Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House.  The political representative that so many seem to love to hate.  Ever wonder why that is?  Is it her politics or is it her…haughty, naughty personality?  Well, whatever it is, she presided over one of the worst political collapses in decades.  Sixty lost seats in the House on her watch.  One would think that Speaker Pelosi would have got the message, recognized that it was time for her to step to the sidelines and allow some fresh blood to lick the wounds of her party and rebuild the machine.  But not Ms. Pelosi.  For her, it’s all about…her.  So, she pulled out all the stops and  imposed her will on her own party, saying that she needed to be elected minority leader of her part–to protect what she helped orchestrate and enact, and what we the people have so soundly rejected.  And her fellow Democratic colleagues in the House–lacking any spine or backbone–buckled under and chose to ignore we the people, who had made it clear they want to see some fresh leadership, some fresh thinking and some change of direction, and today elected Ms. Pelosi minority leader of their party in the house.

          So, which party is it that isn’t listening to we the people, or coming to the table?  And whose party is it going to be?

          For some time now, I have been expressing the view that the unions have really been threatening, and destroying, our economy, particularly in the area of public pension entitlements, but otherwise as well. 

          The November 19 issue of The Week reports that the combined shortfall in funding public pension entitlements could reach $3.4 TRILLION—more than double this year’s total federal deficit!!!  In many cities, these obligations will soon consume a quarter or more of their annual budget—money that should otherwise be used for parks, libraries, street maintenance and public safety.  As the New York Times recently put it, this just can’t go on.  As I previously reported, Colorado is the lone voice in the wilderness judicially testing whether already vested pension fund entitlements can be voided on the grounds that they are not “sustainable,” without having to recklessly wait for actual governmental collapse to get out from under.

           No matter what, the strength and influence of the unions in this country today, and elsewhere as well, is simply way too strong and uncontrolled for the good of we the people.  Instead of our governments running the unions, the unions are running our governments.  And you know precisely what I mean!

          Relief may be in sight—oddly enough, from the State of Michigan, long a stronghold of union support.

          Historically, with the single exception of its state Senate, which has consistently been Republican, the State of Michigan has, thanks to the UAW, always been a BLUE state.  Not any more!  Seen the results of the recent mid-term elections in Michigan?

          In addition to its Senate continuing to be Republican controlled, it’s House of Representatives, for the first time in more than a decade is now controlled by the Republican party.  It’s Governor-elect and Lieutenant Governor-elect are now Republicans.  So, too, are its new Attorney General and Secretary of State.  And, the majority of its State Supreme Court Justices, elected by we the people, are now also Republicans.  All at the same time.

          Strange as it may seem, in the land of General Motors and the UAW, Michigan may soon be a RIGHT TO WORK state!  Hard to believe.  More frightening for the UAW and other unions around the country, this may be a harbinger of things to come, frightfully for the unions, but great for we the people and the country.  Don’t underestimate the power of we the people.  And don’t forget that we may saying for some time to come that roping in those unions all started right here in…Michigan!  Giddyup:)

          Spelling Bees invoke beautiful images of our youth in one hamlet after another across the country, hard at work, studying diligently and building their self esteem and preparing to make their way in the world.

          Contrast this Spelling Bee (of sorts) that invokes quite a different image:

          In Alaska, the recent U.S. Senate election is still up in the air, too close to call as yet.  The opposing candidates are Republican Joe Miller and Republican Lisa Murkowski.  Something seem a bit odd about that, not a Democrat against a Republican, but a Republican against a Republican?   What’s that all about?

          Simple, really.  Two Republicans in the primary vied for who who would win the Republican nomination.  This was really the battle because the perception was that the Democrats really didn’t have a dog in this hunt and whomever got the Republican nomination would go on to win.  Murkowski was the incumbent, but she was out of favor with the Tea Party and their efforts led to the Republican nomination of Miller.

          So far, so good.  Nothing wrong with that process.  More power to the Tea Party.  That’s the American way.  Miller won the nomination fair and square.

          But a funny thing happened on the way to…the election.  Murkowski decided not to take her loss of the nomination sitting down.  She stood up and exercised her right to run in the election as a write in candidate.  She couldn’t run as a Republican, per se, but she could run as an “independent.”  No limits on the number of those.

          And run she did, quite well.  As it turns out, the Democrat was essentially a no show, as predicted.  However, rare as it is, a write in candidate, Murkowski, appears to be ahead, but ever so slightly.  The final outcome will turn on the final count of absentee ballots, where those wishing to vote for a write in candidate must print in the “name“ “as certified” in the write in candidate’s election papers.

          Enter our latest Spelling Bee.  How do you spell “Murkowski,” which isn’t exactly “Smith” or “Jones”?  Write in ballots reviewed to date show that most, but not all, got it write, er, right:)  However, there are some who spelled it “Muroski,” “Murkswke,” “Mvrowski,” “Merkesken” and “Lisa M.”  One even spelled it “Jesus Christ.”

          Just to complete the background here, no one by the name of “Muroski,” “Murkswke,” “Mvrowski,” “Merkesen,” “Lisa M” or “Jesus Christ” was on the ballot, or in any way campaigned for this particular office (or any other office in the State of Alaska).

          As one might suspect, Alaska case law says that the “intent” of the voter is what should control how the ballot is counted.  Alaska officials are, to their way of thinking, following this concept of intent.  No matter how much one might like either Murkowski or Miller, the vote for Jesus Christ was not credited to either one of them.  However, Alaska officials, applying what this blogger thinks makes obvious common sense, wish to credit the votes for “Muroski,” “Murkswke,” “Mvrowski,” “Merkesen” and “Lisa M” to Murkowski, on the grounds that it is pretty obvious what the intent of these voters was–to vote for Murkowski.

          Not okay with Miller.  He wants Alaska officials not to count any ballot for Murkowski where the spelling is not identical to how Murkowski spelled her name on her election papers, “M U R K O W S K I.”  Miller’s “argument” (if you can call it that, and I don’t):  No votes can be counted for Murkowski unless the ballot literally and precisely reads “M U R K O W S K I.”

          The question, I guess, is “what’s in a name”?  Is Murkowski by any spelling other than “M U R K O W S K I” not the “name” “Murkowski”?  If so, then no ballot with a spelling other than “M U R K O W S K I” can be counted for Murkowski.  (Apparently, Miller is not worrying about being beaten by Murkswke.)  Of course, if “intent” is what controls and if it’s reasonable to assume that the person who wrote in “Muroski” actually intended to vote for Murkowski, then that ballot should be counted for Murkowski.  And so forth.  And so on.

          At least so far, Miller has not suggested that a ballot for “Mvrowski” should be counted for him.  (After all, his name starts with the letter M too!  Of course, maybe he realized that no one had to write in his name since it was already on the ballot as the Republican primary winner and nominee.)

          Miller actually went out, hired a lawyer (one can only wonder at whose expense) and filed suit against the State of Alesko (just kidding:)) to enjoin the counting of any ballots for Murowski that do not contain the correct spelling.   The judge had enough common sense to deny the injunction until the vote was completed and he could see what the differential was and whether Miller’s legal argument would actually change the outcome.

          I can tell you this much.  If I wanted to win a Spelling Bee, Miller’s the guy I would want on my team.  Sharp as a tack, nothin gets past him (or his lawyers).  However, when I want someone representing me in Washington, one with Miller’s poor judgment and lack of fair play is the last person I would want.  Give me all of the others:  “Muroski,” “Murkswke,” “Mvrowski,” “Merkesen” and “Lisa M.”  Oh yeah, I’d even take Murkowski:)

          Disclaimer:  As you know, my name is Paige Norman.  That’s “P A I G E.”  You see that “I,” don’t you?  Nevertheless, I get lots of email here at NoPoli.org addressed to Page Norman.”  No “I.”  It’s no biggie.  I can handle it.  We all know who was meant.  Hey, I even get emails here addressed to Paige Oklahoma.  After all, ”Norman” is the third largest city in Oklahoma.  I’m waiting to see if some day I get an email addressed to Paige Broken Arrow, which, last time I looked, was still the fifth largest city in Oklahoma.  Okay, this is why I’m a blogger and not a stand up comedian.  Getting late, time for dinner, my blood sugar must be low.  See ya next time:)

          Results of the mid-term elections were not yet 48 hours old and Ohio Republican Representative John Boehner, the presumed new Speaker of the House-elect, is already knee deep in political poop.  I would have said dog poop, but dogs deserve better than to be drawn into this

          First things first.  Boehner is generally credited with orchestrating the 60 representative swing in the House and certainly deserves a shot at the Speaker position he has long coveted.  Let’s hope he’ll do a better job than he’s unofficially been doing in the first two days following the mid-term elections.  If not, we may have Nancy Pelosi back to kick around again in another two years!

          What exactly am I referring to?

          Boehner is already saying he thinks Congress should vote “as often as necessary” to “repeal” Obamacare. In turn, Democrats are already now accusing Republicans of wanting to reverse the prohibition of “pre-existing conditions” and the increased prescription drug coverage included in Obamacare, the same nonsense Obama put out there the morning after the election.

          It’s the same old political poop deja vu all over again: The politicians who think they’re in the driver’s seat arrogantly flexing their muscles and the opposition jumping on every sound bite opportunity to back seat drive, neither side serving “we the people.”

          A few, simple words of advice for Speaker-elect Boehner:

          1.  Don’t speak until you know, and make clear, for whom you’re speaking, yourself or your party.  There is a difference, John.  Don’t forget that!

          2.  Speak clearly and simply.  If you say “repeal,” be very clear what you mean to repeal, ALL of Obamacare or just specific portions of Obamacare?

          If you mean ALL of it, you better say WHY and it better be good (not just political-ease platitudes) and you better be willing to have those old provisions apply to you and your political colleagues and not just to we the people.  Time for these perks for you Washington insiders to come to an end, John.  Have the grace and the wisdom to recognize that and to get rid of the chronyism.

          I suspect a lot of we the people don’t want pre-existing conditions back and don’t want the old prescription drug doughnut back.  Push that envelope too far, John, and you may look around and all of a sudden find that you’re the only one in the room singing that tune.

          And whatever on earth do you mean by a “lot” of votes to repeal Obamacare, John?  Spend the next two years trying something like that over and over, instead of finding better things to do for we the people, like creating jobs, and we the people are more likely to question you than Obama.  It will only take one Obama veto of a well crafted, reasonable, bipartisan REVISION of Obamacare(be reasonable and you will get the Senate Democratic votes you need to send a revision to Obama) to put Obama out to pasture in two years.  Be smart and either you get rid of Obamacare as it exists today or you get rid of Obama in two years.  It’s a win-win, John.  Waste time doing it over and over, unnecessarily alienating the other side of the aisle accomplishing nothing but petty bickering, and treating we the people like we’re a bunch of dummies, and it will be a new Speaker confronting us in two years, not a new President.

          Slow down, John.  Take a couple deep breaths.  Think.  Make sure you have the votes of both Houses before you go off half cocked, giving Obamacare supporters more sound bite opportunities than you already have given them.

          Do something refreshing, John.  Get it right the first time.  Obamacare is simple.  It has some really bad things that need to go, but it has a few good things that need to be preserved.  You don’t have to throw the baby out with the bath water.  And you won’t get that done anyway.  You’ll just end up hurting your credibility.  Get it done, quickly and simply, or make it clear that Obama is through, and move on to more difficult and more important tasks, like creating jobs!  You’ve been talking about it.  Now you have your chance.  Just do it!

On August 6, 2010, Nopoli Network News publisher and editor-in-chief, my boss, Steve Kessler, posted a blog, entitled Public Pensions Thick as Thieves, about the tiny burg of Bell, California, where the residents, with annual earnings of about $40,000 per year, have–unknowingly–been subjected to local taxes to support concealed retirement benefits for their local political representatives of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year per politician–and, in the case of their now criminally indicted former City Manager, well in excess of $1 million per year!

The ink was hardly dry on the sorely tardy criminal indictments of several former Bell officials–indictments that occurred solely because of the investigative efforts of the Los Angeles Times–when long festering alleged abuses of representatives of the City of Vernon, California finally started seeing the light of day.  Conditions are apparently so inappropriate in Vernon that matters are afoot to actually disband the City altogether!

Now, four Irwindale, California officals have been charged with multiple felonies, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer funds on lavish trips to New York for up to six days at a time during which these officials stayed at five star hotels, dined in the finest Manhattan restaurants, moved around the City in chauffer driven limos, played multiple rounds of golf and attended various Broadway shows!  Why were these many trips made?  Allegedly to meet with New York based representatives of municipal bond credit rating agencies.

To be sure, communicating with these New York credit rating agencies was no doubt valid and necessary.  However:

1.     It’s unclear why the communications had to be in person rather than by telephone, perhaps by video conference telephone calls if need be, but still at a tiny fraction of the cost of these trips to New York.

2.     It is unclear why more than one official and one consultant had to travel to New York, in contrast to four or more representatives.  (True, golf is usually played in foursomes or fivesomes.  Also, it is possible that those in the know might not have agreed to these boondoggles if they weren’t included.)

3.     In at least one instance, the trip to New York lasted six days, including two weekend days, even though meetings with the credit rating agencies totaled only eight hours over the six days.  (True, it’s hard to find enough hours to fit these eight hours of actual business meetings in between all the rounds of golf and the Broadway shows.  And there were so many fine New York restaurants to be sampled that at least a full six day stay was necessary.)

4.     According to reports in the Los Angeles Times on October 28, 2010, there is no indication that any of the representatives of the crediting rating agencies were included in these “necessary” activities.  In other words, there is no claim that the City of Irwindale was entertaining these rating agency representatives and was benefitting by any of these extra-curricular outings.  You know, “a tough job, but somebody has to do it,” entertain the rating agencies to get better bond deals for the City of Irwindale.  No, the rating agency representatives were not included; apparently that would have cost the taxpayers of Irwindale too much money!  The City’s consultant was included.  Why?  So that he could sign for the charges and submit them with his invoice to the City, approved by the now indicted officials, who certainly did not want to show these expenses on their expense forms!

Let’s be clear here:  The behavior of these four indicted officials, and their colleagues in Bell and perhaps Vernon as well, is bad enough, but that is not the real crux of the wrong in this reporter’s opinion.  To show what that is we have to look at one of the four indicted Irwindale officials when interviewed by reporters following his indictment.  Asked for his sense of things, and whether he thought he had done anything wrong, one would think he would have been contrite and said he was sorry (that he was caught with his hand in the cookie jar).  But what he said was, in essence, this is no biggie, it’s yesterday’s news (having happened sometime ago) and is only being raised now because of all the fuss with the Bell scandal.

What’s really outrageous here is that our indicted official is spot on right!  Where’s the oversight in the California system?  Where are the audits?  Where are the checks and balances?  Who’s minding the store?  Where’s the missing cat that has been allowing all of these mice to play while that cat’s away?  In Southern California alone, we have at least three cities where the actions of their officials appear to be indefensible, and absolutely deplorable.  Multiply this by all of the cities across our country.  How many millions of dollars of taxpayer money are being converted to personal gain for our political representatives?  How is this happening?  How is this being allowed to happen?  When is it going to stop?

The answer is fairly simple..  It’s not going to stop until “we the people” begin sending a message, loud and clear, reminding our representatives that they are there to serve–and not to be served!

               Can you believe it?  The ink is hardly dry on the jury verdict “convicting” President Obama of repeatedly making false statements to we the people, either knowingly or recklessly–and our President is doing it again…acknowledging, and demonstrating, the correctness of his conviction–and that he just doesn’t care!

               Desperately trying to avoid a major loss of Democratic congressional seats in the upcoming November elections, President Obama is now accusing Republicans of trying to rig the mid-term elections with “unlimited amounts” of donations from vague, unidentifed ”foreign” sources.  Supposed ringleaders include no less than the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and, apparently, Karl Rove as well.  Come to think of it, President Obama is also effectively casting this “conspiracy” net to include the U.S. Supreme Court as a result of its recent Citzens United decision expressly authorizing precisely what President Obama is now criticizing!

               President Obama and his advisors, including David Axelrod, offer not one shred of evidence to support these obnoxious, extortionary scare tactics.  Asked to provide any evidence supporting its charges that the U.S. Chamber is spending foreign money on the upcoming elections, Mr. Axelrod reportedly responded “Do you have any evidence that it’s not.”  (The Week, October 22, page 6.)  How incredible is this?  A graduate of Harvard Law School, President Obama apparently has no comprehension of the backbone of our U.S. legal system of justice, “innocent until proven guilty.”  Turning that fundamental principle on its ear, President Obama and his advisors apparently defend their “free speech” right to make such disingenuous charges because the U.S. Chamber has not proven that it is not guilty!   What next?  Will President Obama soon begin accusing his opponents of beating their spouses because they have not proven that they haven’t done so!

               The grand jury of the first ever social media people’s court “indicted” President Obama for repeatedly making false statements to we the people, knowingly and/or recklessly.  In the first ever social media people’s court trial of President Obama, broadcast from start to finish by NNN right here on NoPoli.org, President Obama was just found guilty earlier this week of the charges by the first ever social media people’s court jury.  Can there still be any question or doubt about the propriety of President Obama’s conviction?

President Obama wants to raise taxes on the “wealthy.”  Ask those families eking by on $250,000 per year if they feel “wealthy.”

Sure, there are many less fortunate who would love to be “struggling” to make ends meet on $250,000 per year. Ask the growing numbers in the unemployment lines what they could do with $250,000 per year!  No small piece of change, $250,000.  But it isn’t all that much when you look at what Bill Gates makes or Steven Spielberg makes or James LeBron makes, James just for shooting hoops.

Or even the $800,000 per year that former City Manager Robert Rizzo was making doing nothing to run the tiny, blue-collar hamlet of Bell, California.  Actually, with the world now belatedly closing in on Rizzo, he might actually be very happy to see his $600,000 pension cut to “only” $250,000 per year!  (Isn’t it ironic that those jumping on the anti-Rizzo bandwagon include California Attorney General Jerry Brown, in the midst of his heated campaign against equally questionable Meg Whitman to become the next California governor.  Brown’s campaign is almost exclusively financed by the unions whose practices made Rizzo’s misdeeds possible.  Meg Whitman talks out of both sides of her mouth, seeking to distance herself from her investment banker and partner of dubious ethics, Goldman, Sachs.  What does it say about our U.S. political climate when all that California can come up with to succeed the “Governator,” Arnold Schwarzenneger, is Jerry Brown or Meg Whitman?)

And what is Obama going to do with all that additional tax revenue (in the event that many making more than $250,000 per year don’t decide to cut back—on their work, and resulting income—in order not to be required to pay more in taxes in this recession than they are already paying)?  Cut the deficit he is racking up to spare our children and grandchildren?  Hardly.  Obama and his Democrat controlled Congress are already spending that supposed additional tax revenue before they’ve yet to make it, converting the country’s record duration unemployment benefits into a new, thinly disguised, form of welfare for those whose votes Obama and his fellow Democrats are counting on to perpetuate their unproductive control of the country.

To be sure, we must take care of our less fortunate—those who can’t find work or are unable for health reasons to work.  But what is Obama and Congress doing to create more jobs?  Hint:  Nothing!

Don’t any of our streets have potholes that need filling?  Don’t any of our tired underground gas lines, such as the one that just exploded in San Bruno, California, killing four and seriously injuring countless more, need rooting out and fixing?  What are our political “leaders” waiting for?  An invitation?  Well, consider this blog that invitation!

 Is it so beyond comprehension to think that we might require those capable of working to get out there and do some work as a condition to collecting their “unemployment” benefits?  No doubt, there are those who are happy to burn no more calories than lifting their hand to collect a handout.  They might well be outraged to hear that they should actually have to earn those handouts!  However, there are just as many, if not more, good, solid Americans who would love to have a job, and an opportunity to earn an honest day’s pay.

And realize this:  It is not just a matter of busy work filling potholes (which genuinely do need filling).  What about all of those tens of thousands of jobs being sent overseas, where labor is cheaper?  Here’s a “novel” thought:  Why not lower the minimum wage to permit our businesses to employ Americans for the same overseas wages, allowing (perhaps requiring) them to employ Americans, and then taking all of those unemployment benefits and using them instead to subsidize wages back up to a decent minimum U.S. level?  Jump start the economy a bit?  Gee, that’s a thought!

 You do the math:  Rejuvenate the economy with tens of thousands of jobs now going overseas, more spending here in the good old US of A, more resulting profits for business and less required in subsidies for those willing to work for it than now being paid out to those able, but not willing, to work for it—when all they have to do today is lift their hand to get that handout.

 There are ways to lift a hand (for a handout) and there are ways to lift a hand (to do an honest day’s work—that, with just a little imagination, could well be there).  But, no, our political “leaders” are too busy pointing the finger at one another, campaigning and posturing for their reelection, and collecting all of their unique government benefits, to bother earning those benefits with some creative solutions!  So, let’s give them a roadmap and see if that helps.  Any bets?