A Few Good Meals

On Sunday, the Billings Gazette ran a story about Max Baucus and his spending a cool $37,000 of his campaign money on food. Yes, food. Only about 10% of the money was spent in Montana. Ouch.

Besides spending over a thousand dollars at the normal restaurants near his real home in Washington, D.C., Baucus spent thousands of dollars on food at the Harvard Club in Boston and at the Hyatt Hotel in Chicago.

Additionally, Baucus spent, “…about $8,200 for hotels, including the Beverly Hilton in Beverly Hills, Calif., the St. Regis Hotel in San Francisco, the Hilton Hotel Dallas, the Westin Galleria Houston, the Westin Hotel in Chicago and the Pfister in Milwaukee.”

Of course, Baucus’ spokesman says that Baucus believes, “there’s too much money in politics…”

Then why doesn’t Baucus become a leader, instead of a follower? It appears he likes the lifestyle of dining with the rich and famous too much. One also has to wonder how he voted on some of the major issues that these big-time contributors were giving him money for.

It was already reported that 91% of the campaign donations came from out of state. With the spending Baucus is doing, he may run out of money before November. Naaah.

The latest article tells readers that most of the work for his campaign, like consulting, radio and TV advertisements, etc., is being done by out of state companies.

The majority of comments on the Gazette website show that Montanans were not too happy about Max jetting around the country, while many Montanans are struggling to make it paycheck to paycheck. When someone spends campaign money like this, it makes people understand why the USA is in such bad shape.

Will this information make the voters change their mind about Baucus? It should.

Published in: on March 31, 2008 at 8:50 am  Leave a Comment  

The Invasion

Montana will be invaded by several nationally-known Democrats in the next week or so. Yesterday it was announced that former President Bill Clinton will be doing the H-G-H tour on Tuesday in Montana (Helena, Great Falls, Havre).

Ironically, Bill Clinton will be in Montana on April Fool’s Day [insert your own joke here]. Maybe Bill isn’t really showing up at all, and this is an April Fool’s joke on the good folks in Helena, Great Falls, and Havre?

Next Saturday the Montana Democrats hold the Mansfield-Metcalf dinner in Butte, with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama speaking. I wonder if they will eat there.

I happened to read the “rules and information” for those attending the event. There were a few items I found interesting:

-No firearms or weapons–even those permitted for legal carry at other times–will be allowed on the premises.

-Stadium seating tickets come with a complimentary box-meal and bottle of water.

-For those sitting on the floor, we’ll be able to provide light supper.

It looks like a great time for the Montana Democrats. Especially for those people who get to sit on the floor and eat (I hope they have plenty of napkins), and for those people who get a free box meal and water.

Published in: on March 29, 2008 at 10:25 am  Comments (1)  

Oops! They did it again

It’s very hard to believe, but in 2006, the U.S. Air Force mistakenly shipped four fuses designed to trigger Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles to Taiwan.

From what I gathered from various stories, the fuses initially came from F.E. Warren AFB in Wyoming and then were sent to Hill AFB, Utah, in 2005. The fuses were encased in Minuteman III nose cones (which I would think kind of makes them hard to miss). Instead of placing them in a secure location, the personnel at Hill AFB placed them in an unclassified storage area, where they stayed for more than a year. Then they were shipped to Taiwan. Initially the Taiwanese thought they were parts for helicopter batteries, but then contacted authorities in the United States when it was discovered they were not. After some indecision on what to have the Taiwanese do with the fuses, they were turned over to U.S. authorities. Supposedly they are secure now.

China was not amused when they first learned about this problem.

This problem comes on the heels of the incident last year where a B-52 with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles was flown from Minot AFB in North Dakota to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana. Nobody noticed…for awhile, either.

The U.S. Air Force has an inventory problem. These fuses should have been accounted for several times during the year or so they were “missing.” After the cruise missile problem, heads rolled. I would imagine even more severe punishment will be handed down when the investigation is completed into this embarrassment.

It makes this Air Force veteran wonder what else is missing that we may not hear about for a couple of years.

Published in: on March 28, 2008 at 7:19 am  Leave a Comment  

Legal, but…

Some folks may have heard of the lady named Debbie Shank, who was injured in an accident a few years ago that left her with brain damage. She is now confined to a wheel chair and lives in a nursing home.

She was an employee of Wal-Mart. She had their health insurance.

Ms. Shank and her husband sued the trucking company responsible for the accident, and they won about a million dollars. After legal fees, she ended up with about $417,000. It was placed in a trust for her long-term care.

Wal-Mart paid about $470,000 for her healthcare after the accident. Since she won the suit against the trucking company, Wal-Mart sued Ms. Shank for the $470,000. Wal-Mart won. Wal-Mart also won the appeal. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case. So, according to the courts, Wal-Mart is legally justified to recoup their money.

The court of public opinion may see it differently.

About a week after the Shank family lost their appeal, they were notified that their 18- year-old son was killed in Iraq.

A happy ending to this story would have been for Wal-Mart to say, “As a loyal employee, and one who has suffered so much, we will forgive this debt.”

Wal-Mart made $90 billion in net sales in 2007, while Debbie Shank lost almost everything. To take $470,000 from this lady after all she has gone through is just downright pathetic and greedy.

In closing I say, “Come on Wal-Mart executives, you’ve created a public relations nightmare for your corporation. Let’s change your bloodsucking attitude and return the money to Debbie Shank. You’ll sleep better, and be able to look at yourself in the mirror again.”

Published in: on March 27, 2008 at 2:19 pm  Comments (2)  

A Special E-mail

This morning, I received an e-mail from Senator Jon Tester called, “Full Speed Ahead.” Tester was asking my support for his good friend, colleague, and mentor, Senator Max Baucus.

Attack, Attack, Attack

Tester’s e-mail alerted me that, “Max’s race has been targeted by the National Republican Party” and, “Out-of-state attack groups will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to distort Max’s record.” Say it ain’t so, Jon!

Yes, Jon, that is what happens in campaigns, and you should know about the out of state attack groups first hand. You had plenty working for your team in 2006.

Money? LOL!

Of course, Tester wanted me to send a donation to Max. A donation? Baucus has about a gazillion dollars more than all the Republicans running for the nomination combined. Baucus has more staff working for him in Montana than most fifth Generation Montanans have relatives in the state.

We all know from the 2006 elections that money is not everything, but sleaze was.

The Route to Jack

The e-mail had Tester’s campaign banner on it, with his return address to his campaign. The e-mail took an interesting route (bounced around the internet) through the world of Democratic groups, like the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), Democrats.org, and democratsenators.org, and democracyinaction.org, to name a few. They must have been checking it a lot.

Strange things happen

We’ve all heard the saying, “politics make strange bedfellows” and this is highly evident now that Tester is the junior Senator from Montana.

I say this because I don’t really think Jon Tester was Max Baucus’ choice to be the democratic nominee for Senate in 2006. I think Baucus was in John Morrison’s corner all the way, and Max probably did not want a country bumpkin running. But, things changed when a little negative info was leaked about Morrison, which probably caused him to lose the primary to Tester.

On the other hand, I felt that Brian Schweitzer was in Tester’s corner all the way, and Schweitzer won. To me, this makes Schweitzer the real leader in the Montana Democratic Party, and Baucus is like an old Uncle who you invite to the annual family reunion just to be nice.

Tester told me he would keep me updated on how I can help with Max’s campaign. I look forward to these updates.

Published in: on March 27, 2008 at 12:52 pm  Leave a Comment  

Inaction & Scare Tactics

The newest report from the Trustees of Social Security and Medicare paints a very bleak picture for these programs and not too far down the road. Of course, the Trustees have issued very bleak reports in the past, and so far nothing has been done by the “movers and shakers” in Congress.

The reports tell us:

The financial condition of the Social Security and Medicare programs remains problematic. Projected long run program costs are not sustainable under current financing arrangements. Social Security’s current annual surpluses of tax income over expenditures will begin to decline in 2011 and then turn into rapidly growing deficits as the baby boom generation retires.

Medicare’s financial status is even worse. This year Medicare’s Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund is expected to pay out more in hospital benefits and other expenditures than it receives in taxes and other dedicated revenues.

And the Trustees tell us:

We are increasingly concerned about inaction on the financial challenges facing the Social Security and Medicare programs. The longer action is delayed, the greater will be the required adjustments, the larger the burden on future generations, and the more severe the detrimental economic impact on our nation.

The House Ways and Means Committee, has jurisdiction over programs like Social Security and Medicare, as does the Senate Finance Committee. According to The Hill, “The top five Democrats on Ways and Means have more than 130 years of experience in Congress.”

With that much experience, you’d think they would get something done.

From my research, the Senate Finance Committee’s top five democrats have about 128 years in Congress with chairman Max Baucus serving for about 30 years.

Repeat: With that much experience, you’d think they would get something done.

Ironically, the Chairmen of the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee are such good buddies that they formed a Political Action Committee (PAC) in 2007 to raise some money.

It looks like these two committees need a House (and Senate) cleaning if these vital programs will ever be saved. It appears they are saying, “Why save them, when we can use them every few years to scare seniors into voting for us?”

The key thing the Democrats do when someone attempts to get a dialogue going on how we might repair these programs, especially if the person is a Republican, is cry “PRIVATIZATION” to scare the elderly, by making them believe the big bad Republicans will take their checks. They understand that senior citizens are a large and active voting bloc. One would think they would feel just a little dirty and sleazy doing this, but this is Washington, D.C., and nothing is more important than getting reelected.

We saw the scare tactics up close in 2005 when the President came to Great Falls to talk about repairing Social Security. Max Baucus held meetings the same day telling folks that the President wanted to privatize Social Security.

Because of these tactics and inaction, the programs are headed for failure, and it looks like we will all have to pay much more in taxes to save them. Of course, Democrats like to raise taxes. The people who are using these programs and those who will need them in the future need a little more than “the politics of getting reelected” from people like Baucus. They need action, and we are not getting it from those who serve in the majority on these committees.

Published in: on March 26, 2008 at 8:38 am  Comments (4)  

They Just Serve

Recently the 4000th military person was killed fighting in Iraq. It is sad. It not only makes me sad about the young person who died, but it also makes me sad for their family and their friends. I think most people from the right and the left agree with this.

The politicians can always discuss and argue over the reasons for the war and reasons to leave before, some say, the job is done. They are elected for these very reasons. Both sides of the aisle in the political world have said and done things that have hurt our military personnel. I could write a book about politicians saying dumb things in the last five years about Iraq and the war on terror, many times not thinking about how their comments affect the men and women serving in the war. The media has done their own hurtful things during the last five years, all in the name of getting the scoop, instead of thinking how their stories may harm the people who are doing the fighting.

Meanwhile, the military personnel continue to serve. They signed up voluntarily. These brave people signed up to protect us. They serve that we might be safer.

The people who actually serve in the military understand that by signing up and taking the oath, they can be sent anywhere in the world, and sometimes at a moment’s notice to fight. They also understand they may be hurt, or they may even die. They just serve.

They serve to give us freedoms, even if those freedoms are to disagree with what the fight is for. As a veteran, I enjoy seeing a protest even if it’s about the war because in some small way, I smile and think, “I helped give you that right!”

I’ve had good friends die while serving. I’ve attended funerals and heard the volleys being fired. I’ve heard taps played while family and friends cry. I watched a young mother mourn her husband’s death. I’ve seen young children place a flower on their daddy’s casket, not really understanding why their daddy is there.

They paid for the war with their life, because they served.

I’ve talked to mothers and fathers who have sons and daughters serving in Iraq. I see their anguish when a few days go by without a call or e-mail.

Make no mistake, anyone who has been in a war or in the military never really wants a war, but they salute and march on when the order is given. They serve.

To some people, 4000 is just a number. It gets a day or two of coverage in the newspaper. But for the families of these 4000 military personal, it’s more than a number. They are a loved one. They are a father and mother’s son or daughter. They are wife or husband’s love and life, or they may be a child’s father or mother.

They just served because their country needed them. We can’t forget their sacrifices. Never.


Published in: on March 25, 2008 at 3:11 pm  Leave a Comment  

$3.26

The numbers for today are 3, 2, and 6, and they are brought to you by the Democrats who have been in control of U.S. Senate and the U.S. House for the last 14 months.

By the way, $3.26 is the new record price for a gallon of gas in the United States. The highest price per gallon of gas, ever. Does Jimmy Carter have anything to do with this?

Of course, the Democrats will say it’s the President’s fault.

Is the “newest” energy bill passed by Congress last year really helping anyone? I’d like to know who!

So much for ending this country’s dependence on foreign oil. Oh well. Are there carbon credits for driving my daughter to school…in an SUV? Maybe Max will know?

Published in: on March 24, 2008 at 6:57 pm  Leave a Comment  

A Side-Splitting Comedy

Last night was a pretty comical night to watch MSNBC. I know, nobody watches MSNBC. Even their most highly rated show, Countdown, is beaten two or three to one in the ratings for that time period.

I watch Countdown occasionally. It’s humorous seeing a sportscaster doing the news.

The folks at MSNBC felt they had some “breaking” news last night: Senator Barack Obama’s personal passport information had been electronically accessed by three low-level “contract” employees at the State Department. Two of these employees have already been fired, and the third employee was disciplined with the investigation continuing.

Supposedly, well-known people have their personal data flagged and access is limited, so when someone accesses this information, an alarm is triggered notifying their superiors. This system apparently worked perfectly. The notification of Obama did not work so well.

So, for two hours we listened to MSNBC and their many “experts” tell us what probably happened. Of course, there’s the conspiracy theorists (helped by the Obama Campaign) telling viewers that the Bush Administration might have been responsible for this breach of privacy, or that it could be insiders working for McCain or Clinton. Nobody mentioned that Jason Bourne may have had something to do with it, but at any moment, I expected to hear that theory.

It was only briefly mentioned that it could just be the employees’ “curiosity.”

MSNBC is firmly behind Obama in his quest to become President. They have downplayed the issue with Rev. Wright. Some MSNBC broadcasters almost wet their pants with excitement when Obama gave his speech this week on race relations.

Last night MSNBC gave Obama two hours of coverage with the “breaking news banner” flying across the screen. Guest after guest appeared. I checked other channels, including CNN and FOX, and expected there to be a breaking news segment and that the networks would be breaking into regular coverage. FOX and CNN lightly covered it. Larry King was even interviewing Barack Obama. I expected the first question from Larry King to be about the passport issue. Instead King asked him about the Michigan and Florida issue with their primaries. Maybe it was not “Larry King Live” because I did not hear King ask him about the passport issue.

In today’s paper, I expected a front page, top of the fold story, with a headline in two inch letters. Instead, I saw a small 120-150 word story about it from the Associated Press, on the bottom of page two! It appears that other new sources are not so eager to tout Obama for President. At least not so openly like MSNBC. Maybe they are actually giving this issue the coverage it is due.

The State Department did screw this up by not letting Obama know about this security breach, which happened three times. It’s a violation of the Privacy Act. The first time it occurred was in early January. It appears that some lower level civil service manager tried to handle this at his/her level, probably not realizing what the repercussions could be. Supposedly, the high level managers, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, were not notified until a day or so ago. She has apologized to Sen. Obama for the contract employees reviewing his file without authorization.

MSNBC went over the top with their reporting of this event. It is apparent that the folks at MSNBC, especially Keith Olbermann of the show Countdown and Dan Abrams of the show, Verdict, want nothing more than for Obama to be the next President.

If nobody is watching MSNBC, will this work?

Published in: on March 21, 2008 at 9:22 am  Comments (1)  

Rejected as usual

It appears that Democrat Kendall Van Dyk of Billings had his complaint about radio talk show host, David Berg, and Berg’s donation to Republican gubernatorial candidate Roy Brown rejected by the Montana Commissioner of Political Practices.

According to this story, Van Dyk contended that it was wrong for Berg to give money to Roy Brown’s campaign under his radio name, David Berg.

The Billings Gazette reported that, “There is no registered Montana voter under Berg’s name, Van Dyk said, and it’s illegal to give under a falsified last name.”

If Van Dyk believes you have to be registered to vote to give money to a campaign, that’s funny. But the funniest part of this whole issue is that the check written to Brown’s campaign listed both David Berg and his real name, David Fulwiler.

These frivolous complaints seem to be the method of operation for the Montana Democrats and their supporters. They don’t seem to win many.

In 2006, I remember several complaints were filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) by the Montana Democrats and their supporters in connection with the Burns/Tester race.

There was the FEC complaint about the seating at a debate (Case # MUR 5827 & 5829): The Commission decided by a vote of 5-0 to dismiss.

There was FEC complaint about the Inland Northwest Space Alliance (Case# MUR 5866): The Commission decided by a vote of 5-0 to dismiss.

There was the FEC complaint about automated phone calls (Case # MUR 5860): The Commission decided in a vote of 4-0 there was no wrongdoing by Burns’ campaign.

These are just a few. In doing a quick check, I don’t believe the Federal Election Commission ruled in the Democrats’ favor on any of their complaints concerning Burns/Tester. Maybe they did and I missed it?

You can do your own check of complaints on the FEC website at: http://eqs.sdrdc.com/eqs/searcheqs.

On the other hand, according to this story from 2007, “The Federal Election Commission has fined the State Democratic Central Committee $15,000 for not fully disclosing money it spent on a 2005 attack ad against former Republican Sen. Conrad Burns.”

I guess a good rule for the Montana Democrats and their supporters to follow would be when they file a complaint with the FEC or the state, they should actually have some solid evidence of wrongdoing before they hit the send key.

Published in: on March 20, 2008 at 11:13 am  Leave a Comment  
« Older Entries