Obama Voters Get the Gas Prices They Voted For

February 28, 2012 | Comments (0)

Congratulations to those voters who cast their ballots for Barack Obama four or so years ago.  They watched the campaign, they reveled euphorically in the rhetoric and the undefined catchphrases, they ignored the glaring facts, and when that fateful November day dawned, they weighed in for a man who, without hesitation or shame, stated that, as president, he would like to see gas prices rise above $4 a gallon and beyond.  Now as we watch those prices shoot into the stratosphere, I trust those voters are dancing in the streets as they see this particular campaign promise become a reality.

In this spirit, I would like to remind those who voted for Barack Obama that the man is doing exactly what he said he would do – long before you cast your votes.  Meanwhile, we who did not vote as you did, we who listened to what he said before November 2008 and from the get-go viewed his anti-American agenda and his non-existent resume with suspicion, we, unlike you, resent his $4-plus-per-gallon price tag.  Plenty of us also happen to believe that all of this is happening by design, right according to plan – you know, the plan to “transform” America by destroying all that has made America the greatest nation the world has ever known.

So, those of us who count ourselves as pro-American, pro-liberty, we ask that you who forced this man upon us resist the urge to complain about the toll your president’s policies are taking on your bank accounts – and the future bank accounts of your children and grandchildren.  We ask, too, that you resist the urge to complain as you find yourself pumping this week’s grocery money, as well as the kids’ college fund, into your gas tank.  And please don’t bother telling us that you now regret your vote that November.  You knew exactly what you were voting for, but you have left the rest of us to join in paying for what you did.  Whether it can be fixed remains to be seen.

 

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

A Curious Collection of Super Bowl Commercials

February 5, 2012 | Comments (0)

Amazing Super Bowl tonight.  A nailbiter until the very last moment when the Giants claimed the ring and the Lombardi trophy.  But, sad to say,  I found the journey to that last moment rather disconcerting.

It’s no secret that many watch the big game for the commercials.  From coast to coast, viewers gather to see what amazing, not to mention pricey, creations the ad agencies have concocted to wow America while the players take a breather.  Today we did indeed witness some clever moments that will no doubt be discussed around America’s water coolers tomorrow, but what I found disconcerting, and I hope others did, too, was what wasn’t represented.

Most notably, our nation’s ailing economy seemed to be on display in the limited number of companies that shelled out the big bucks for those coveted Super Bowl minutes.  It would appear that only one beer company could afford those slots, but even more jarring were the lack of car companies who could.  The game seemed like one giant commecial — wall to wall — for the company the cynics among us now refer to as “Government Motors.”  It’s amazing what an entity can purchase when it has a bottomless bailout (taxpayer) slush fund at its disposal for commercial time, and the game tonight proved the ultimate showcase for such excess.

The capper was a dark and endless tearjerker presented by thought-he-was-a-conservative Clint Eastwood, a treatise that lamented (and I paraphrase here) the fact that we are hurting, but because we’re America we all got together to do the right thing and bail out a car company and turn it over to the government and the unions, because, you see, “it’s half-time in America.”  Really?  Aside from a shameful rip-off of President Reagan’s iconic “morning in America,” I don’t remember being asked to “do the right thing” and turn over my tax money for a government/union take over of a private corporation.  Let me say, as well, that I would be royally furious right now if I were the powers-that-be at Ford Motor Company — a car company that refused the bailout — which was bashed by name in one of the Government Motors spots.  As a taxpayer, and an American, I’m royally furious for them — and for myself.

Other than that, many thanks to the Giants and the Patriots for a great game, and may we all be thankful that though commercial time was dominated by the left’s propoganda, at least this year the president did not interrupt the festivities with one of his customary Super Bowl campaign lectures.  Count our blessings for that, and have a nice night.

 

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

Pelosi and Slaughter Desperately Hurl the Tired Old Threats

April 10, 2011 | Comments (0)

The left is pulling out all those tired old chestnuts to combat the budget chaos plaguing Washington at the moment, a situation that threatens to shut down the federal government. Currently raging is Congress’ battle over just how – and if – they will/should rein in the spending spree draining America’s economy of every cent sent to them in good faith by America’s taxpayers.

Playing her part as expected, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), no doubt missing the limelight these days, has nostalgically informed us that the republicans want to starve senior citizens. A laughable comment coming from a high-profile representative of the left, who, along with her fearless leader and their party faithful spent the last two years forcing upon America a much-vilified health-care bill that promises openly to ration health care, by pacifying ailing seniors with blue pills and relegating their health-care decisions to bureaucrats (a.k.a. “death panels,” remember?). I personally will never forget that chilling town-hall moment when a smiling president told a woman that no, under his plan, the woman’s elderly mother would not have received the pacemaker her doctors ordered. His plan, he was proud to say, would not take into consideration such silly factors as “spirit” or will to live – no individual considerations whatsoever.

And now we hear from Louise Slaughter (D-NY), as well, notorious for her highly publicized strategy to bypass openly that pesky Constitution to jam through the beloved Obamacare (for we the peasants only, of course; Congress and anyone who supports this president are exempt and immune). Slaughter this week announced that the freshmen republican representatives (her way, I presume, of saying Tea Party and /or conservatives) are trying to kill women.  Now, at the risk of sounding ineloquent, that is just flat out stupid. Anyone who believes such a foolish comment should be stripped of all voting rights (same for the Hollywood bimbos who way back when on Oprah’s slobber-fest sobbed that re-electing George W. would legalize rape).

What both of these women conveniently disregard with their desperate, wanna-be-incendiary statements is that despite what the media lapdogs may try to promote, most of us out here beyond the Beltway don’t automatically equate the word “republican” with “conservative.” In this spirit, let me say that we on the right are watching the right, as well. Indeed everyone is in the hot seat at the moment, regardless of the party-affiliation letters representatives happen to slap on to their names. And, like our national debt, our expectations are growing exponentially by the day.

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

Why Aren’t Obama Voters Rejoicing Over Rising Gas Prices?

April 1, 2011 | Comments (0)

During the George W. presidency, the first question a liberal-leaning friend in another state would ask me whenever we spoke was always, “So how much are you guys paying for gas right now?”

But ever since Barack Obama, her guy, took office, she hasn’t asked me that question once.

This perplexes me, because Obama was crystal clear during his campaign for the presidency, that a dream he held for this nation was to see gas prices rise to well above $4.00 a gallon. His current secretary of energy stated before he claimed that title – and probably in an attempt to snag the position – that he wanted to see those prices rise to European levels (which means somewhere around $10 a gallon). Now we hear that gas prices may actually reach $5 or more – well on the way to that $10 goal — so all you Obama voters out there, let the rejoicing begin. Your man is keeping his promise, a promise he made long before you entered the polling booth, and I thus presume one of the many reasons you cast your precious vote for him.

The same should be applying to the lapdog media, shouldn’t it? They practically ran perpetual counters on the TV screen, ticking off gas and oil prices under President Bush, but I have yet to hear a peep out of them in celebration of this kept campaign promise of their guy, Obama. They have excused mightily their man for failing to keep his promise to close Guantanamo and to let loose those poor mistreated, misunderstood Gitmo inmates who simply sought to exercise their religious freedoms.  And they have done all they can to promote their man’s support of the hardworking labor folks and unemployed 60s throwbacks in Wisconsin simply trying to exercise their right to receive free health insurance and Viagra. Indeed the follow and promote blindly virtually anything and everything their man says or does.

But come to think of it, my non-lapdog-media friend so intent on monitoring gas prices under President Bush hasn’t mentioned any of these other issues, either. No talk of Obamacare and blue pills, no talk of widespread unemployment, and no mention of the First Family living in luxury as the matriarch of that family lecturers the peasants, urging them to embrace hunger and cold. Yet my friend voted for all of this, gleefully casting her precious vote for the “redistribution of wealth” and the socialization of America promised by then-candidate Obama.

Of course, to be honest, I don’t want to hear anything about this from her, nor do I care to hear mention of regret. As I have made crystal clear again and again, I have no patience for those who now regret casting a vote for an inexperienced, socialist-minded candidate who stated clearly his intent to transform America; to ensure our houses remain colder, our refrigerators emptier, our bank accounts skimpier; to ration medical care for Americans and gut the promise of a career in medicine; to appease those who wish to kill us; and to see gas prices soar. Let the silence of those I wish to see remain silent speak for itself.

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

Both Sad and Not Surprised at Borders Filing Chapter 11

February 26, 2011 | Comments (0)

About a week ago the CEO of Borders bookstores sent a mass email announcing that the company has filed Chapter 11, and will thus be closing those stores that are “underperforming.” I found this news very sad, but not all that surprising.

One of my greatest joys in this life is to enter the great double doors of a Borders or Barnes and Noble, catch that rich warm aroma of bound pages and brewing coffee, then wander the aisles for books either familiar or newly discovered (the most recent for me of this latter category being Black Potatoes, a kids’ book on the potato famine of Ireland that kept me transfixed for more than an hour).

The Borders closest to my home seems safe at the moment from closure, which I must say almost surprises me, given their failure at times to remember their reason for being. A few years ago I went to this store to purchase a book by conservative political commentator Ann Coulter, which at the time sat perched high atop the New York Times Bestseller List. I couldn’t find it anywhere, including within the display at the front of the store allegedly boasting the nation’s current bestsellers. So I asked a guy who worked there.

“Oh, that’s back here,” he said, and he led me to the most secluded shelf of the most secluded corner at the very back of the store, where we found the book, practically wrapped in a plain brown wrapper.

“Isn’t the goal here to sell books?” I asked the guy. He just shrugged. “You know this is a bestseller right now,” I said.  He just shrugged again. I decided to forego such concepts as censorship, political agendas, and supply-and-demand business practices. Chalk it up, I decided, to some left-wing genius at this Borders, perhaps every Borders, who hatched a brilliant plan: Hide the Coulter books, and the customer will have no choice but to purchase instead an Obama autobiography, anything by Michael Moore, or perhaps the film made and released during the presidency of George W. Bush, allegedly fictionalizing his assassination — all of which, may I say, were prominently featured in this Borders, and perhaps every Borders.

This was, unfortunately, not my only brush with the Chapter-11-to-be practices I witnessed at this store. Recall, if you will, the July 21, 2008, issue of The New Yorker that featured a cartoon of a radical militant then-democratic-presidential-nominee Barack Obama and his wife on the cover. When this cover was revealed to its predictable outcry, I wanted one, so again I traipsed into my trusty local Borders. “Oh, we’re not carrying that one,” a guy – a different guy — told me. So I traipsed off to my local Barnes and Noble, which was apparently unaware of the Borders brilliant plan and did have the issue available to customers who wished to shell out the cash to purchase one.

So for the time being, it appears the victor in the battle of the bookstores is Barnes and Noble, its decision makers even willing to feature a giant cover of Atlas Shrugs on the wall, a design element I spotted during visits to several California Barnes and Nobles last week. Also featured were displays devoted to Ronald Reagan’s centennial (standard right now to every Barnes and Noble, east and west, I have frequented of late), the only evidence of books devoted to our current president being a couple of children’s paperbacks slipped in among books celebrating President’s Day. A bookstore selling books on both sides of the political spectrum: You don’t have to be a CEO to hatch that brilliant plan.

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

Journalist Hacks Sink to a New Low with the First Lady’s Vacation

August 20, 2010 | Comments (1)

Back in the day when the Clintons were in office, friends and I (those who had put the Clintons in office included), would joke about the deal this couple must have cut with the devil. As the scandals kept piling on at breakneck speed – and as Teflon Bill and his wife continually deflected whatever came their way – we could only imagine the monarch of the underworld scrambling around trying to figure out just how the he** he was going to make this one go away. He must have concluded pretty early on that he really wasn’t getting his money’s worth with this one.

For some reason, the lapdog media’s response to Her Royal Highness Michelle’s recent five-star sojourn to Europe has reminded me of those halcyon days that had Beezlebub scrambling to cover for the Clintons. With few, admittedly big-gun exceptions, they have desperately tried to paint this picture in a positive light. And they have ended up looking like even bigger fools for it.

Since the moment of the big announcement that HRH Michelle would be traveling to Spain with a massive, budget-busting entourage, destined to tolerate only the finest Spain could offer, the royal couple’s loyal media hacks have regaled those few who would listen with fanciful Camelotesque tales of how this woman has taken Europe by storm, while simultaneously inspiring the peasants back home. But despite the valiant spin, the lapdogs know full well that those peasants back home (the core of their ever-dwindling audiences) aren’t buying this pathetic story arc. Indeed Michelle’s opulence, coupled with the failing economy and job losses on the homefront, are the classic definition of “disconnect.”

The Clintonesque last straw occurred when one media outlet grasped in a last gasp for a message that would resonate. This particular media outlet (never mind the name, as they are all interchangeable) sputtered that Michelle Obama is only now beginning to approach the extravagance of….and it’s embarrassing for me even to write the name….Laura Bush.

Laura Bush?!

Did I hear that correctly? Yes, I did. Laura Bush. Nancy Reagan has been out of the spotlight for too long for such comparisons, they wouldn’t dare utter the name Barbara Bush, and Hillary…well, she’s one of them and has that pact in place, so the only option is Laura Bush, one of the gentlest, most gracious and elegant First Ladies ever to occupy the White House (gosh, I miss her). Say what you wish about George W., and indeed many have, using such terms as “assassinate,” “Nazi” and “idiot.” But Laura? Extravagance? Even the lapdogs couldn’t sink so low, could they?

Obviously they did, and in making this ridiculous, bogus connection, they reveal the shameful level of pathetic desperation to which they have sunk. Must be tougher than ever to look themselves in the mirror at night. How can they can face their non-journalist friends? How they can face their children? Struggle as they must to remain true to their loyalty to the First Family, they are learning, as certain presumed masters of the underworld must have in the nineties, how dangerous – and embarrassing – it is to pledge your allegiance to parties who make an artform of thumbing their collective noses in your face.

Betsy Siino | Comments (1)

Obama Is Still Blaming Predecessor President Bush

August 6, 2010 | Comments (0)
Earlier this week, Barack Obama told a fundraiser audience in Atlanta that the GOP is betting their political future on a mass American amnesia epidemic that will erase the American public’s memory of the GOP’s continued support of the policies of Obama’s predecessor George W. Bush – the predecessor Obama continuously blames for the nation’s catastrophic economy.

Excuse me, Mr. President, but despite your stab at clever repartee, we the people know that you, sir, are the one wishing for a nation of amnesiacs.

You’d best not hold your breath for that one, however. Our memories clear, we remember well the events of 2006, a mere four years ago. That was the mid-term election when your party, the democrats, took control of Capitol Hill, thus wrestling control of the American economy from the GOP. It was that glorious moment in time when dear Nancy became Speaker, George W. occupied the Oval Office, and you were Senator from Illinois, suddenly yourself a member of the majority party. Remember? Perhaps you were simply too busy running for President at the time to remember such minor details.  

As for your continually pitting GOP against DNC, speaking again as a so-called “regular” American, let me say that you are a bit confused there, too, my friend (conveniently so, I’m sure). This is no longer a nation of republican versus democrat. We on the right discarded those labels long ago. Today we are conservatives versus liberals, Alinsky strategy versus the U.S. Constitution, good versus evil, liberty versus tyranny. And it’s all your doing. In a way we should be thanking you for reminding us so effectively of who we are, who we are not, and who we are meant to be.

So by all means, keep claiming your failures (and desperation) are firmly rooted in the policies of George W. Bush and those who have supported him.

The rest of us will find our truth rooted in the quote of the day above – “That makes you responsible for my irresponsibility.” I quote here a buffoonish pass-the-buck monarch who scolds a perplexed underling in a scene from a favorite TV show of my daughter’s, The Penguins of Madagascar. Unfortunately, sir, that monarch could be you, blaming others for your own irresponsibility, your own incompetence.

In the meantime, we the people, our memories remain clear. We know who is running this show, and we know which side of the aisle has been driving it since 2006.

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

Stupid Commercial for Financial Irresponsibility

March 2, 2010 | Comments (0)

March 2, 2010 | Comments

The camera opens on an attractive, well-dressed, well-spoken couple with expensive hair. They sit chatting in what appears to be the kitchen in a bright, airy, well-appointed contemporary home (theirs, I presume).

Their topic on this fine, sunny morning? The high service charges levied upon them when they cash their weekly paychecks, government checks, whatever checks they say they are regularly cashing. It seems these attractive people don’t have a bank account – not even a small savings account that would earn them check-cashing privileges. Poor things. So they apparently have to cash their checks with the shark on the corner, and it’s costing them far too much.

But today they share the great news: Walmart’s check-cashing charges are much cheaper than what they have been paying! Oh, happy day! And it gets better. Once they figure these reduced charges will save them as much as $200 a year, they gleefully agree to put that sweet savings to good use and buy a new flat-screen TV! Oh, happy day again!

Now, if this is indeed a valid portrait of Americans faced with economic challenges today, it’s no wonder households across the nation are in such dire straits financially. I also have to wonder just who Walmart is targeting with this message? Perhaps the woman I saw at Best Buy the other day fits the audience profile. Denied her attempt to purchase a laptop computer with food stamps, she stomped out of the store and bee-lined in a huff to her Lexus parked in a handicapped spot outside the door. I guess she has been cashing her checks at Walmart.

As for you, commercial couple, how about taking that $200 and opening a savings account. You’ll likely find that family security trumps new toys any day.

Betsy Siino | Comments

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

Agnostic?

February 12, 2010 | Comments (0)

February 12, 2010 | Comments

For the many months leading up to his election, one of the primary promises repeated by the President was that he absolutely will not raise taxes on families that earn less than $250,000 a year. No way. Won’t happen. Don’t even think about it.

Well, earlier this week — in a flip-flop worthy of comparison to the first George Bush’s “no new taxes” – when asked by Bloomberg BusinessWeek about the inconsistency of this promise with the crippling multi-trillion-dollar federal budget released last week, the President said:

“What I want to do is to be completely agnostic in terms of solutions.”

Huh? Agnostic? What exactly does that mean, Mr. President? If you didn’t mean to say “antagonistic,” does it mean you don’t plan to commit one way or another? Given your habit of voting “present,” I’ll assume you’re voting present here, as well.

Betsy Siino | Comments

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

A Brilliant Mind for Business

February 10, 2010 | Comments (0)

February 10, 2010 | Comments

UPDATE/CORRECTION:  In regard to my post earlier today, it’s been brought to my attention that yesterday the President said not that the goal of small business owners is to take loans out to “meet” their payrolls, but rather to “boost” their payrolls. Sorry about that, but this frankly doesn’t change the gist of my thoughts (or my son’s) on the subject. In fact, I think it makes it worse. This President’s idea of “creating jobs” thus consists of his notion that all a business needs to do is borrow money and “create” a job. Mission accomplished. Of course the rest of us know this is not how it works in the real world. It is, however, how it works in the welfare/socialist/non-capitalist world. –Betsy

February 10, 2010 | Comments

It’s no secret that we have a President who has never held what we might call a “real” job. He has never worked the counter at McDonalds or 7-11. He has never swung a hammer on a construction site, waited tables at Chili’s, or assisted customers at a sporting goods store. Sure, he has organized communities (not entirely clear on what that means, but I have a good idea) and given lectures to students and to the American people. But I see no evidence here of any experience that might lead to an understanding of economics, budgeting, shelf stocking, investing, or even operating a cash register and making change.

Yesterday, the President’s lack of business experience was displayed front and center when he thrilled the Washington press corps with a surprise press briefing (something for which the corps has been clamoring since July).

Now, as we know, this Pres doesn’t work off teleprompter with impromptu questions, a weakness he attempts to mask with an arrogant smirk and condescending tone of voice that utters repeatedly such phrases as “move forward,” and “look…” But yesterday, some concrete questions came up that required a little more meat, a little more substance. ABC’s Jake Tapper, for one, dared to ask the President if he is concerned that small business owners are hesitant to hire because they fear such economically crushing policies as cap and trade and health care in the future.

The President predictably responded that no, small business owners don’t have that fear (a surprise, I’m sure, to the small business owners I know, that we all know, who are indeed worried that future policies from this administration’s agenda would destroy them financially). Then he continued, and here is where the business “brilliance” kicked in. In a nutshell, according to the President of the United States, the true worry among small business owners is their inability to get credit so they can take out loans to meet their payrolls.

Again, according to the President of the United States, all small businesses need and want to do is take out loans so they can pay their employees.

And that will lead to more jobs and hiring, Mr. President? Really? Have you ever actually held a job in a place of business, small or otherwise? Have you ever managed a payroll or even glanced at a business budget? Never mind, we already know the answer to that one.

I had just picked my teenage son up from school when we heard the President utter these words on the radio. “What!” shouted my son. “Did he really just say that?”

Yes, he did.

“You don’t take out a loan to make payroll!” my son continued ranting. “Anyone knows that! If you can’t make payroll, you can’t pay back a loan. If you can’t pay your people, you have to lay them off. And you know where I learned that? From “The Office!”

So there you have it, Mr. President. According to the teenager in my car, and I’m sure from teenagers working fast-food counters and helping customers at malls everywhere, maybe you need to watch some episodes of “The Office” and get some business training from Dunder Mifflin’s own Michael Scott.

If nothing else, I was left smiling, knowing that at least my son is on the right track. Let’s just hope we still have a country left where he, and all our children, can someday practice their own brand of business brilliance (and common sense).

Betsy Siino | Comments

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)