Tuesday, April 26, 2005

I Can't Help It

I was all set to blog about something trivial. I just wanted to sit down and blog how much I love the NBA Playoffs. I was also going to throw in a paragraph about how Andrew has finally broken me and I love 311 now. I can't get enough of their music. Granted, they're not U2, but they do have some pretty good music. But then I got in the car and took a road trip to Columbus. While listening to talk radio I was tempted to pick up a USA Today.

Let me say I HATE USA Today. I get it free all the time thanks to Hampton Inn. It's a nice way to catch up on the news, but it's written for a third grader and it never gives the full side of the story. But today they found the other side of the story and actually ran it. Props to USA Today. For weeks they have been blasting Tom DeLay for his allegedly "unethical". I've stated on this blog before I can understand that. He may have messed up and had lobbyists pay for his travel. My case has always been this, "Why blast only DeLay when everyone does it?"

It's documented that Barbara Boxer does it. It's documented that Nancy Pelosi does it. Harry Reid does it for goodness sake. So why just point out DeLay? It's just Democrats avoiding facts and trying to gain ground. Quinn in the morning, a local conservative talk show personality always says, "Look at what Democrats are saying about Republicans, assuming about them, and that's what they're up to." If they say they're lying about service (i.e. Bush guard duty) then they probably are (i.e. Kerry and war stories). If they say they're misusing funds or being unethical, chances are they are themselves as well.

So USA Today finally runs the other side of the story today as well, and front page no less. The article outlines how travel by congressmen and congresswomen (all about equality here just like GCC and Title IX) is often paid privately. Since 2000 $16 million has been paid in private trips with half being paid / sponsored by non-profit groups. If Non-profits pay for the trips, the rule is they don't have to disclose who is paying for the trip. The rule goes that a lobbyist or a representative of foreign interst may not pay. That's the short of it all.

PoliticalMoneyLine did a survey of campaign finance and lobbying data and found out some of the following stats. Democrats took 3,025 such trips while Repubulicans took 2,375. DeLay took 14 trips, valued at $94,568 and was 28th on the list of money spent per trips. And Harold Ford, a democrat took the most trips 63. The Nancy Pelosi took a nice little trip to Puerto Rico that her aide said, "I was unaware that we had to document expenses." UNAWARE! YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING ME.

A quote from the article: "While ethics rules require lawmakers to try to find out and disclose who is paying for their trips, they often fail to do so, said Larry Noble of the Center for Responsive Politics an ethics watchdog group. 'It has become a don't ask dont' tell system,' Noble said."

So I make my point. I wanted to have a nice blog. But I couldn't stay silent on this. This is prime time example of facts being kryptonite, but only to the democratic party instead of the Republican party. This kid is so sick of the democrats pointing fingers and not answering questions when the fingers are pointed back. Tom DeLay messed up, but so did others. And darn it it's time they answered for it as well. I'm sick of the watchdog media just giving them a pass. I'm sick of Larry King asking soft questions. Then he gets a soft answer and doesn't follow up with the hard one. I'm tired of Dan Rather making stuff up and then passing the buck. I'm tired of Yahoo headlines sneaking in liberally slanted headlines and pictures of U.S. soliders serving their country honorably but Yahoo puts up a picture with kids crying. I'm tired of hearing news reported about how Iraq is a mess, and then meeting those who have served our country and they come back and say we're doing so much good. No longer should Democrats get a pass. Apparently they screwed up this time as well and if they're going to fry DeLay then some of them need to fry as well.

Blam! Rant over. No one's perfect, let's see it from both sides this time. Next time I'm going to blog fun and lighthearted ... I promise. Sometimes things get lit under me and you just have to rant. And oh yeah, by the way, the Surreal Life on VH1 is such a gay show.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dude, USA Today sucks. It's McPaper. It tries to woo you in with graphs and color photos, don't let it!

- KarlHungus

Anonymous said...

The rule goes that a lobbyist or a representative of foreign interst may not pay.

Abramoff.

Bye bye, Bugman.

Josh said...

Anon, you have asked for the link to the facts about the cost of welfare to taxpayers.

I will happily provide you my source.

However, before I do that, are you going to reject it out of hand summarily? I am conservative; therefore, it's a conservative source, so I'm thinking you won't accept its validity in any case.

Just thought that I could save us both a little bit of time.

Josh said...

By the way, Andrew, I created the quotes that you laid out, and am ready to head to Starbucks to try this course of action. Will pictures on my cameraphone suffice?

Donkey Patrol said...

Hahahahaa,

Yeah pictures on the phone will suffice so long as I can see
1) that my label is on your cup and
2) that you are indeed in Starbucks.

You rule Josh!

Anonymous said...

Name your source.

Does your source cite a source or do they just make things up?

Does the source of your source cite a source?

What documentary evidence is there? GAO?

Josh said...

Anon, my source is Larry Elder's book "The Ten Things You Can't Say in America".

We will have to wait until I get home to find the source that he used, as it is in the book.

He also states how 70 cents of every welfare dollar goes to bureaucratic costs, meaning only 30% of the money gets to the intended recipient.

Welfare is an unconstitutional concept and needs to be repealed.

Josh said...

Wonderful Welfare

Wall Street Journal

March 24, 1995