Lavish Overseas Travel Expenses For Congresscritters And Senators TRIPLES Since 2001…

Hey, why should we have a problem of any sort with our elected leaders public SERVANTS taking one-day trips to Iraq to earn some self-promoting facetime with our “boots on the ground” followed by week long vacations in Italy (Wall Street Journal), accompanied by their spouses and children in five star hotels, dining on the finest foods from five star restaraunts? Fair is fair — ANY of us could do the same if ONLY we would be selfless selfish enough to run for Congress or the Senate to serve ourselves the best of the best on taxpayer dollars serve our brethren after all. Correct? After all, thanks to the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform scandal, this is America — the land where ANY of us can pass a hat around and take these CUSHY jobs from these crooks public servants, correct? OOPS — perhaps not.

Some selected “snips” from the Wall Street Journal article referenced above:

WASHINGTON — Spending by lawmakers on taxpayer-financed trips abroad has risen sharply in recent years, a Wall Street Journal analysis of travel records shows, involving everything from war-zone visits to trips to exotic spots such as the Galápagos Islands.

The spending on overseas travel is up almost tenfold since 1995, and has nearly tripled since 2001, according to the Journal analysis of 60,000 travel records. Hundreds of lawmakers traveled overseas in 2008 at a cost of about $13 million. That’s a 50% jump since Democrats took control of Congress two years ago.

The cost of so-called congressional delegations, known among lawmakers as “codels,” has risen nearly 70% since 2005, when an influence-peddling scandal led to a ban on travel funded by lobbyists, according to the data… “

Let’s enjoy our “staycations” this Independence Day weekend, my friends, shall we? Our nation is broke; nearly bankrupt and you wonder why? TARP? TARP II BURP II? It ALL adds up, folks.

Time for some REFORM, ‘ya think?

***

Meanwhile, Governor Sanford Continues To Sing Like A Bird Brag Like Most Other Men Would About His Numerous Sexual Conquests In Addition To Argentine Hottie, Maria Belen Chapur…

Aptly called The Party Of No (NO, NO, NO, NO!!! Sex is a filthy act reserved for marriage which is defined as a union between ONE man and ONE woman!!!), numerous Republican senators and congresscritters in the Great State of South Carolina who’ve simply not been caught yet for doing the same thing (just an educated guess on my part) are abandoning their “old friend” and calling for his resignation (The State — S.C.). In a way, Governor Mark Sanford deserves it — Mr. “Long Don9 Silver II” cannot seem to keep his mouth shut. He’s telling anybody and everybody with a camera and/or a microphone who is willing to give him a few minutes the opportunity to utter the basic equivalent of:

“Oh, heck yeah — Maria’s HOT and I just couldn’t stop boffing her. One week? You’ve gotta be kiddin’ me! How about over a half a dozen romps with that hottie? Try that one on for size. And not only THAT — there are others. MANY others, bro! Heck, I could write a triple-X book for the ages that’d knock yer’ frigging blocks off and steam those glasses of yours up!“

Okay — let’s ponder this whole thing for a second — from perhaps, a sort of unique point of view — that of a failed “Dot-Commer” and four-time CEO. As a CEO, I had many occasions to entertain and/or BE entertained by many other corporate CEO’s — some of them of the Fortune 500 and Fortune 1000 variety whom shall remain nameless to protect the guilty — in an effort to earn their business. While I was a sexual “angel” of a married man (my story and I’m stickin’ to it), I can tell you MOST of the others couldn’t wait to take me (or vice versa) out to the nearest “questionable” watering hole and shockingly, I would quite frequentlly see them engage in, and even encourage others, to join them in debauchery behind the backs of their significant others. Most of them are STILL CEO’s and most of them are still guiding their companies competently despite this economic disaster we are facing in these United States today. Sexual escapades don’t seem to be affecting their abilities to “lead”, or “govern”, whichever term you prefer.

Just askin’…

***

Other noteworthy bloggers weigh in: Drudge Retort (Left) is engaging in a discussion involving Governor Holmes’ admission Maria is his “Soul mate”; Michelle Malkin (Right) continues to show no mercy; Ed Morrissey of Hot Air (Right) is taking a poll and says Sanford is burying himself like a high school kid bragging about his sexual experiences…

Former Senator Norm Coleman Concedes Disputed Senate Race To Stuart Smalley…

If I hear the phrase “funnyman, Al Franken” again, I swear, I’ll toss my cookies. I’ve made it no secret that I, as a self-professed Liberal (capital “L”) on purpose, have never found Al Franken of Saturday Night Live (”SNL”) and Air America fame to be particularly funny. On the other hand, the man earned my respect for calling a one-hour round table meeting for all concerned veterans to engage him in a question and answer session and that, folks, is where Mr. Franken earned my respect.

From TPMDC:

Minnesota Supreme Court Rules On Coleman’s Appeal: He Lost, Franken Won The Election
By Eric Kleefeld

The Minnesota Supreme Court has handed down its much-expected ruling in the heavily-litigated Minnesota Senate race from 2008 — and it’s a unanimous one — deciding against Republican former Sen. Norm Coleman’s appeal of his defeat in the election trial and affirming the lower court’s verdict that Democratic comedian Al Franken is the legitimate winner of the race.

The courts finds that “Al Franken received the highest number of votes legally cast and is entitled under Minn. Stat. § 204C.40 (2008) to receive the certificate of election as United States Senator from the State of Minnesota.” This means that when Franken is ultimately seated, the Democrats will have 60 seats and be able to beat any Republican filibuster if they stay completely united (though good luck with that, obviously.) …

Well, congratulations, Senator Franken, and please keep your word to we veterans — we need a watchdog and NOT a half-assed comedian on our side now more than we’ve needed in decades and it is my sincere wish you will come through for us and leave the jokes for someone who’s actually FUNNY.

***

Other bloggers weigh in on this news: Drudge Retort as always offers a colorful “Yellow Dog Democrat” discussion; My Twin Brutha from Another Muthah and former GTL columnist, Matthew O’Keefe of Papamoka Straight Talk gleefully says “Bye Bye, Norm Coleman“…

Why Are The Conservative Justices The Ones Who Rule In Favor Of The Racially-Discriminated While The Liberals Oppose Them? New Haven, Connecticut Part II…

Not that long ago, our so-called “liberal” SCOTUS justices ruled in favor of “Big Bidness” during the Kelo Decision (a.k.a., Eminent Domain) while the so-called “conservative” justices ruled in a “rarity” in favor of We, The Little Guy -slash- Gal. The nation was notably shocked and we Libertals (REAL ones) were throwing our hands up, asking ourselves “WTF????” Remember that?

Again, I ask — where and who are the REAL “Liberals” and the REAL “Conservatives” (capitalized on purpose) when you need ‘em?

***

Other bloggers weigh in: The Drudge Retort (Left) offers a great Yellow Dog Democrat discussion as usual; Andrew Sullivan of The Daily Dish (The Atlantic — Moderate) is also scratching his head over this one; John Cole of Balloon Juice (Left) says the “Righties” are portraying this as a 9-0 ruling against Sotomayor; Jazz Shaw of The Moderate Voice seems to be on my own brain level on the issue; Don Surber of The Charleston Daily Mail (Right) is more direct — says this proves Sotomayor was “wrong“…

susan 28: Offers A Gun-Toting Liberal Libertarian-ish View On Socialized Medicine…

In response to Obama tank-man Marc Seltzer’s defense of the “Fig leaf Option”, susan 28 says:

“I don’t care what your position on healthcare is; that capsule looks *cool*..

But I do think a ‘public option’ will eventually corner the market because private entities can’t compete with an entity that has a monopoly on the use of deadly force to fund itself.

Take the following example:

Say one shopkeeper uses her life savings to stock her shelves and needs to price items accordingly.

The shop next door, selling the same items (let’s say, ecstasy in those cool olive-lime capsules), is run by the Mafia, who shakes down everyone in town for their income, leaving them only enough to purchase their ecstasy from the Mafia shop, which, since its overhead is covered by its own customers, easily undercuts Mom’s Ecstasy Emporium next door, and Mom quickly goes under.

For awhile, everyone celebrates and the Don is the toast of the town for ‘bringing cheap ecstasy to the people’.

Until their serotonin is depleted, their backs start aching and the hangover sets in, at which time they realize they can’t pay their rent because the Don used their rent money to finance the party, and that, although Mom’s ecstasy was decidedly more expensive, not only was it *really good stuff*, but she never pointed a gun at them to raise the money to stock her shelves, nor to compel them to purchase her product.

And to make matters worse, once Mom was eliminated (rumors abound about her whereabouts, poor dear), the Don and his anointed, no-bid suppliers jacked prices up even higher than Mom charged, and there was no-one left to challenge them.

So, when Mom was the supplier, they had great E at a price that kept both Mom and her customers in high style (and their own habits in check) and left them with enough income to pay their rent and throw the occasional party. But now that the Don ran the game, the most popular drug in town was The Don’s Handy-Dandy Backache Pills, which were distributed “free” to all.

I agree that health insurance as it sits – with the top insurers themselves being “anointed” as Medicare “partners” like Humana/BCBS – is outta control and definitely Fascism writ large. But I do think a “public option” will inevitably morph into “public only”, which is why it is primarily supported by those who would prefer public-only and are floating the “option” not as something they see as an ideal scenario in itself but as a fig leaf for the public-only situation they ultimately prefer.

I think a small percentage of those folks are on the level and really do see it as a check-and-balance against insurance monopolies – and i agree Big Insurance could use a good old-fashioned body-check by We, The People – but I don’t see a tax-subsidized “competitor” going anywhere but “The Don” running the show and the tyranny and corruption that entails.

Such as the Don insisting he have access to your medical records so that he may sanction even further your personal habits, forbidding you to engage in any potentially harmful behaviour since “he” (with your “protection money”) is paying your bills, and the only pleasure he now allows you is his substandard ecstasy – which not only doesn’t get you off but doesn’t even come in those cool green caps anymore (those were Mom’s invention, but the dye was expensive and aesthetics weren’t a priority to the Don’s philistine palate).

So, while I agree that something has to change, the question is:

Who do you want throwing YOUR next party?” — susan 28

***

susan 28’s BIO:

susan 28 is a former systems analyst who left the corporate world in the 80’s to follow her calling as a freelance nightclub dj and libertarian activist whose issues include reproductive rights, Second Amendment rights, assisted suicide, fiscal reform, the recognition of contractual relationships between consenting adults of all persuasions and the abolition of all vice laws. Her interests include art, music, physics, philosophy, bioethics, politics, tight groups, loose women and fast driving. She currently resides in Palm Beach, Florida.

Appreciate susan 28’s column? Disagree? Sound off in the comments section below…