Episode 5 on WAAM 1600 AM: School Lunches, Repeal Failure, and E-Cigs [podcast]

Posted on April 2nd, 2017 by Tracy Connors


Fingers revealed that his kids’ schools keep track of what they order at lunch, which is more than a little bit creepy. Are your kid’s lunch buying habits being tracked by their school? What is being done with this information? Are the schools selling it to Big Junk Food? It’s just so odd and gross.

The seven-year-in-the-making-ObamaCare-repeal-effort failed in spectacular fashion last week.

Pathetic.

This is terrible for Trump.
Not so fast. Scott Adams believes the failure of the Trump/Ryan repeal effort is a good thing, because it destroys the “Trump is HITLER!” meme.

With the failure of the Ryan healthcare bill, the illusion of Trump-is-Hitler has been fully replaced with Trump-is-incompetent meme. Look for the new meme to dominate the news, probably through the summer. By year end, you will see a second turn, from incompetent to “Competent, but we don’t like it.”

Why yes, it is rather un-Hitler like to acquiesce to the democratic process. So out with the “Trump’s a dictator” and in with “Trump’s an incompetent boob who can’t navigate Washington so we probably shouldn’t be so frightened.”

Just don’t expect this change to happen overnight. This new reality in which Trump is not in fact an evil dictator will come into focus slowly for some. If Adams is correct, and thus far he has been, we’ll see most of the “resistance” people moving into the competent camp by the end of the summer.

Outrage outbursts certainly aren’t abating. This week pompous windbag Bill O’Reilly, had the temerity (word of the day kids!) to say that Rep Maxine Waters appears to be wearing a James Brown wig.

Eh, not exactly Bill but close enough I suppose.

Having eyeballs and using them to notice similarities is of course racist. So poor old Bill is getting hammered for his comments. Might feel sorry for him if he wasn’t such an ass.

CrowdStrike, the cyber security firm that told the FBI that the Russians totes hacked the DNC server, and the FBI took their word for it, is back in the news this week.

CrowdStrike had to make changes to their December report linking the Russian hacker group “Fancy Bear” to a hack that targeted the Ukrainian military, because they got just about everything wrong. But they’re still totally correct about “Fancy Bear” being behind the DNC hack. Uh huh.

Do you work for the DNC? Well you better get cracking on writing a letter of resignation. Via The Hill:

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has asked its staff to submit resignation letters as the party goes through a shakeup after a rough 2016 election cycle.
Shortly after former Labor Secretary Tom Perez became the party’s chair in late February, the DNC requested resignation letters to be dated April 15, giving Perez the ability — should he choose — to launch a large-scale reorganization.
Obtaining the resignation letters eases the process for deciding who to keep, regardless of how many are eventually let go.
How many heads will roll?
If you thought the “Mattress Girl” story was over you were sadly mistaken. The man she accused of raping her, Paul Nungesser, has been battling in court for years to try to salvage his reputation. Ashe Schow at Watchdog.org has all the sordid details here are some of the highlights:
 A former Columbia University student who is suing his alma mater for failing to stop his accuser from publicly harassing him has lost in court a second time.

For the second time, a judge has dismissed Paul Nungesser’s lawsuit against his university. This time the complaint was dismissed “with prejudice,” meaning the former Columbia student can’t make any more appeals.

Nungesser and his attorneys filed their original complaint in April 2015 but amended it in July of that year following his graduation. Manhattan federal judge Gregory Woods issued the ruling March 24.

The Nungesser’s original complaint:

Despite being found “not responsible” numerous times, Nungesser was treated as guilty in the media, which continued to fawn over Sulkowicz’s art project. When the two graduated in May 2015, Sulkowicz was told she could not carry her mattress on stage, but she wasn’t stopped from doing so anyway. The school had previously sent out an email banning large objects at graduation. It seemed at the time like allowing Sulkowicz to bring her mattress on stage would help Nungesser’s lawsuit, but it didn’t.

Nungesser sued Columbia for allowing her to publicly harass him through her art project. During the senior art exhibition, Sulkowicz not only displayed her mattress, but also drawings she had made of her alleged rape, including drawings of Nungesser’s genitals.

In his first dismissal of Nungesser’s lawsuit, Judge Woods claimed the gender-based discrimination claim rested on a “logical fallacy.”

“He assumes that because the allegations against him concerned a sexual act that everything that follows from it is ‘sex-based’ within the meaning of Title IX. He is wrong,” Woods wrote. “Taken to its logical extreme, Nungesser’s position would lead to the conclusion that those who commit, or are accused of committing, sexual assault are a protected class under Title IX. The statute does not permit that result.”

But Woods’ description would also affect accusers of sexual assault. Title IX has been used as a gender discrimination claim in sexual assaults because women are the primary accusers; therefore, not responding to their claims is somehow discriminating against them as part of a class.

Nungesser’s lawsuit was more complex than other Title IX lawsuits brought by male accused students. He was arguing that Sulkowicz’s art project — and the school and professor that sanctioned that art project — was harassment, since his name was leaked to the media and he was humiliated on campus. Nungesser returned to his native Germany after graduation, believing he couldn’t get hired in the U.S. after the negative media attention.

Judge Woods didn’t buy the harassment argument, and in a 46-page decision, wrote Columbia couldn’t have perceived that he was being harassed based on his gender, rather than his relationship with Sulkowicz.

One of Nungesser’s attorneys, Philip Arwood Byler of Nesenoff & Miltenberg, told the New York Post that he was determined to continue fighting the case.

“I’ve scanned the opinion and my view is that it’s mistaken,” Byler said. “We think we have a good appeal. We’re going to have to go to the 2nd Circuit [Court of Appeals] and get it done right.”

Makes your brain hurt doesn’t it?
And finally, also from the brain pain files, comes this lunacy via the NY Post:

Gov. Cuomo’s Department of Health last week released survey data that he’s using to bolster his case for a $12 tax on 30 ml bottles of vaping liquids and a ban on vaping indoors. Yet the survey data — and much other evidence — undercut his case.

That hasn’t stopped legislators from piling on with efforts to ban coupons for vapor products, prohibit sales in pharmacies, ban flavored e-liquid and even ban the sale of liquid used in vapor products altogether. State Sen. Kemp Hannon (R-Nassau) says he’s reached an agreement with Cuomo to pass the vaping ban.

The first thing the governor, Hannon and other legislators fail to recognize is that e-cigarettes aren’t tobacco products. E-cigarettes contain no tobacco. Most contain nicotine, which is heated in a flavored liquid to produce an aerosol users inhale. But nicotine isn’t exclusive to tobacco. The same nicotine is used in nicotine gums and patches used to help smokers quit.

Scientists have recognized for years that people smoke for the nicotine but die from the smoke, which contains thousands of harmful chemicals. E-cigarettes contain no tobacco and produce no smoke. While we may prefer living in a fantasyland where teens never engage in any risky behavior, the Health Department report demonstrates that New York teens are actually making better, more health-conscious choices.

The party that claims to have a monopoly on the love of science sure doesn’t seem to understand it all that much.

BONUS CONTENT

Has science on the verge of solving the biggest problem of our times, then hangover?  Via the Daily Mail:

SunUp is the brainchild of Margaret Morese, a senior molecular, cellular and developmental biology Major at Yale, and Liam McClintock, a senior D1 athlete involved in Greek life at Yale.

‘Hangovers cost the U.S. over $200 billion according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention,’ the team shared on their Indigogo page.

‘That’s about $1.37 for each drink consumed by Americans!’

‘Together with your help we are aiming to prevent the damaging effects of alcohol on the body, terrible feelings of hangover, and productivity lost due to alcohol hangovers.’

If you want to contribute to their crowdfunding campaign you can do so here.

 

That does it for this week’s news. We’ll be back next Sunday with an all new Enough Already Radio. All episodes will be posted to SoundCloud. You can also subscribe to the podcast on iTunes, Google Play, Stitcher and TuneIn, or follow us on facebook.

follow Fingers on twitter @FingersMalloy
follow Tracy on twitter @TracyLConnors
follow Ashe on twitter @AsheSchow

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Episode 3 on WAAM 1600 AM: Trump’s Budget Proposal, CAFE Standards, and Maddow’s Big Fail [podcast]

Posted on March 20th, 2017 by Tracy Connors


This Thursday, President Trump released his budget proposal. The 62 page document titled, America First: A Budget Blueprint to Make America Great Again, only deals with discretionary spending (read it doesn’t touch on entitlement programs) which makes up just 1/3 of the overall budget. As he promised on the campaign trail, he’s asking for serious cuts, save for defense spending which he is asking to be increased by $25B this fiscal year, and $54B next.

Massive cuts to the discretionary budget?!

Yes, this is real life.

The leftwing media and democrats are unsurprisingly freaking out, Big Bird is going to be homeless! But Big Bird’s been working for HBO since 2015 so he’s (I’m assuming gender here, apologies) going to be fine just fine. The same cannot be said for employees at the EPA, HUD, HHS, DoT, Commerce, Labor, and Interior Departments.

Via CNN (emphasis added):

Here’s a look at some of the major cuts in the President’s budget blueprint:

Health and Human Services, the department responsible for implementing Obamacare and its proposed repeal, would face a $12.6 billion cut — a 16.2% decrease
Environmental Protection Agency: $2.6 billion, or 31.4%
State Department: $11 billion, or 28.7%
Labor Department: $2.5 billion, or 20.7%
Agriculture Department: $5 billion, or 20.7%
US Army Corps of Engineers: $1 billion, a 16.3% cut
• Cuts National Institutes of Health spending by $5.8 billion, a nearly 20% cut. Also overhauls NIH to focus on “highest priority” efforts and eliminates the Fogarty International Center.
• Other double-digit cuts include Commerce at 15.7%; Education at 13.5%; Housing and Urban Development at 13.2%; Transportation at 12.7%, and Interior at 11.7%.
From what we’ve been able to gather, these “slashes” to the budget spell the end of art, science, and research in the United States. Also, poor people, children and the elderly will no doubt starve to death if Trump’s proposed budget is accepted by Congress. The theatrics have only just begun, isn’t hyperbole fun?!
Leftist aren’t the only ones throwing around hyperbolic statements this week. Senator Rand Paul is still fuming over Paul Ryan’s “ObamaCare” Lite bill. From Breitbart:

It doesn’t have to be this way. We just had an election about change, about draining the swamp. President Trump promised to be different, and I believe he sincerely wants to be. But he is being taken for a ride through the swamp right now on “Obamacare Lite.”

For four STRAIGHT elections, REPUBLICANS ran on repealing Obamacare, and now “Republican orthodoxy” — I’m told — is keeping insurance subsidies, mandates, taxes, and insurance company bailouts.

That’s not acceptable to me. And it isn’t keeping our promise.

Though I want to believe the glass is half full, I am tempted, very tempted, to smash a glass half full of Obamacare Lite — smash that glass to smithereens!

Hear! Hear! Let’s smash that glass of ObamaCare Lite, which as far as we know is non-alcoholic so it’s just begging to be smashed to smithereens, and bring an end this idiocy.

 Speaking of idiocy, Rachel Maddow takes top honors this week for her overhyped unveiling of two pages of Donald Trump’s 2005 1040. Lucky for Rachel, no one watched her make a fool of herself in primetime. Oh wait, sorry, turns out that her non-scoop garnered her the biggest ratings of her career. More than 4 million people tuned in to watch her humiliate herself, hahahaha!
The President traveled with DoT Secretary Elaine Chao and EPA Chief Scott Pruitt to Michigan this week to meet with auto manufactures and see what can be done to revive the American auto industry. The a review of the EPA’s ludacris CAFE standards was discussed at length, via Reason:

On its way out the door in January, the Obama administration rushed to lock in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) standards at 54.5 miles per gallon for light duty vehicles by 2025. The final determination also calculated that the higher CAFE standards would save American drivers nearly $100 billion in fuel costs by 2025.

Today, President Donald Trump told a cheering audience of auto industry workers in Michigan: “We’re going to work on the CAFE standards so you can make cars in America again. We’re going to help companies so they are going to help you. We’re going to be the car capital of the world again.”

New EPA administrator Scott Pruitt also announced today that the agency in coordination with the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will reconsider the final determination and decide by April 1, 2018 whether the Obama-era CAFE standards will stand. The reconsideration of the stringent CAFE standards is taking place at the request of American automakers who argue in a February letter to Pruitt that they are unachievable using currently foreseen automotive technologies. In its letter the Alliance of Auto Manufacturers asserts that the Obama Administration’s EPA final determination is “riddled with indefensible assumptions” regarding available technologies, consumer acceptance, technology affordability, and industry employment effects.

The inane EPA standards have forced companies to manufacture costly “compliance cars” that no one wants to drive. Eric Peters explains:

[T]he compliance car – is a car designed to fail. A car they know ahead of time won’t sell, that they’ll have to give away at a loss.

And they build it anyway.

And continue to build it.

Why would auto manufactures build vehicles they know won’t sell? Peters continues;

[Compliance cars are] Purposely built as economic throw-aways, designed solely to comply with the “zero emissions” fatwas coming out of Washington and state capitals (California, particularly) that insist a certain number of these things will be built each year.

Bottomline, automakers are wasting time and money building cars that no one wants. Sound familiar *cough* ObamaCare mandated minimum coverage *cough*. In order for American auto industry to make a serious comeback, these idiotic rules must go.
And finally, we leave you with your dream nightmare wedding?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Episode 2 on WAAM 1600 AM: ObamaCare, Wikileaks, and #ADayWithoutAWoman President [podcast]

Posted on March 12th, 2017 by Tracy Connors

The long awaited House ObamaCare Repeal/Replace Bill was unveiled this week and seemingly everyone, save for Paul Ryan and President Trump, thinks it stinks on ice.

Heritage hated it:

This bill misses the mark primarily because it fails to correct the features of Obamacare that drove up health care costs. Congress should continue to focus on first repealing the failed policy of Obamacare and then act to offer patient-centered, market-based replacement reforms.

Cato completely trashed it:

This bill is a train wreck waiting to happen.

The House leadership bill isn’t even a repeal bill. Not by a long shot. It would repeal far less of ObamaCare than the bill Republicans sent to President Obama one year ago. The ObamaCare regulations it retains are already causing insurance markets to collapse. It would allow that collapse to continue, and even accelerate the collapse. Republicans would then own whatever damage ObamaCare causes, such as when the law leaves seriously ill patients with no coverage at all. Congress would have to revisit ObamaCare again and again to address problems they failed to fix the first time around. ObamaCare would consume the rest of Congress’ and President Trump’s agenda. Delaying or dooming other priorities like tax reform, infrastructure spending, and Gorsuch. The fallout could dog Republicans all the way into 2018 and 2020, when it could lead to a Democratic wave election like the one we saw in 2008. Only then, Democrats won’t have ObamaCare on their mind but single-payer.

According to Breitbart, Rand Paul wants to hold public burnings (note: this is a hyperbolic interpretation of Rand’s reaction) of the bill:

Paul told Breitbart News:

I think the reason why the House leadership bill is Obamacare Lite is because it retains subsidies. Obamacare had subsidies for people to buy insurance. In the Paul Ryan bill, they keep the subsidies—they just call them refundable tax credits. Some people are predicting that it’s actually going to be more expensive than the subsidies we have under Obamacare. This isn’t you getting your own money back, this is you getting somebody else’s money. So, a family that makes $30,000 a year could actually get $14,000 that they didn’t pay. Let’s say they paid zero in income tax, they could get $14,000 back. One, we don’t have the money—it’s a new entitlement program and two, if you get $14,000 back do you think the insurance company is ever going to sell insurance for less than $14,000? That becomes the floor. So, it actually pushes insurance rates up—it doesn’t allow insurance rates to fall. So, that doesn’t allow insurance rates to fall and it sets up a new entitlement. The second thing that Paul Ryan’s Obamacare Lite bill does is they keep the Obamacare taxes—all of them—for a year. And then after a year, they keep the Cadillac Tax forever. That’s the tax on if you have really good insurance, Obamacare taxes that. So will Paul Ryan’s plan. The third thing they do that is Obamacare-like is they keep the individual mandate. It seems like every Republican says they were against the individual mandate. That’s if you didn’t buy insurance you had to pay a penalty to the government, a tax. Obamacare Lite, Paul Ryan’s plan, just changes it so you have to pay a penalty to the insurance companies. I consider that to still be a mandate that isn’t consistent with those of us who want less government involvement. So they keep the subsidies, they keep the taxes, and then they keep the mandate. Then the fourth thing they do is they actually subsidize the insurance companies. Right now, insurance companies are losing money and Obamacare has this rescue thing called ‘risk corridors’ to bail out the insurance companies. Paul Ryan has got the same thing, he just calls it reinsurance and it’s $100 million worth. I predict that might not even be enough. So I don’t like any of it. Now, I do think we agree as Republicans on repeal. But I don’t think we agree on the replacement. That’s why I say we should separate them, vote on repeal and then vote the same day on a separate bill that’s called replace.

This fight has only just begun #popcorn.

The other big story this week was Wikileaks’ release of Vault 7 “Year Zero”.

ZeroHedge describes the content of the document dump thusly:

Yesterday Wikileaks released 8,761 CIA documents detailing the agency’s hacking of smart phones, routers, computers, and even televisions.

These files reveal that the CIA can and has hacked devices that were supposedly secure– iPhones, iPads, and Android devices.

The documents further reveal that the CIA is deliberately infecting personal computers with spyware, including Windows, Mac OS/X, Solaris, Linux, and other operating systems.

They’re also hacking WiFi routers to deploy software that monitors Internet activity, and have even figured out how to bypass anti-virus software so that their spyware cannot be detected.

They’ve also managed to make the rest of the world believe that Russian hackers, not the CIA, are behind all this malware and spyware.

It’s like a restatement of that old Mission: Impossible line– “Should any of your IM force be caught or killed… we’ll blame Russia.”

The CIA is pretty shameless about its activities, nicknaming its various hacking programs “Assassin”, “Medusa”, and “Brutal Kangaroo”.

One of the deepest revelations is that the agency is able to hack Internet-connected televisions, including Samsung smart TVs, through a program called “Weeping Angel”.

Basically the CIA can turn your TV into a listening device, recording conversations in the room and transmitting the audio to a CIA server.

Even if you think the TV is off, it’s not.

CIA hackers have been able to spoof the on/off display and set the television to a “false off” mode.

Bottom line, no device that’s connected to the outside world is truly safe.

Combine these new revelations, with this fun flashback about the time the CIA “improperly intruded” (read: hacked into) a database that was being used by the Senate Intelligence Committee and their staffers to compile research for their “Torture Report”, and it becomes much easier to believe that Donald Trump and his campaign were being spied on during the 2016 election.

From a 2014 McClatchy piece regarding the CIA/Senate Intelligence Committee spying scandal.

An internal CIA investigation confirmed allegations that agency personnel improperly intruded into a protected database used by Senate Intelligence Committee staff to compile a scathing report on the agency’s detention and interrogation program, prompting bipartisan outrage and at least two calls for spy chief John Brennan to resign.

Brennan did not resign. The Justice Department did not investigate. Shocking I know. But did the CIA offer any explanation? Why yes, yes they did, from the same McClatchy piece (emphasis added):

A person with knowledge of the issue insisted that the CIA personnel who improperly accessed the database “acted in good faith,” believing that they were empowered to do so because they believed there had been a security violation.

There was no malicious intent. They acted in good faith believing they had the legal standing to do so,” said the knowledgeable person, who asked not to be further identified because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly. “But it did not conform with the legal agreement reached with the Senate committee.”

Oooooh, so they were acting in good faith, no malice was involved and they believed they had legal standing! Well then by all means we should just let them slide, call it a mulligan and carry on with our business. Disgraceful!
That no one was even reprimanded let alone fired for hacking into the Senate Intelligence Committee’s database undoubtedly sent a signal to others inside the agency; intrude away! And that they most certainly did.
Onto something almost as ridiculous, although way less frightening. An attempt to prove that the evil, omnipresent surge of sexism cost Hillary Clinton the White House which was made by two academics, failed in spectacular fashion.

Via the wonderful Ashe Schow writing for the Observer:

The idea: Recreate pivotal scenes from the presidential debates to prove a woman wouldn’t be able to get away with saying the things that then-candidate Donald Trump said. Also, prove that people would like Hillary Clinton more she had been a man, thus showing sexism alive and well in the political arena—and giving the Left another reason to whine over the election.

The result: Oops! It turns out people would like Trump more if he were a woman and would like Clinton even less if she were a man.

My sides!

And if you were wondering, no, no one who participated in this theatrical experiment seems to given up on the idea that sexism lurks round every corner.

Finally, we just had to talk about the #ADayWithoutAWoman protests, marches, strikes, whine-ins, whatever, that took place on March 8th. What these women are complaining  about is an unsolvable mystery that even the great Robert Stack (PBUM) wouldn’t even attempt to unravel. Lucky for you all, we decided to give it the old community college try!

As best we can tell, the women striking (read: women who put in for and were granted a paid vacation day) really dislike President Trump and by extension all white males, whose businesses are to be boycotted.

screengrab from womensmarch.com

Did you catch that guys? You’re supposed to “lean into” care giving, whatever the hell that means. Oh and guys, these ladies who fancy themselves to be so integral to your workplace that their absence will be felt, yeah they’re gonna need to you pick up the slack for them. Thanks!

Still don’t have a clue what this is all about? Sigh, neither do I. Maybe this from WomenStrike.org will help: 

screengrab from WomenStrike.org

Haha! Just kidding.

Oh, and about that #GrabYourWallet, don’t be misled into believing this means grab your wallet because you’re going to be spending big league! as it actually means the exact opposite. Could it be that they wanted to avoid using the word boycott because it contains “boy” and ew boys are gross and grow up to be terrible oppressive men? The list leads us to believe that these ladies have hate for Ivanka Trump. The majority of businesses that appear on the list were placed there because they carry one of Ivanka’s lines. Help women by hurting a woman, this is groundbreaking stuff.

Confused, irritated and angry? Feel like putting on a silly pink hat and taking to the streets to yell about it? Well now you know what it feels like to be a woman! Er, no, that’s not it.

Maybe this exchange between Tucker Carlson and Julie Alvin, Executive Editor for Bustle.com (no they don’t sell those old-timey butt enhancer things) will clear things up once and for all.

Nope. Guess this is one mystery that will remain unsolved.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Snark Factor 255 with Rick Wilson and Donlyn Turnbull

Posted on August 16th, 2012 by Fingers Malloy

Republican political strategist Rick Wilson joined us to talk about Paul Ryan, voter ID and the Republican Party’s use of new media.

Donlyn Turnbull debuted her new segment, “On the Edge with Donlyn.”

Tania Gail and Thomas LaDuke are The Snark Factor Players.

Tags: , , , , ,

Snark Factor 254 with Jedediah Bila

Posted on August 15th, 2012 by Fingers Malloy

Jedediah Bila stopped by the radio hootenanny to discuss what she like in a man–and what some women like in their VP candidate.

The Snark Factor also debuted VP Joe Biden’s new faux hit song, “The Back in Chains Blues.”

Amy Miller and Thomas LaDuke are The Snark Factor Players.

Tags: , , ,