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: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Attorney General Jeff Sessions to Obama DoJ Appointees: GTFO

Posted on March 10th, 2017 by Tracy Connors

Jeff Sessions (29090205550)

Nope. The headline of this piece is purposely misleading. But now that I’ve gotten your attention, let me see if I can keep it for a paragraph or eleven.

Most people only read headlines. I’d link to studies proving this, but anyone with a twitter or FaceBook account who pays even a modicum of attention to current events knows this to be true.

Don’t believe me? Just pop over into the trending topics feed (which is where I found the story I’m using to prove my point) and you’ll witness people losing their minds in reaction to a headline that has been framed to fire up outrage because that means clicks! Mind you, those clicks don’t translate to people actually reading through the article. I’m going to guess, based upon absolutely nothing, only 15% of people who share something because the headline elicited some variation of the following reaction; ZOMG! THIS IS INSANE/EVIL/CRAZY EVERYONE MUST KNOW ABOUT THIS IMMEDIATELY AND I MUST BE THE FIRST ONE TO TELL THEM!, actually bothered to read even a paragraph of the article before they RTed or shared it.  

I feel it is my duty to point these stories out from time to time in order to try to stop the outrage sharing madness. Today I was presented with an excellent example: Here’s the headline from The Hill

via screengrab

Wow, this must be a big deal! If this was just business as usual it wouldn’t really constitute news and no paid Hill staff writer would waste a moment of their time on it, right?

via GIPHY

From The Hill article (emphasis mine):

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has asked dozens of U.S. attorneys appointed by former President Obama to submit their resignations, the Department of Justice announced Friday.

U.S. attorneys are normally replaced at the beginning of new administrations. Of the 93 U.S. attorneys, 46 remain from the past administration, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

This really isn’t news, this is non-news (not to be confused with fake news). This is what happens every time a new Administration comes to Washington. I have to wonder if perhaps someone pointed this out to the fine folks over at The Hill, because they’ve since added a juicy tidbit to the story that does make it news:

The call for resignations applies to Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, the New York Times reported.

The move is a surprise, as Bharara reportedly met with Trump after the election and agreed to remain in his position during the Trump administration. Sessions also asked him to stay, the prosecutor told The New York Times.

Good on The Hill for adding some actual news into a piece that originally lacked it.

But I have no doubt that The Hill would have left the original, non-news story version of the piece up because of what a headline like that can be turned into by leftist sites and social media pages that traffic in outrage.

These outrage merchants have spun the normal practice undertaken by every new Administration into sensational story of PURGES! and have fed that malarky to their frothing audiences and they are sharing the crap out this garbage.

This is not news, this is non-news.

Learn to recognize it, and dismiss it and your blood pressure levels won’t fluctuate wildly throughout the day.

Featured image By Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America (Jeff Sessions) [CC BY-SA 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Fake News the Latest Lyrical Logic Lesson from Remy (video)

Posted on March 10th, 2017 by Tracy Connors

Remy does an excellent job here explaining CNN’s continued inability to comprehend why President Trump, and others, feel that they deserve the moniker “fake news” or if you prefer “really fake news.”

Even the dumbest among us, looking at you Brian Stelter, should be able to follow Remy’s lyrical logic.

Tags: , , , , ,

Monica Crowley Drops by Hannity to Address Plagiarism Allegations

Posted on March 8th, 2017 by Fingers Malloy

Friend of the show Monica Crowley was a guest on Hannity last night to address the plagiarism allegations that lead to her stepping down from a position in the Trump Administration. After taking a moment to pay tribute to her late brother-in law, Alan Colmes, Monica opened up about what happened to her:

“Well, look. What happened to me was a despicable, straight up, political hit job. Okay, it’s been debunked. My editor has completely supported me and backed me up. There is a very toxic, and it’s getting increasingly toxic and poisonous atmosphere of personal destruction, in Washington and the media. But now it’s at a whole different level.”

An excellent piece written by Andrew C. McCarthy at National Review breaks down the plagiarism allegations made by CNN, and how they were debunked by copyright attorney, Lynn Chu. As Monica said to Hannity, this toxic atmosphere is pushing smart and good people out of government service. Monica Crowley is one example.

And that’s a shame.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Grassley wants to know why FBI considered paying author of salacious Golden Shower Dossier

Posted on March 6th, 2017 by Tracy Connors

‘Member that memo, uh excuse me, that dossier, published back in January by BuzzFeed and not published, but merely alluded to by CNN in several articles? The dossier contained, among other things, a wild tale of Trump procuring a Moscow hotel room in order to have it defiled by Russian prozzies because the Obamas had once slept there. Sounds plausible right?

The dossier led to this confrontation between then President Elect Donald Trump and CNN reporter Jim Acosta.

The patently absurd fanfic was compiled by an MI6 agent called Christopher Steele. At one point the FBI seemed to find this fabulist’s fairytales to be credible and considered paying him to continue his investigation into Trump and the Golden Shower Girls of Gorky Park.

Well Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) thinks the FBI Director James Comey has some ‘splaining to do.

Via The Hill:

“The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican nominee for President in the run-up to the election raises further questions about the FBI’s independence from politics, as well as the Obama administration’s use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends,” Grassley wrote.

“It is additionally troubling that the FBI reportedly agreed to such an arrangement given that, in January of 2017, then-Director Clapper issued a statement stating that ‘the [intelligence community] has not made any judgment that the information in this document is reliable, and we did not rely upon it in any way for our conclusions.’”

In his letter, Grassley asks for all records regarding Steele’s investigation, details of the agreement between the FBI and Steele, the FBI’s policies for using outside investigators, and whether the bureau has relied on any of the information Steele has provided in seeking warrants.

Get ’em Chuck!

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

Trump Speaks to Congress and Women in Costumes [podcast]

Posted on March 2nd, 2017 by Tracy Connors

This week on the big show, Fingers and Tracy react to Trump’s speech to a joint session of Congress and the pathetic Democrat response that followed it. Then it’s on to other news, Mayor Kenney is still being plagued by problems he never saw coming when Philadelphia’s soda tax was passed. SAG wants actors ages removed from IMDB because of the potential for age discrimination, and of course they had to talk about the monumental screw up at the Academy Awards.

A new episode will drop next week. 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. Check the feed often, you never know when we’re going to drop an Enough Already Bite.

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

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

CPAC 2017 Wrap-up with Kerry Picket, Kurt Schlichter, Stephen Kruiser & Scottie Nell Hughes [podcast]

Posted on February 28th, 2017 by Tracy Connors

This week on the big show, Fingers gives Tracy a recap of his CPAC experience, the drama, the panels, the parties, and of course, the casino. Also included, Fingers’ CPAC interviews with The Daily Caller’s Kerry Picket, Townhall’s Kurt Schlichter, IJ Review’s Stephen Kruiser, and Right Alerts’ Scottie Nell Hughes.

A new episode will drop later this week. 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. Check the feed often, you never know when we’re going to drop an Enough Already Bite.

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

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

Who will make my coffee on March 8th? [podcast]

Posted on February 16th, 2017 by Tracy Connors

This week on the big show, Fingers and Tracy discuss the Women’s Marchers calling for a general strike, lefties refusing to pay income taxes, Air BnB charging occupancy taxes, the GOP infighting over the repeal of ObamaCare, and the alien built tunnel that runs from LA to DC.

A new episode will drop next week. 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. Check the feed often, you never know when we’re going to drop an Enough Already Bite.

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

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The are a lot of killers [podcast]

Posted on February 9th, 2017 by Tracy Connors

This week on the big show, Fingers and Tracy break down the Cruz vs Sanders CNN debate, the Super Bowl, Lady Gaga’s a-political performance that some on the left have managed to convince themselves was a super secret subversive middle finger to Mike Pence, Elizabeth Warren being nicely told to sit down and shut up, and Trump’s supposedly outrageous statement to Bill O’Reilly; “There are a lot of killers. You think our country’s so innocent?” Ashe Schow stops by to talk about DeVos’ confirmation, and campus bias response teams. 

A new episode will drop next week. 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. Check the feed often, you never know when we’re going to drop an Enough Already Bite.

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

follow Ashe on twitter @AsheSchow

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