100 Days of Irony

Isn't it ironic that while the President tells us to make sacrifices for the "common good", he lives a lavish lifestyle? Where has he cut back? Food? No. He serves $100 per pound steak at White House parties and has chefs flown into D.C. from Chicago to make his favorite pizza. Clothes? No. His wife wears $540 sneakers while working at a DC food bank. Travel? No. He and his security entourage used about 9000 gallons of fuel on their Earth Day tour while again telling us to cut back on our fuel usage to "save the planet". We still have the freedom to travel five hours across the state four times a year to see close grandma in Midland or 10 hours out of state once a year to see far grandma in St. Louis or three days across the country once a year to see my cousin get married in the San Juan Islands. We would have to make these trips for 22 years in a row to use what he did in one day, and while I asked nobody else to support these trips, he forced me to support his trips through mytaxes.

Isn't it ironic that while the President and Congress desire local control of radio stations and local programming, they intend to force it on those stations from on high, with the heavy-hand of the federal government, namely the FCC and community boards reporting to them?

Isn't it ironic that while they want what "works" in education, regardless of ideology, they kill programs that work, such as the DCOSP discussed in an earlier post?

Isn't it ironic that while they want to keep the government, at ALL levels, out of the decision of a woman who wants an abortion, or should I say wants to end an innocent life, they desire the government at the highest level to be intimately involved in the medical decisions of all people through the single-payer health care plan? Are you overweight? Sorry, that surgery would be a waste of "our" money until you lose some weight. Are you a senior citizen? Sorry, you won't live long enough to benefit from that surgery. Do you have cancer? Sorry, treatment is too expensive.

Isn't it ironic that while four non-TARP, hedge fund debt holders in Chrysler are asked to take about $0.30 for every dollar invested, the UAW is given the full value? One of those bond holders said, "What we're looking for is a reasonable payout on the value of the debt . . . more in line with what unions and Fiat were getting." George Schultze, the managing member of the hedge fund Schultze Asset Management, a Chrysler bondholder, said, "We are simply seeking to enforce our bargained-for rights under well-settled law." Most private entities agreed to take the loss, but four said no deal because they expect their contract to be honored. The UAW will be getting a majority share and Fiat, the government and private entities will make up the difference.

Isn't it ironic that while harsh or extreme terrorist interrogation techniques (including, yes, waterboarding) do get valuable intelligence for the thwarting of attacks on the people of this country, to which the documents themselves, the former VP, the current CIA director as well as the President himself admitted, they will no longer conduct them? Who are they trying to protect...us or them? The question is who are they Constitutionally-obligated to protect?

I'm sure they are more ironies to discuss and more to come.