Austin Rhodes Cheats on His Taxes

Source: http://www.metrospirit.com/?p=7509

Austin Rhodes doesn't drive 15,000 miles a year for his job as a radio talk show host.  He's a liar and a cheater.  He claims he's been doing it for 20 years.  That means he's been cheating on his taxes for 20 years.  What a shmuck.

He'll probably get away with it because all a person has to do to cheat on mileage is fudge entries and show gas station receipts.

But he has the chutzpuh to complain about it on his radio show.  The poor persecuted conservative radio talk show host had to show his fudged up mileage records.  Poor baby.

Evans Medical Group are a Bunch of Greedy Bastards

Yesterday, my wife received a letter from Evans Medical Groups which consists of 5 money-grubbing doctors, including hers--Dr. Jordan. Actually, he's no longer her doctor--he's fired.

The doctors sent this letter to all of their patients informing them that unless they had a certain kind of insurance, they would refuse to see them.

I thought doctors were in this profession to help people, not to maximize their profits.

When I called the office to talk to someone about this, I discovered that it was impossible to talk to any doctor without paying a $10 "triage" fee. They actually charge money to talk to people on the phone.

These so-called doctors are inhuman money-making machines.

Dr. Jordan has Christian propaganda plastered all over his office. I think his attitude is hardly Christian. When push comes to shove he chose money over doing what's right. I'm pretty sure that's not what Jesus would do.

My wife only saw him a couple of times. Once we waited in his office for over an hour and he never showed up so we left. The son-of-a-bitch called her at home and gave her a lecture about why she should have spent the entire day waiting for him (I guess because he considers himself royalty).

*****************************************************************************

I'm letting my subscription to the Augusta Chronicle expire. There's no sense in subscribing to a paper with an editorial page that defends bigotry. I'll seldom read any of the plagaristic editorial any more so this blog is still on hiatus.

I think Jennifer Keeton is bisexual

I think Jennifer Keeton, the ASU student who is suing the school because she didn't like her homework assignment, is bisexual. Note that I'm not saying she is bi-sexual; I'm just writing that I think she is bisexual. I want to make that clear so turd-heads, like Austin Rhodes, can't make the bogus claim that I'm being libelous.

Here is why I suspect she's bisexual:

She claims homosexuality is a choice. Through careful studies, scientists have determined that a person's sexual preference is innate--we are born to be homo, hetero, or bi. Heterosexuals don't have a choice--we like members of the opposite sex. Homosexuals don't have a choice--they like members of the same sex. Only bisexuals have a choice--they like both sexes. Because she thinks there is a choice about the matter, she must be bisexual.

Moreover, people who condemn homosexual lifestyles the loudest, are those who frequently have been discovered to have secret homosexual tendencies. Consider the long list of televangelists and conservative republican politicians who scream against the sins of homosexuality and always vote against legislation favored by the gay community, but are eventually discovered to either have homosexual lovers, or are cruisers of the bathroom stalls.

***************************************************************************

I'm suspending regular commentary on this blog, however, I will make irregular blog entries when the Augusta Chronicle refuses to publish one of my letters, or if they refuse to allow me to comment on their website. Currently, I'm posting comments about their editorials using an amagram of my name.

I posted this about Jennifer Keeton because it was one they erased and wouldn't allow in their comments section.

I'm more interested in posting on my other blog--http://markgelbart.wordpress.com/ This is my blog promoting my book--Georgia Before People: Land of the saber-tooths, mastodons, vampire bats, and other strange creatures. I'd rather spend my time discussing paleo-ecology than rehashing old arguments against conservative blather.

Michael Ryan joins the bandwagon of phony scandals

Re: "Ugly in any color," from the July 10th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

Are there any stupid right wing talking points that Michael Ryan doesn't regurgitate?

In this column he repeats the debunked lies of J. Christian Adams who claims the Obama Department of Justice isn't pursuing a case of voter intimidation by the Black Panthers.

Racist conservative pundits are trying to stir this up into something that it's not. They want to make the ridiculous claim that Obama is protecting radical violent African-Americans.

What Adams claims is completely false.

First, it was the Bush administration that refused to persue this case.

Second, the Obama administration did get a default judgement against Samir Shabazz for carrying a weapon near a polling place.

Third, there are no witnesses in this case who claim to have been intimidate...in other words there is no case.

*************************************************************************

Re: "A Telling 'tweet' on terror," from the July 11th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

Mr. Ryan's claim that CNN has low ratings because they're liberal is bologna. CNN's ratings are still good during the day but decline at night because CNN's programming is stale (See Larry King). Divisive opinionated news shows are more popular during prime time. MSNBC's ratings are growing with the liberal Olbermann and Maddow. How does Mr. Ryan explain that?

Michael Ryan's Tax Cut Constipation

Re: "A tailspin of spending" from the July 8th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

Mr. Ryan still stupidly advocates tax cuts as a cure all. He thinks tax cuts would stimulate the economy. We've had Bush's tax cuts for a decade. Bush's tax cuts were proven a dismal failure--the country went into a massive recession, following 7 years of his tax cuts.

He also complained that the economy is recovering slowly because Obama didn't cut taxes. This is a complete falsehood--Obama DID cut taxes. They've also failed to stimulate the economy.

Mr. Ryan advocates deregulation along with tax cuts as a policy to stimulate the economy. Deregulation of the financial and real estate markets was one of the causes of the recession.

Mr. Ryan and his demented conservatives have a philosophy that can be summed up in three words--Duh Tax Cuts.

What's their solution to spousal abuse?--tax cuts
Pollution?--tax cuts
World Hunger?--tax cuts
The expanding deficit?--tax cuts (Logically, tax increases would reduce the deficit, but logic isn't a strong suit of conservatives.
Crime?--tax cuts
Energy crisis?--tax cuts
Broken leg?--tax cuts
College football playoffs?--tax cuts

***************************************************************************

Re: "An ill-fitting suit," from the July 9th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

This editorial is evidence that Mr. Ryan does no research at all. He claims that the federal government's case against the Arizona state immigration law has little chance of succeeding. Obviously, he didn't read any precedents. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the feds have exclusive power to regulate immigration. Any state laws regulating immigration would violate the supremacy clause of the constitution. BTW, the supremacy clause is Article VI, the second paragraph. Check out your copy of the constitution.

I don't understand why people are opposed to all of these Mexicans crossing the border anyway. I say the more the merrier. If they were suddenly deported, it would be an economic catastrophe. Clearly, opposition to illegal immigration is based entirely on racism. They're a bunch of cranky old white people saying, "get off my lawn."

********************************************************************************

Crazy letters of the week award is a tie between Tom Hunter and Robert Smock.

Hunter writes an almost monthly letter claiming that the Associate Press has a liberal bias, yet in none of his letters has he ever given a good example. This month ("AP's bias running, ruining our nation") he claims AP showed bias when an AP article simply gave the other side of an issue.

That's not bias--that's good journalism. Good journalists always are supposed to give both sides of the issue.

Hey Robert Smock. Georgia Regional is ready for you. Last Sunday he wrote a letter suggesting that "ecoradicals" were responsible for the oil leak disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.

Maybe he just refuses to believe that the free market economy can lead to a disaster. Or maybe he's just a paranoid schizophrenic.

Michael Ryan is too Lazy to Look up the Name of a Supreme Court Case

Re: "There's no right to treason," from the June 27th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

This editorial is just so one-sided and extreme that I couldn't let it pass. Mr. Ryan accuses Supreme Court justices who dissented from the majority opinion in Holder, attorney general vs. Humanitarian Law Project of being treasonous. While I agree with the majority opinion in this case, accusing the justices in the minority of being traitors, simply because they hold a different viewpoint, is ridiculous and destroys Mr. Ryan's credibility.

This case is not as clear cut and black and white as Mr. Ryan leads the reader to believe. There is lots of gray area here.

The name of the case as I pointed out earlier is Holder, the attorney general vs. Humanitarian Law Project. Mr. Ryan was either too lazy to even look up the name of the case, so the reader could research it further and know what he was referring to, or he didn't want to give the name for other reasons that I can only guess at. Maybe he didn't want to admit being on the same side of the case as the Attorney General because he's called for his resignation or removal. Maybe he knows supporting a decision against an organization with the name "Humanitarian," looks bad.

In any case here's what this ruling is about: Some charities give non violent aid to organizations that the government has determined have ties to terrorists. In other words they send food and materials for housing, and medicine to poor people around the world. Some of these charities give this aid to organizations that support many different groups which may include some the government deems terrorists. It's difficult for charities to give this aid, if they have to weed out which members of these groups are terrorists and which are not. Most unfair of all is how the government defines terrorism. In this particular case the government declared that the Kurdistan Workers Party was a terrorist organization. The only reason the Kurdistan Workers Party was declared a terrorist organization was to placate Turkey for diplomatic reasons. The Kurdistan Workers Party favors an independent homeland for Kurds, an ethnic group that lives on the border of Iraq and Turkey. They aren't really even a terrorist group.

I agree that terrorists shouldn't be given any kind of aid, even humanitarian. But there are problems with the government defining which organizations are terrorists. And it is kind of an unfair burden on charities to expect them to try to discern exactly which poor people this food, medicine, and money for shelter goes to.

There's also a freedom of speech issue here where individuals may be prosecuted because of guilt by association. They know and politically support charities that are distantly related to organizations that are distantly related to terrorists. They may be afraid to support such causes for fear of being persecuted by the government.

It's a bad law that needs to be fixed legislatively. Mr. Ryan can't seriously consider the Jimmy Carter Foundation, and other charities that filed friends of the court briefs for the Humanitarian Law Project, terrorist support groups and traitors.

The Free Market's Not Fixing the Mess in the Gulf Either

Re: "Faith-based government," from the June 20th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

Michael Ryan unfairly criticizes the concept (supposedly favored by President Obama) that government can help people and solve problems by noting some examples of government inefficiency in its efforts to clean up the oil spill mess in the gulf.

This criticism is asinine. I don't see the free market cleaning up this mess. There's no profit to be made by cleaning up the oil spill, demonstrating a clear example of free market failure.

In fact it was the free market that created this mess. The free market in America which demands lots of cheap energy created the need to drill for oil offshore--a disaster. The cost of the damage from this oil spill probably rivals or surpasses the profits made by all the offshore oil wells in America. Moreover, if it wasn't for the federal government, there would be no clean up effort at all. BP would not face any fines, and they would be doing nothing, other than trying to salvage the operation for their own profits. Even more oil than now would be destroying the environment.

So yes, the federal government may be inefficient, but without it there would be chaotic anarchy, and this kind of situation would be much worse. Without government regulations, the Gulf of Mexico would've become a toxic dead lake decades ago.