Listen live link

http://azulweb.streamguys.com/absolute2.asx

All You Need To Know About The Stimulus Package

How to handle a missed flight.. in style

Here is how:

And what are YOUR children playing with?

When I buy toys for my children, I buy the closest item to what they are asking for. But now I am now an uncle (after about a decade of waiting), I have a niece who may soon be interested in dolls, dress-up, and tea parties, and I don't have the luxury of "making up for it." So I did what any excited uncle would do; I started looking into what is hot and new!

I have a few good ideas, but I need you, my listeners and readers, to help me decide what toys will be best. Here are the top toys on my list. Make sure you play the video! I need a totally informed decision from you.

Typical talking baby doll 1:
Fisher Price Cuddle and Coo doll


Typical talking baby doll 2:
Another Fisher Price Cuddle and Coo doll


Or maybe something to help her learn about technology AND still fun:
Nintendo DS (showcases both amazing toys):
Baby Pals by Crave Entertainment for Nintendo DS


It is such a hard choice for me. My daughter is 16, so I am not up with all these hip new toys. As a parent, what one do you think is appropriate for your impressionable child?

A Royal Ball For The King!!!

January 16, 2009

Let us stipulate that you have achieved a goal that you have been working towards for a number of years. You planned a party to celebrate, but money gets tight in your household. You have already sent out invitations months in advance and people are currently traveling to see you. What is the best course of action?

A. Call off the party even though you have people who have traveled to celebrate.

B. Cut back on what you are spending on the party (don’t go as big).

C. Throw the party as planed with no changes.

D. Throw a larger party than should be expected for such an occasion.

Well, if you are Barack Obama, you go with choice D. Though the Democrats BEGGED George Bush to be cautious with funds for his inaugural four years ago, they seem to have NO issue with Obama spending upwards of $150 million on his inaugural event. Yes, $150 million towards a 3 day block party for the man that just pleaded for the rest of the $700 billion from the bail-out money to be released to save us from economic crisis. (That was a mouthful.) But there is good reason to spend $150 million on Obama's inaugural block party, we must have a proper party for the first President of color! (at our expense!)

Can I opt out of this? Can I just tell the IRS “Don’t blame me, I voted for McCain”? Would that be enough to get me out of paying for this? I think Obama should have an inaugural party, but let us be reasonable. Bush DID spend $40 million on his inaugural AND his parade, yet the Democrats were screaming bloody murder. If $40 million bothered them so much, where is the outrage over King Obama and his $150 million, three day block party? How can it be wrong for George Bush to spend $40 million, and perfectly wonderful that Obama spends $150 million. What price tag sounds like it should have everyone up in arms? What "party" would YOU rather pay for?

In short, Obama has proven that he can spend millions in excess waste, and not one Democrat will bat an eyelash. The Mainstream Media does not care, they have "this thrill go up" their collective legs, just ask Chris Matthews. Those of us that were hoping for responsible spending and economic stability over the next four years, are screwed.

UPDATE:
January 19, 2009

The price tag has increased!!! King Obama’s festivities have now reached an estimated $170 and climbing. This is the most expensive inauguration I have ever seen. I can now see that this is the beginning of four bleak years. Years where we spend more than we should, THEN increase the price tag on something we are ALREADY overspending on. Your next four years in a nut shell; tax increases, spending increases, and economic decreases. Stay tuned for more bad news!

UPDATE:
January 20, 2009
MORE BAD NEWS!!!
As if enough money was not spent on the 3-day party that has been the Obama inauguration, Michelle Obama decided that she should wear a dress that is valued a $1,500. This is not the first time Michelle was worn one of the expensive designer outfits made by Isabel Toledo, and it will not be the last. The only difference is that now ALL of the United States will be paying for Michelle to flaunt wealth, not just Illinois!

Thank you president Obama, Spread that wealth!

We Have AUDIO!

There has been some issues with the podcasts. It has been fixed (I hope) so I will be adding the ENTIRE ELECTION COVERAGE to the podcasts later this week! I am cutting the MP3 into segments and listing the contributors in the segments, so you will have to give me a day or two to label.

What is there to fear?

In the wake of the elections, what is my biggest fear? I wonder if this is Jimmy Carters 2nd term. We have lived through this before, and it did not kill us... too much. I can see more spending and more deficits over the next four years. We have two years that we have to tolerate until we can fix the mess we are in. But a lot of damage can be done in two years.

You have already seen my fear of the "fairness" doctrine, and you know about Hoover's... err... Obama's tax plan, what else could go wrong? How about partial birth abortions? What about late term abortions? Both are disgusting procedures that DO constitute murder in my eyes. How about Obama's "share the wealth" comments? What does that mean? Obama has not fully explained what he meant by this, but considering his voting record (the little that he has), and his ideas and comments, I am thinking socialism.

I know the picture I created has a communist flag, but then again, we have never seen communism in the world. We have seen extreme socialism (such as "communist" Russia and China) and therefore the flag fits. I fear that Obama, in conjunction with the Democrat Congress, will move us one step (or more) closer to socialism. If I have to give my hard earned money to the government so they can "redistribute income" to those who DON'T work, what would you call it? Socialism.

What else do I fear? Click the links on the right hand side that say "black panthers" and you will see. Intimidation, fraud, and cheating are the tactics used by the far left for years. Add to those videos the actions of Acorn, and the "don't be selfish" message from Obama, and you start to see the how close we are to socialism.

Barack wants big government, income redistribution, government run healthcare, and government control over the media (IE: fairness doctrine). He can't do it alone, but he doesn't have to; we have given him a Democrat Congress. (Talk about a free pass!) I know of another country, one previous and one current, that is very similar to the one Barack wants to create; China and the U.S.S.R.

I am quitting my job. Thank you for sharing your paycheck with me, comrade!

YES! I hear you!

I am getting your letters, and I know how you feel. I can not respond to everyone. Please do not email me with "did you get my email." The answer is YES! But there are WAY too many. Please give me some time. I am flooded, but I am reading. I am sorry if I am going so slow. I awoke to over 150 emails; some long, some short, all very good. I can not respond to everyone, but I will try to address everyone's concerns.

First, the fairness doctrine. Yes this is a real thing. It was enacted in 1949 to "ensure that all coverage of controversial issues by a broadcast station be balanced and fair." (The Museum of Broadcast Communications

There is a part two to this. The net is also susceptible to "fairness" via content policies. Just ask the FCC commissioner. He said, "the Fairness Doctrine could be intertwined with the net neutrality battle. The result might end with the government regulating content on the Web, he warned." -commissioner Robert McDowell

What next? How about another economic depression like in 1932? Look at Obama's tax plan, then look at this plan from Hoover (that failed miserably). Don't be fooled by the wording, this is what BOTH plan call for. Tax the top tier more, give money to everyone else. Yes, I am part of "everyone else," but I can see though the fluff. Simply put, the higher taxes to the top tier will cause a rise in prices to the lower tiers. There will be no relief from this policy, only an increase to cost of living. Mark my words, Obama will fail because this is Hoover's failed plan.

Keep the emails rolling, I will try to address every issue you raise. FYI, no I do not feel safe in my own home. Even Obama's VP agrees with me; within 6 months we will face crisis.

More to come check back later today!

Quick note from Scott: the podcasts are working correctly again, so we now have the entire Jennifer Horn interview up in its entirety (not cut down to 30 seconds). Sorry for the technical difficulties.

Ready... Set... GO!

It is 8am EST, and the races have begun. Make sure you get out to vote today. This morning I have been writing, so check for updates on the site. Today I dedicate to the races, and tonight I am going to be on the air. Listen tonight from 7-midnight to 1590 WSMN Nashua's source for news and talk, or online (Click the WSMN logo on the right). Call in and talk with us on the air at WSMN at (603) 883-9900.

New Hampshire and the Election Cycle

No, I am not going to bore you to death talking about the literal meaning of this post's title. This is a treat for you. Want to know what was going through my head today while I was in studio? Did you miss the show and our wonderful guests? Well how about a quick recap of the topics, a few free shout outs for my special guests, and I will also post links up to their websites. (Remember that we keep recordings of our shows in the "podcasts" link. GO LISTEN! You'll be sorry if you don't!)

Our guests (click a name to go to their website):

Paul LaFlamme

Sandra Ziehm

Jacqueline Casey

Part one (click here to listen to the podcasts)

Today we had Paul LaFlamme in the studio during part one of Temperature Gauge Live (sorry about the picture Paul, it was the best one on the web). We talked about his debate in Hollis, spending in New Hampshire, alternative energy (sort of, we got side tracked), over regulation (what we got side tracked to), and the economy. Over all, Paul came across as an intelligent conservative who is looking out for you and me.

Towards the end of the segment, Sandra Ziehm called in to talk with us. I tried to get Paul and Sandra to work off each other for a couple minutes, like a round table of sorts, and it worked out fairly well.

Segment two, we said goodbye to Paul and talked with Sandra one on... two (?) Sandra talked about the record of her opponent, taxes, spending, and some of the ridiculous legislation that has been presented under the Democrats. I have to say, this woman makes a lot of sense. Sandra is an intelligent, well informed, solid conservative.

I was inept in my duty to reign in the filibustering today, so I decided to turn segment three over to Jacqueline Casey. I posed a few soft questions to her and started to feel guilty. Jacqueline spoke about second amendment issues such as gun free zones and crime rates, stated she was a "Ron Paul" Republican (or rather she is a Libertarian), and eluded that her favorite word when it came to taxes and spending was "no!" We also talked about proposed taxes by the Democrats and spending issues. Just so I could milk my point about gun free zones, I played devils advocate with her. You must listen if you want to know what I asked!

If you’re going to listen to one of the shows, this might be the one. (I am still partial to the one with Jennifer Horn –website-, listen to Part 2) The part with Sandra (2) has a conversation between a Lanna and Sandra. This is one of the best parts, listening to Sandra talking to one of our great listeners.

I want to thank all three candidates for taking the time to come talk with us on Temperature Gauge Live. Also, thank you to those who are listening, reading, and continue to support us at Temperature Gauge and Temperature Gauge Live. If you want to leave a question, comment, or just want to voice your opinion, I will pass on any “appropriate” comments to the candidates. Remember to visit their websites!

Paul LaFlamme

Sandra Ziehm

Jacqueline Casey

Just the Facts, Scam... ahh, Ma'ma

Now THAT’S what I call a debate. The candidates actually debated! If you missed this one, you missed the best one. Obama came off as cool, calm, and collected… almost. He was sent reeling a few times by the questions and comments from McCain.

Obama might have looked good on the surface, but by watching and listening to Obama’s responses, you could tell he was having a hard time fielding McCain’s assaults. Obama stammered and stuttered his way though a few different factual inaccuracies, and in some cases, out and out lies.

One of the worst inaccuracies was when Obama said people at McCain rallies are yelling “kill him” towards Obama. This is not true for two reasons. First, Obama made it sound like people were calling for Obama’s death. Not ONE person called for Obama’s death, and this fact is backed up by the investigations of the Secret Service.
Supposedly, when Bill Ayers name was mentioned, someone yelled “kill him,” in reference to Bill Ayers. This is an important distinction to make, and Obama tried to blur the truth. Obama lied by telling only half of the truth.
Here is an example; It’s like if I said, “I hate when I run over frogs in the rain” and someone twists my words and tells you I said “I hate frogs and run them over” then qualifies it as a racist statement toward people of French descent. Obviously the words in the second quote were said, but not in the way they are written.

So why is this important? If you haven’t figured it out yet, Obama is a liar through and through. He gives you half the truth, and even the truth he gives you is twisted around. Obama may have looked smooth, but McCain dominated in substance. Rather than recap the debate, let me point out other Obama half-truths

Let’s start with one of my favorite subjects, oil. Obama said the oil companies have 68 million acres leased that they are not drilling. He was correct about the leased land, and that’s about it.
Fact:
Exploratory drilling is being done on quite a bit of the 68 million acres. Though they are not producing oil yet (key word is yet), they are using the land. The only area that can be listed as land used is those that are actually producing oil. Thus, the areas that are being drilled for exploration are not counted until they produce oil. Oh, and by the way, it takes about 10 years for an exploratory hole to produce oil. Thank you for the half-truth Barack O-Liar.


Another favorite subject of mine is education. Barack tried to claim that he doubled the number of charter schools of charter schools in Illinois. Talk about stretching your resume! First, you happened to put your name on a bill, so you didn’t do a damn thing other than sign. Second, you AND your fellow politicians double the charter schools in Chicago. That is one city out of the entire state. Sorry bud, be honest.
Fact:
You supported legislation that doubled the amount of charter schools in the city of Chicago, you did not personally double charter schools in Illinois (you fraud!).

Again, Obama tried to claim he breaks ranks with the democrats (he claimed bill S.5 as an example.) How often does Obama reach across the aisle?
Fact:
18 to 26 among democrats voting on this, and Obama happened to vote along side about 40% of the Democrats? How is this even CLOSE to breaking ranks? About 97% of the time, he voted the party line. Enough said.


Let’s skim the “Joe the Plumber” issue. Joe said he was going to buy a company that is projected to make $250 to $280 thousand a year. He wanted to know if his taxes would go up. Let’s stipulate that Joe’s company make $250K. The answer under Obama’s plan is yes.
Fact:
You will receive a tax increase if you make $200k gross or more annually ($250K if you are married filing joint). Let’s talk about the increase of 3%. If you made $199,999 this year, and you make $200,000 next year, your taxes will be $6,000 more for 2009. That extra dollar you make next year is going to cost you $6K. Sound equitable to you?


Speaking of taxes, the Tax Policy Center claims that the national debt would substantially increase with either candidate’s current policy. Even with Obama’s proposed spending cuts, he could increase our debt by $281 billion for the year 2013. That’s not over the next five years that is just one years deficit increase for calendar year of 2013 (re-election year). McCain is not innocent here either, he needs to do some major spending cuts too, but I trust McCain to cut spending, not the “tax and spend” record of Obama.

I also love how Obama walks around the truth by avoiding key facts. So “small businesses” who do not supply healthcare coverage would not be fined. This is great, don’t you agree? Now define small business. Mr. Obama? Oh, that’s one fact that you conveniently ignore. Is small business a company with 2 employees, or 10, 20 may be? Do you take into account how profitable the company is? Or does profit only matter when you decided how much the company must pay in taxes? (33% not high enough for you? what about 70-80%, like France?)

Obama also claims that his health care plan will cut family’s premiums by $2,500 annually. At least Obama has strong optimism! Maybe you should try a lower number, Mr. Obama. Let say $1,600 at best. He claims he can save $120 billion a year, but that is an inflated figure. He MIGHT save $77 billion (64% of what he is claiming)

At this point, I think you get the idea. Like I said before, there were some good parts to this debate. My two favorite moments happened to be John McCain moments. The first was a slip of the tongue when John was talking about the government. He called Senator Obama, “Senator Government”. Personally, I think it was a fitting name, but John corrected himself. It was an obvious slip up as evidenced buy John’s reaction to his own words.

The second great moment was when John said,
“Yes. Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago. I'm going to give a new direction to this economy in this country.”
And John is correct. He is not President Bush, and he will not be President Bush. John McCain has his own ideas, his own cabinet appointments, and will not govern the way George Bush has. It is important that John distinguished this fact, and that he called Obama out on this.

I think John did fairly well. The only complaint I have about McCain’s performance was that he did not press Obama when he had him pinned. John had Obama on the ropes, and let him go. McCain did a good job pointing out inaccuracies in Obama’s statements and platform, but did not dig deep enough or push hard enough. It left a lot more work for the fact checkers and analyst, like me. But like I said, it was a good debate. I would call this a slight McCain win.

So here we are, with less than 3 weeks until the election. It is up to you. Do you want to pay more taxes, screw up the economy more and increase the chances of being killed in your own home by a terrorist? If so, vote Obama, or just stay home this election cycle.

Want to be safe in your home, not afraid of a terrorist attack? How about fixing the economy? Want to reduce the national debt without raising your taxes? Vote John McCain.

And where is your name, Senator Obama?

Take a look at the signatures. Notice the names on the first page. John Sununu is at the top of column 2 and John McCain is the second name in Column 1.

Barack Obama must have just been "Present"...