Lie Of The Day

Yesterday an expert, who they called the “most bullish man in America” appeared on a financial show and proclaimed that the stock markets will see a huge rise by year end. He said this was due to the lowest interest rates in history. My response, then why has Japan had two lost decades since adopting its zero interest rate policies?

This brought to mind a post that I attached below. I wrote this note of irritation on March 27th it is called,
                                                         You Don’t Know That!

Oh to the confident and suave television and news commentators, and the experts that speak with such authority, I include the pundits and so called specialist, to you I  say, I’m skeptical and dubious. Even when you mask your bias and your agenda is hidden, I must often remind myself that, you don’t know that. It is often not the message you put out, but how you project it. I can see you now, your head a bobbing and your arms moving all around, you state your case  with such brilliance and force that often we are swept away!

This rant is in reference to all the pundits and so called experts, about all the words that spew from their mouths, about the reams of material they write, and the large quantity of often misstated facts they put forth. Sometimes these clowns even go as far as to tell us exactly what someone was thinking, for example if  a commentator states, “when the man jumped he knew it was to his death”, I ask, how do they know that? It is possible that the man was an optimist or the light never came on. Fact is that when it comes down to what someone is thinking these authorities are only speculating.

After they have used every line from “green shoots” and “edge of  the envelope” they say, “that being said” and after “having said that” they often  wow me with “just do the math” or “it is not if, it is when”. But what sends me over the top is the line often used by politicians and our so called public servants to justify some unsavory action, “it would of been far worse if we had done nothing”. How do they know that? I beg to differ, but on more then one occasion I wish they had done nothing.

It seems that people love to defer to the opinions and advice of so called experts so they don’t have to think, of course I don’t know that for sure. One thing I do know is that is not based on speculation or hearsay is that it would be a lot easier to tolerate these clowns if they were right at least every now and then.



What appears to be a quasi-government agency has put the American hero Lance Armstrong on trial. I suspect I’m not the only taxpayer that is angry at the continuation of our government attacking it’s citizens. Armstrong has been an incredible inspiration, an ambassador for America as well as a leader in bringing the issue of cancer and the fight against it to the forefront. On June 13th former professional cyclist Lance Armstrong was formally charged with doping by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, another creation of our Government that has run amuck. With no “due process” and a standard lower then “legal reasonable doubt” the USADA charges and investigation amounts to the crucifixion and destruction of the life and rights of an American citizen using our taxpayer money.

The Wall Street Journal cited a letter in which the agency said blood samples collected in 2009 and 2010 were “fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions.” In a statement, Armstrong attacked the “discredited allegations dating back more than 16 years.” The action could cost Armstrong some or all of his seven Tour de France titles, according to the Journal, he’s now banned from competing in triathlons as a result of the charges. The case is no longer just about whether Armstrong used drugs to win the Tour de France, but whether there was a team-wide doping program, an offense that could lead to fraud and conspiracy charges.

Of course two of the accusers, Landis and Hamilton, have credibility issues and have changed their stories. A story by CBS chose to rely on these questionable sources while completely ignored Lance’s nearly 500 clean tests and the hundreds of former teammates and competitors who would have spoken about his work ethic and talent. Armstrong and his lawyers claim Hamilton is leveraging his allegations against Armstrong to try to secure a book deal. Hamilton’s public remarks put him alongside not only Landis but also George Hincapie as the third trusted teammate to have allegedly spoken to federal authorities looking into the Armstrong case. (See the Reuters release below:)

(Reuters) – Statement released by Lance Armstrong on Wednesday in response to reports he had been contacted by the United States Anti-Doping Agency over doping allegations

           “I have been notified that USADA, an organization largely funded by taxpayer dollars but governed only by self-written rules, intends to again dredge up discredited allegations dating back more than 16 years to prevent me from competing as a triathlete and try and strip me of the seven Tour de France victories I earned. “These are the very same charges and the same witnesses that the Justice Department chose not to pursue after a two-year investigation. These charges are baseless, motivated by spite and advanced through testimony bought and paid for by promises of anonymity and immunity.
            “Although USADA alleges a wide-ranging conspiracy extended over more than 16 years, I am the only athlete it has chosen to charge. USADA’s malice, its methods, its star-chamber practices, and its decision to punish first and adjudicate later all are at odds with our ideals of fairness and fair play. “I have never doped, and, unlike many of my accusers, I have competed as an endurance athlete for 25 years with no spike in performance, passed more than 500 drug tests and never failed one. “That USADA ignores this fundamental distinction and charges me instead of the admitted dopers says far more about USADA, its lack of fairness and this vendetta than it does about my guilt or innocence.”

I’m dubious and suspicious of any testimony that is sought after with such vigor and where the accuser is given immunity. I must question if the testimony has been coerced or the motivation of the accusers and why these guys continue to try to bring Armstrong down with taxpayer money? What do they feel they have to prove?  Baseball great Roger Clements Roger was recently acquitted on all charges that he obstructed and lied to Congress in denying he used performance-enhancing drugs to extend his pitching career. Like the governments assault on  Martha Stewart this is another example of injustice, she did time and was forced to pay huge fines not for insider trading (something that until recently was legal for politicians in Washington), but for lying. What politician could endure this kind of constant scrutiny?