Let's make it clear. I don't think he's a Muslim. I'm not buying into that Christian thing either. I know that the Bible says not to judge lest we be judged .. and I think that applies to a man's religion more than other areas of one's life .. but since Obama wants to judge when I've made enough money, I'll feel free to pass my own judgments on his professed religious feelings.
Christian? Sorry ... don't buy it. Obama joined Jeremiah Wright's church in Chicago for one reason ... political advantage. He surveyed the landscape and figured out that membership in this particular church would bring him the biggest political advantage as he launched his career. Simple as that.
But what about this Muslim thing? The media likes to portray those who think Obama is a Muslim as stupid, foolish or just plain demented. Really? These people who believe Obama is a Muslim have absolutely no foundation to their beliefs at all? Consider:
* Obama was born to a Muslim father. Some interpretations of Islamic law indicate that if you're born to a Muslim father .. you're a Muslim, at least at birth.
* Obama most definitely did go to a Muslim school while living in a Muslim nation.
* Obama most definitely did say that one of the most beautiful sounds in the world is the Muslim call to prayer at Sunrise.
* Obama most certainly has engaged in an extraordinary amount of pandering to Muslims since he was elected.
* Obama told his NASA Administrator that his "foremost" at NASA would be to improve relations with the Muslim world to make them feel good about their historic contributions to science.
None of these things make Obama a Muslim today. Again .. I don't think he is a Muslim any more than I think he's a Christian. But people who do have their doubts and express them as they have a right to do shouldn't be denigrated by the media elite for their stupidity. There is that looks like a duck, quacks like a duck thing.
Now this isn't to say that Obama doesn't have a god that he worships. He most certainly does. That god is Government and his scripture is the Federal Register, his cathedral the Capitol Building and his communion a bill signing ceremony.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Recovery Summer
So there we have Joe Biden telling Americans yesterday that "we're heading in the right direction." Well ... from his standpoint, and certainly from the standpoint of his boss, The Community Organizer ...perhaps he's right. Right, that is, if your version of "the right direction" is toward the economic tyranny that will be visited upon us by Obama's vision of a centrally planned economy and your ability to accept fictional numbers like jobs saved or created and lives touched.
Just take a look at some of the headlines over the past few days:
* Home sales in the United States were down in July. This in spite of dirt-cheap mortgages and greatly reduced prices. The figures are the worse we've seen in this country in over a decade. The experts are telling us that we're in for another drop in home values. Welcome to Recovery Summer!
* The Financial Times says that disappointing US economic figures are driving a surge in demand for low-yielding assets. I'm not sure what that means, but it doesn't sound good. Here's a quote: "Things appear to have come to a head...with markets braced at the edge of a precipice ahead of key US economic data likely to further unnerve investors already concerned by the extent of impending slowdown." Welcome to Recovery Summer!
* This from The Wall Street Journal: Day after day, investors have been hit with more evidence that the economy is stalling. The Dow is down over 4% this month, after an ebullient July that was fueled by impressive earnings results from U.S. companies. The Dow posted another triple-digit loss today and at one point fell below the 10,000 level. Michael Casey has details about the factors driving today's market action. But earnings season is now over and investors are far more focused on potential troubles ahead. What's that Biden said? Oh yeah ... Welcome to Recovery Summer.
* Economist David Rosenberg, apparently someone who has earned a certain degree of respect in economic circles, writes a daily brief for investors. Yesterday he said that the U.S. economy is heading into a 1930s-style depression. He reminded his clients that the Great Depression also had some high points such as positive stock market gains .. but then, as now, those signs of recovery were unsustainable and only provided a false sense of stability.
* Charles Nenner, founder and president of Charles Nenner research says that the Dow is on its way down to 5000 in the next 30 months. He's saying that things "really look bad for the next 10 years."
* While millions of Americans are looking for jobs so that they can start taking care of their families again, Our Hero is looking for over 5% in new income tax that our own government says will affect 50% of the small business income that we need to put to work to grow new jobs. Smart, isn't it?
* You saw the jobless claims that came out last week. Try 500,000 new jobless claims. Welcome to Recovery Summer.
* The number of subscribers to cable and satellite television fell for the first time in history during the second quarter of this year. People just aren't going to pay the price any more .. not in this economy they're not.
* The Obama Administration is no longer using the "jobs created or saved" nonsense to tout the effectiveness of the stimulus plan. There's a new phrase now .... "lives touched."
* The Obama Administration has now as much as admitted that ObamaCare will increase the cost of medical care in this country and, at the same time, add to our deficit. Exactly the opposite of what was promised when they were trying to get the bill passed earlier this year.
Is this all working out the way you planned it in 2008? Absolutely NOTHING that Obama and his Democrat dog washers are trying is working. In spite of the infantile ravings of Biden, there is no recovery. Millions of Americans are still out of work while Democrats borrow money for such wonderful stimulus projects as teaching Siberians how to deal with their government. Siberians, in case you were educated in our hideous government schools, are Russians .. and the government we're trying to teach them to interact with is located in ... Moscow. There you go. A quick $200,000 shot to hell by Pelosi's big spenders ... and Obama calls this "economic stimulus."
This is what we get when the idiot voters in this country fall for a smooth talking community organizer with absolutely NO executive experience at all, a man surrounded by academics and lawyers ... and who has often professed his disdain for the private sector, and satisfied their collective white guilt... and we put this inexperienced dolt in charge of bringing our economy back. And who does PrezBo put in change of the recovery--Joe Biden who has never been right in his life.
Would you take your sick puppy to a vet that hates dogs? Why, then, would we take a sick private sector economy to a ruler who hates the private sector?
This is all so much worse than I ever could have imagined when Obama got his tira in January of 2009. I've seen incompetence before ... but this character gets the gold medal.
I'm telling ya. If the Democrats remain in power after the November election this year, it's time to buy some luggage. If they remain in power after 2012 ... and this disaster of a president gets a second term ... it's time to pack.
Just take a look at some of the headlines over the past few days:
* Home sales in the United States were down in July. This in spite of dirt-cheap mortgages and greatly reduced prices. The figures are the worse we've seen in this country in over a decade. The experts are telling us that we're in for another drop in home values. Welcome to Recovery Summer!
* The Financial Times says that disappointing US economic figures are driving a surge in demand for low-yielding assets. I'm not sure what that means, but it doesn't sound good. Here's a quote: "Things appear to have come to a head...with markets braced at the edge of a precipice ahead of key US economic data likely to further unnerve investors already concerned by the extent of impending slowdown." Welcome to Recovery Summer!
* This from The Wall Street Journal: Day after day, investors have been hit with more evidence that the economy is stalling. The Dow is down over 4% this month, after an ebullient July that was fueled by impressive earnings results from U.S. companies. The Dow posted another triple-digit loss today and at one point fell below the 10,000 level. Michael Casey has details about the factors driving today's market action. But earnings season is now over and investors are far more focused on potential troubles ahead. What's that Biden said? Oh yeah ... Welcome to Recovery Summer.
* Economist David Rosenberg, apparently someone who has earned a certain degree of respect in economic circles, writes a daily brief for investors. Yesterday he said that the U.S. economy is heading into a 1930s-style depression. He reminded his clients that the Great Depression also had some high points such as positive stock market gains .. but then, as now, those signs of recovery were unsustainable and only provided a false sense of stability.
* Charles Nenner, founder and president of Charles Nenner research says that the Dow is on its way down to 5000 in the next 30 months. He's saying that things "really look bad for the next 10 years."
* While millions of Americans are looking for jobs so that they can start taking care of their families again, Our Hero is looking for over 5% in new income tax that our own government says will affect 50% of the small business income that we need to put to work to grow new jobs. Smart, isn't it?
* You saw the jobless claims that came out last week. Try 500,000 new jobless claims. Welcome to Recovery Summer.
* The number of subscribers to cable and satellite television fell for the first time in history during the second quarter of this year. People just aren't going to pay the price any more .. not in this economy they're not.
* The Obama Administration is no longer using the "jobs created or saved" nonsense to tout the effectiveness of the stimulus plan. There's a new phrase now .... "lives touched."
* The Obama Administration has now as much as admitted that ObamaCare will increase the cost of medical care in this country and, at the same time, add to our deficit. Exactly the opposite of what was promised when they were trying to get the bill passed earlier this year.
Is this all working out the way you planned it in 2008? Absolutely NOTHING that Obama and his Democrat dog washers are trying is working. In spite of the infantile ravings of Biden, there is no recovery. Millions of Americans are still out of work while Democrats borrow money for such wonderful stimulus projects as teaching Siberians how to deal with their government. Siberians, in case you were educated in our hideous government schools, are Russians .. and the government we're trying to teach them to interact with is located in ... Moscow. There you go. A quick $200,000 shot to hell by Pelosi's big spenders ... and Obama calls this "economic stimulus."
This is what we get when the idiot voters in this country fall for a smooth talking community organizer with absolutely NO executive experience at all, a man surrounded by academics and lawyers ... and who has often professed his disdain for the private sector, and satisfied their collective white guilt... and we put this inexperienced dolt in charge of bringing our economy back. And who does PrezBo put in change of the recovery--Joe Biden who has never been right in his life.
Would you take your sick puppy to a vet that hates dogs? Why, then, would we take a sick private sector economy to a ruler who hates the private sector?
This is all so much worse than I ever could have imagined when Obama got his tira in January of 2009. I've seen incompetence before ... but this character gets the gold medal.
I'm telling ya. If the Democrats remain in power after the November election this year, it's time to buy some luggage. If they remain in power after 2012 ... and this disaster of a president gets a second term ... it's time to pack.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
A few facts
Here are some facts that you can throw at your liberal friends every time you seek to talk about government spending, and all they can come up with is "Well the Iraq war cost us .......". Randall Hoven of the American Thinker has a few facts to chew on:
* Obama's stimulus, passed in his first month in office, will cost more than the entire Iraq War -- more than $100 billion (15%) more.
* Just the first two years of Obama's stimulus cost more than the entire cost of the Iraq War under President Bush, or six years of that war.
* Iraq War spending accounted for just 3.2% of all federal spending while it lasted.
* Iraq War spending was not even one quarter of what we spent on Medicare in the same time frame.
* Iraq War spending was not even 15% of the total deficit spending in that time frame. The cumulative deficit, 2003-2010, would have been four-point-something trillion dollars with or without the Iraq War.
* The Iraq War accounts for less than 8% of the federal debt held by the public at the end of 2010 ($9.031 trillion).
* During Bush's Iraq years, 2003-2008, the federal government spent more on education that it did on the Iraq War. (State and local governments spent about ten times more.)
* Obama's stimulus, passed in his first month in office, will cost more than the entire Iraq War -- more than $100 billion (15%) more.
* Just the first two years of Obama's stimulus cost more than the entire cost of the Iraq War under President Bush, or six years of that war.
* Iraq War spending accounted for just 3.2% of all federal spending while it lasted.
* Iraq War spending was not even one quarter of what we spent on Medicare in the same time frame.
* Iraq War spending was not even 15% of the total deficit spending in that time frame. The cumulative deficit, 2003-2010, would have been four-point-something trillion dollars with or without the Iraq War.
* The Iraq War accounts for less than 8% of the federal debt held by the public at the end of 2010 ($9.031 trillion).
* During Bush's Iraq years, 2003-2008, the federal government spent more on education that it did on the Iraq War. (State and local governments spent about ten times more.)
Ya just can't make this shit up!
I am waiting for someone to pull the "I gotcha!" out from under this one .. because it is so absurd that I have a hard time believing that even our government could be this dense. First of all, here is a figure I can believe: $194,213. That is how much the Government Accountability Office estimates it has cost for every job "created" by Obama's stimulus plan. Is there a sane American left who does not understand that the stimulus plan was never anything other than a compilation of Democrat politician spending dreams and schemes?
But ... as they say .. you ain't heard nuthin yet. Now we apparently a new way to classify a "job created" or a "job saved." Apparently these are no longer the terms of choice for the GAO. They have decided to go with a kinder, gentler phrase ..... "lives touched."
No I'm not kidding, folks. The Daily Caller has a quote from a spokesperson from the CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company explaining:
"'Lives Touched' is a figure that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) uses to track the amount of people who have been positively affected by the Recovery Act funds. This total would include people who have been provided full time employment (i.e. saved and created jobs) through the Recovery Act and people who at some point have supported a project funded by the Recovery Act."
You want to talk about lives touched? Talk about the millions of Americans who can't find jobs right now because of the anti-business policies of the Democrats and the Obama administration. Now there are some lives touched.
Let's see how long this GAO "lives touched" bat shit lasts.
But ... as they say .. you ain't heard nuthin yet. Now we apparently a new way to classify a "job created" or a "job saved." Apparently these are no longer the terms of choice for the GAO. They have decided to go with a kinder, gentler phrase ..... "lives touched."
No I'm not kidding, folks. The Daily Caller has a quote from a spokesperson from the CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company explaining:
"'Lives Touched' is a figure that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) uses to track the amount of people who have been positively affected by the Recovery Act funds. This total would include people who have been provided full time employment (i.e. saved and created jobs) through the Recovery Act and people who at some point have supported a project funded by the Recovery Act."
You want to talk about lives touched? Talk about the millions of Americans who can't find jobs right now because of the anti-business policies of the Democrats and the Obama administration. Now there are some lives touched.
Let's see how long this GAO "lives touched" bat shit lasts.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Alternative Universe
Ummm hello??
Is anybody out there just a wee bit concerned about the fact that Iran is now, officially, a nuclear-capable state? They have been working on their nuclear plans for years, and thanks to the help of the Russians, they finally managed to get it done. Iran now has an operational nuclear plant and, on Saturday, loaded the enriched uranium into the reactor for the first time. Any sane person knows that this is absolutely not the last step in the nuclear process for Iran. It is only a matter of time - one year, according to Obama - in which Iran could enrich that uranium to destructive levels. Make no mistake - nuclear weapons are on the way. In fact, on the same day that Iran started up its nuclear reactor, it also launched the country's first domestically built long-range unmanned bomber aircraft, calling it an "ambassador of death" to Iran's enemies. Sounds like a country that is out for peace, doesn't it?
The reaction from the White House: this is "no threat" to anyone's security. How unbelievably dense must Iran think we are? The mad mullah Ahmadinejad has called for the extinction of Israel .. to "blow Israel off the map." He has defied the entire world in achieving his goals of a nuclear state, and with what repercussions? Exactly. We have done nothing and we will continue to do nothing. The only choice we have at this point is to react to any provocation that may occur. I'm sure Israel is thrilled. At this point, considering that Obama is the one with his finger on the button, who knows if we would even come to Israel's defense?
Is anybody out there just a wee bit concerned about the fact that Iran is now, officially, a nuclear-capable state? They have been working on their nuclear plans for years, and thanks to the help of the Russians, they finally managed to get it done. Iran now has an operational nuclear plant and, on Saturday, loaded the enriched uranium into the reactor for the first time. Any sane person knows that this is absolutely not the last step in the nuclear process for Iran. It is only a matter of time - one year, according to Obama - in which Iran could enrich that uranium to destructive levels. Make no mistake - nuclear weapons are on the way. In fact, on the same day that Iran started up its nuclear reactor, it also launched the country's first domestically built long-range unmanned bomber aircraft, calling it an "ambassador of death" to Iran's enemies. Sounds like a country that is out for peace, doesn't it?
The reaction from the White House: this is "no threat" to anyone's security. How unbelievably dense must Iran think we are? The mad mullah Ahmadinejad has called for the extinction of Israel .. to "blow Israel off the map." He has defied the entire world in achieving his goals of a nuclear state, and with what repercussions? Exactly. We have done nothing and we will continue to do nothing. The only choice we have at this point is to react to any provocation that may occur. I'm sure Israel is thrilled. At this point, considering that Obama is the one with his finger on the button, who knows if we would even come to Israel's defense?
Monday, August 16, 2010
Oh no I didn't!
You can't imagine how shocked I was to hear our Community Organizer promote the mosque at Ground Zero. On Friday evening, in an observance of Ramadan, here's what Obama had to say about the mosque:
"As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country ... That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances ... This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable."
Wow. Is this guy sharp or what? Am I the only one getting a bit weary of Obama bringing his community organizer mentality to the podium of the White House? The issue has never been whether or not Muslims have the right to build a Mosque - community center - or whatever they chose to call it. The issue has been WHERE they want to build it. Obama made this statement in the presence of some of this country's most influential Muslims. This was an opportunity for him to address the sensitivity Americans have to the building of this Mosque on the site of a building damaged by the 9/11 attacks ... a site just two blocks from Ground Zero. Obama could have simply said something like this: "The American people have a deep appreciation for freedom of religion and have shown through the history of this country their tolerance of different religious viewpoints. All they're asking of the Muslim community is recognition that many, perhaps most Americans consider the location of this planned Islamic Community Center as hallowed ground. The landing gear from one of the aircraft flown into the World Trade Towers crashed into the very building that will be demolished for the construction of this Islamic center. As President, and on behalf of the people that I represent, I would ask you to reconsider your plans for this project."
But nooooo. Not Barack Obama! The next day, Obama decided to "clarify" his comments:
"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there," Obama continued. "I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about. And I think it's very important as difficult as some of these issues are that we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about."
So .. there you have it. Not one mention of Ground Zero. Not one mention of the sensitivities and concerns of the American people. In fact, he specifically said that he would not comment on that. How's that for leadership? What an amazing disaster this man is.
"As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country ... That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances ... This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable."
Wow. Is this guy sharp or what? Am I the only one getting a bit weary of Obama bringing his community organizer mentality to the podium of the White House? The issue has never been whether or not Muslims have the right to build a Mosque - community center - or whatever they chose to call it. The issue has been WHERE they want to build it. Obama made this statement in the presence of some of this country's most influential Muslims. This was an opportunity for him to address the sensitivity Americans have to the building of this Mosque on the site of a building damaged by the 9/11 attacks ... a site just two blocks from Ground Zero. Obama could have simply said something like this: "The American people have a deep appreciation for freedom of religion and have shown through the history of this country their tolerance of different religious viewpoints. All they're asking of the Muslim community is recognition that many, perhaps most Americans consider the location of this planned Islamic Community Center as hallowed ground. The landing gear from one of the aircraft flown into the World Trade Towers crashed into the very building that will be demolished for the construction of this Islamic center. As President, and on behalf of the people that I represent, I would ask you to reconsider your plans for this project."
But nooooo. Not Barack Obama! The next day, Obama decided to "clarify" his comments:
"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there," Obama continued. "I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about. And I think it's very important as difficult as some of these issues are that we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about."
So .. there you have it. Not one mention of Ground Zero. Not one mention of the sensitivities and concerns of the American people. In fact, he specifically said that he would not comment on that. How's that for leadership? What an amazing disaster this man is.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Obama and Dems are ButtBoys for the Unions
We've heard the rhetoric from Democrats: Republicans are in bed with the oil companies. The Republicans favor Wall Street over Main Street. Republicans are on the side of evil health insurance companies. Democrats love to point the finger at Republicans and the influence of their "special interests." But who are the special interests that keep the Democrat Party awash in funds? The anti-business party has to be getting campaign donations from somewhere .. they have to be at the end of somebody's lobbying agenda. So who is it?
Oh come on now. Surely you already know.
The labor unions. The teachers unions. BP may be the current corporate boogey man ...but the damage done to the Gulf ecosystem is already proving to be much less than estimated. In my estimation teachers unions have done far more damage to our nation and our culture this year than BP, and the damage lasts generations. If Americans had a clue about the nature of the damage being done to their children by the refusal of teacher's unions to accept ideas such as school choice and teacher accountability these unions would have been run out of town a decade ago. Our government schools exist to indoctrinate our children into how to be good employees and loyal government subjects. The teacher's unions are willing participants in this effort.
I understand that there are good patriotic union members, and I understand that unions sometimes stumble into positive action .. but by and large unions exist today as organizations designed to help workers escape workplace accountability and to fund economic liberty's greatest enemy, the Democrat Party. Unions are the number one reason so many of our local and state governments are facing tremendous budget problems right now. The wage and pension benefits negotiated by unions - negotiated in return for massive campaign contributions - are a threat to local economies coast to coast. They have managed to scam politicians into a generational theft scheme, which has now left our country, our cities, our states, our taxpayers, deep in the red. This entitlement mentality that permeates from union goons is ultimately paid for by you - the taxpayers - because our gutless politicians are too afraid to lose their support and ultimately their jobs. Timothy Carney of the Washington Examiner has the painful truth. These are facts that you and everyone should know .. facts that will demonstrate just how influential these unions are over Democrat politicians.
Public employees and their unions have contributed more money to the 2010 elections than the employees, executives and PACs of every oil company combined, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The $7.9 million that the sector gave to Democrats is more than the Republican haul from Wall Street, insurance or lobbyists.
The public employee sector spent $40 million on lobbying in the first six months of this year -- more than health maintenance organizations, commercial banks and the defense/aerospace industry, according to CRP.
Democrats have raised $1.7 million this year from the American Federation of Teachers, more than Republicans have raised from Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America, combined.
AFT's PAC spent $21 million in the 2008 election, more than certified "special interests" such as the National Association of Realtors PAC and the National Rifle Association PAC. Combine the PAC spending of the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, America's Health Insurance Plans, and the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America, and you're at about 36 percent of AFT's spending.
Stunning, isn't it? If you believe that these labor unions, and the teachers unions, truly have your best interests at heart .. that is probably because you grew up in a government school where you were educated to believe that from a young age. The teacher union bailout vote this week is absolutely nothing but Democrat pandering to one of their largest supporters. How hard is this to understand? There is one thing the Democrats got right. This vote was about jobs .. only it wasn't really saving jobs in your community but about saving their own jobs in Washington.
Oh come on now. Surely you already know.
The labor unions. The teachers unions. BP may be the current corporate boogey man ...but the damage done to the Gulf ecosystem is already proving to be much less than estimated. In my estimation teachers unions have done far more damage to our nation and our culture this year than BP, and the damage lasts generations. If Americans had a clue about the nature of the damage being done to their children by the refusal of teacher's unions to accept ideas such as school choice and teacher accountability these unions would have been run out of town a decade ago. Our government schools exist to indoctrinate our children into how to be good employees and loyal government subjects. The teacher's unions are willing participants in this effort.
I understand that there are good patriotic union members, and I understand that unions sometimes stumble into positive action .. but by and large unions exist today as organizations designed to help workers escape workplace accountability and to fund economic liberty's greatest enemy, the Democrat Party. Unions are the number one reason so many of our local and state governments are facing tremendous budget problems right now. The wage and pension benefits negotiated by unions - negotiated in return for massive campaign contributions - are a threat to local economies coast to coast. They have managed to scam politicians into a generational theft scheme, which has now left our country, our cities, our states, our taxpayers, deep in the red. This entitlement mentality that permeates from union goons is ultimately paid for by you - the taxpayers - because our gutless politicians are too afraid to lose their support and ultimately their jobs. Timothy Carney of the Washington Examiner has the painful truth. These are facts that you and everyone should know .. facts that will demonstrate just how influential these unions are over Democrat politicians.
Public employees and their unions have contributed more money to the 2010 elections than the employees, executives and PACs of every oil company combined, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The $7.9 million that the sector gave to Democrats is more than the Republican haul from Wall Street, insurance or lobbyists.
The public employee sector spent $40 million on lobbying in the first six months of this year -- more than health maintenance organizations, commercial banks and the defense/aerospace industry, according to CRP.
Democrats have raised $1.7 million this year from the American Federation of Teachers, more than Republicans have raised from Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America, combined.
AFT's PAC spent $21 million in the 2008 election, more than certified "special interests" such as the National Association of Realtors PAC and the National Rifle Association PAC. Combine the PAC spending of the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, America's Health Insurance Plans, and the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America, and you're at about 36 percent of AFT's spending.
Stunning, isn't it? If you believe that these labor unions, and the teachers unions, truly have your best interests at heart .. that is probably because you grew up in a government school where you were educated to believe that from a young age. The teacher union bailout vote this week is absolutely nothing but Democrat pandering to one of their largest supporters. How hard is this to understand? There is one thing the Democrats got right. This vote was about jobs .. only it wasn't really saving jobs in your community but about saving their own jobs in Washington.
Monday, August 09, 2010
A little reality and truth
The Democrat strategy for this upcoming election is abundantly clear: they are running against George Bush. The language on the network shows lately point to the "Bush recession" and the "failed policies of George Bush." Democrats are trying their best to link Republicans to George Bush. This is particularly evident when it comes to the battle over the Bush tax cuts. Democrats and Obama administration officials like to tell us that we simply cannot afford to continue tax cuts for the evil rich. In other words, the evil rich need to pay more of their 'fair share.' But there are a few facts about the Bush tax cuts (and tax cuts in general) that you should keep in mind. These come from the Heritage Foundation:
Myth #1: Tax revenues remain low.
Fact: Tax revenues are above the historical average, even after the tax cuts.
Myth #2: The Bush tax cuts substantially reduced 2006 revenues and expanded the budget deficit.
Fact: Nearly ALL of the 2006 budget deficit resulted from additional spending above the baseline.
Myth #3: Supply-side economics assumes that all tax cuts immediately pay for themselves.
Fact: It assumes replenishment of some but not necessarily all lost revenues.
Myth #4: Capital gains tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
Fact: Capital gains tax revenues doubled following the 2003 tax cut.
Myth #5: The Bush tax cuts are to blame for the projected long-term budget deficits.
Fact: Projections show that entitlement costs will dwarf the projected large revenue increases.
Myth #6: Raising tax rates is the best way to raise revenue.
Fact: Tax revenues correlate with economic growth, not tax rates.
Myth #7: Reversing the upper-income tax cuts would raise substantial revenues.
Fact: The low-income tax cuts reduced revenues the most.
Myth #8: Tax cuts help the economy by "putting money in people's pockets."
Fact: Pro-growth tax cuts support incentives for productive behavior.
Myth #9: The Bush tax cuts have not helped the economy.
Fact: The economy responded strongly to the 2003 tax cuts.
Myth #10: The Bush tax cuts were tilted toward the rich.
Fact: The rich are now shouldering even more of the income tax burden.
There is one fact that stands out to me: Tax revenues correlate with economic growth, not tax rates. If the Obama administration's true goal is to get businesses hiring and investing, increases taxes and maintaining economic uncertainty clearly isn't going to do that. What the administration SHOULD consider are policies which will give businesses true incentives to hire. Obama should focus on growing the economy rather than generating more tax revenue with tax increases. For example, repealing or at least lowering corporate tax rates would be a huge help to corporations at this time. Ironically enough, countries like England are currently lowering their corporate tax rates. Meanwhile, we can only assume that any taxes on the rich or evil corporations is only going to sky-rocket. Would continuing the Bush tax cuts cost money? Well sure .. in the short term. Clearly you would expect an increase in revenue over the short term with an increase in tax rates, but as the high producers adjust their behavior to meet the punishment of increased tax rates you would see government revenue from those with increased taxes start to fall. Remember ... more than half of the evil rich people who will be hit with these Obama tax increases are small business owners. These are the people we need to grow our economy and produce jobs. I would submit to you, though, that Obama's intense dislike of the private sector, and his dedication to wealth seizure and re-distribution overweighs any desire for jobs growth in the private sector. Obama truly believes that money spent by government will do a better job of prompting economic growth than money spent by the parties who actually earned it. If you agree, Obama is your man. Keep that obscene bumper sticker on your car.
Myth #1: Tax revenues remain low.
Fact: Tax revenues are above the historical average, even after the tax cuts.
Myth #2: The Bush tax cuts substantially reduced 2006 revenues and expanded the budget deficit.
Fact: Nearly ALL of the 2006 budget deficit resulted from additional spending above the baseline.
Myth #3: Supply-side economics assumes that all tax cuts immediately pay for themselves.
Fact: It assumes replenishment of some but not necessarily all lost revenues.
Myth #4: Capital gains tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
Fact: Capital gains tax revenues doubled following the 2003 tax cut.
Myth #5: The Bush tax cuts are to blame for the projected long-term budget deficits.
Fact: Projections show that entitlement costs will dwarf the projected large revenue increases.
Myth #6: Raising tax rates is the best way to raise revenue.
Fact: Tax revenues correlate with economic growth, not tax rates.
Myth #7: Reversing the upper-income tax cuts would raise substantial revenues.
Fact: The low-income tax cuts reduced revenues the most.
Myth #8: Tax cuts help the economy by "putting money in people's pockets."
Fact: Pro-growth tax cuts support incentives for productive behavior.
Myth #9: The Bush tax cuts have not helped the economy.
Fact: The economy responded strongly to the 2003 tax cuts.
Myth #10: The Bush tax cuts were tilted toward the rich.
Fact: The rich are now shouldering even more of the income tax burden.
There is one fact that stands out to me: Tax revenues correlate with economic growth, not tax rates. If the Obama administration's true goal is to get businesses hiring and investing, increases taxes and maintaining economic uncertainty clearly isn't going to do that. What the administration SHOULD consider are policies which will give businesses true incentives to hire. Obama should focus on growing the economy rather than generating more tax revenue with tax increases. For example, repealing or at least lowering corporate tax rates would be a huge help to corporations at this time. Ironically enough, countries like England are currently lowering their corporate tax rates. Meanwhile, we can only assume that any taxes on the rich or evil corporations is only going to sky-rocket. Would continuing the Bush tax cuts cost money? Well sure .. in the short term. Clearly you would expect an increase in revenue over the short term with an increase in tax rates, but as the high producers adjust their behavior to meet the punishment of increased tax rates you would see government revenue from those with increased taxes start to fall. Remember ... more than half of the evil rich people who will be hit with these Obama tax increases are small business owners. These are the people we need to grow our economy and produce jobs. I would submit to you, though, that Obama's intense dislike of the private sector, and his dedication to wealth seizure and re-distribution overweighs any desire for jobs growth in the private sector. Obama truly believes that money spent by government will do a better job of prompting economic growth than money spent by the parties who actually earned it. If you agree, Obama is your man. Keep that obscene bumper sticker on your car.
Thursday, August 05, 2010
Our esteemed Community Organizer spent some time pandering to the unions yesterday. It was at a speech to the AFL-CIO where he came up with this quote: "You have a perfect economic storm that's hit our middle class directly in every region, every segment of this country."
Perfect for what? For government to swoop in and solve all of your problems. Although, that ALWAYS comes with a price. This is a price that liberals try to convince you is worth it - more government, most taxes, more redistribution. In the end you are to believe that you would never have weathered the storm without your trusty government officials there to guide you.
This is a prime example of never letting a good crisis go to waste. This "perfect economic storm" means that it is perfect for government and for unions. But as for the private sector?
Oh and while we are talking about pandering to the unions. Our Community Organizer also pledged to the AFL-CIO that he would "keep on fighting to pass the Employee Free Choice Act," otherwise known as the card check bill. That is just what Americans want right now - more power concentrated in the hands of unions and Washington. But ... Obama knows where the votes are. He knows that pandering to the unions is a big part of keeping Democrats (and himself) in charge.
If for no other reason than to reduce the power and influence of unions in our economy, the Democrats must be removed from power in Washington. For the most part, the time for unions has come and gone. They are a destructive force in our schools and a destructive force in our economy.
Perfect for what? For government to swoop in and solve all of your problems. Although, that ALWAYS comes with a price. This is a price that liberals try to convince you is worth it - more government, most taxes, more redistribution. In the end you are to believe that you would never have weathered the storm without your trusty government officials there to guide you.
This is a prime example of never letting a good crisis go to waste. This "perfect economic storm" means that it is perfect for government and for unions. But as for the private sector?
Oh and while we are talking about pandering to the unions. Our Community Organizer also pledged to the AFL-CIO that he would "keep on fighting to pass the Employee Free Choice Act," otherwise known as the card check bill. That is just what Americans want right now - more power concentrated in the hands of unions and Washington. But ... Obama knows where the votes are. He knows that pandering to the unions is a big part of keeping Democrats (and himself) in charge.
If for no other reason than to reduce the power and influence of unions in our economy, the Democrats must be removed from power in Washington. For the most part, the time for unions has come and gone. They are a destructive force in our schools and a destructive force in our economy.
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
ObamaCare--Missouri ain't buyinng it..
This may be one of the most memorable political quotes from 2010. It came from Princess Nancy Pelosi. She was speaking about ObamaCare, and she said that Democrats were going to have to "pass the bill so you can find out what's in it, away from the fog of controversy." Well, that worked for Pelosi and Obama. Did it work for you?
Well ... it would seem that the voters of Missouri have now seen what is in the bill ... and they don't like it; not even a little bit. There was a little vote in Missouri yesterday. Well, not quite so little if you're an ObamaZombie. About 70% of the Missouri voters supported a measure on the ballot that would prohibit the government from requiring people to buy health insurance or to penalize them for not buying it.
Obama is also having some problems with the courts on Obamacare. The recent ruling in Virginia on the ObamaCare challenge is a prime example. Judge Hudson believes that "never before has the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause been extended this far." Are you hearing this? The Obama administration has managed to push our Constitution to its absolute limit to the point where the courts cannot determine whether or not this is even within the bounds of our Constitution. Judge Hudson goes on to say, "While this case raises a host of complex constitutional issues, all seem to distill to the single question of whether or not Congress has the power to regulate-and tax-a citizen's decision not to participate in interstate commerce. Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any circuit court of appeals has squarely addressed this issue. No reported case from any federal appellate court has extended the Commerce Clause or Tax Clause to include the regulation of a person's decision not to purchase a product, notwithstanding its effect on interstate commerce."
What is the matter with the "decisions have consequences" mantra? OK, fine. So someone makes the choice not to buy health insurance. What does that mean for them? In the past it meant that you head to the emergency room for your ordinary medical care and the insured patients and taxpayers end up paying for your irresponsibility through higher hospital bills and taxes. Now this just isn't a workable model. We need to return to a system where individuals are expected to show at least a modicum of responsibility for their own lives ... and where they will be expected to face certain consequences if they do not. Let's put it bluntly. If someone makes stupid lifestyle and financial choices, and then reaches the point where those stupid choices have created a situation whereby that person is unable to adequately address resulting illnesses ... that situation should not constitute a liability for another American who has paid attention to the details of a responsible and healthy life. When people figure out that the failure to address their own healthcare needs and a healthy lifestyle is going to work out very poorly in the end --- and that includes their not being able to use the government to plunder those who have lived more responsibly --- things will change.
Just remember that to many "rulers" in Washington, the Constitution is an impediment to The Community Organizers' "fundamental transformation" of The United States of America. It would be a nation built on a vaporous definition of "fairness" and redistribution of wealth and resources, rather than a nation built on hard work, individual responsibility and freedom. Slowly but surely, these people in Washington have managed to chip away at our Constitution for years, all in efforts to promise the dumbmasses more and more, for the sole purpose of being re-elected and maintaining power.
Well ... it would seem that the voters of Missouri have now seen what is in the bill ... and they don't like it; not even a little bit. There was a little vote in Missouri yesterday. Well, not quite so little if you're an ObamaZombie. About 70% of the Missouri voters supported a measure on the ballot that would prohibit the government from requiring people to buy health insurance or to penalize them for not buying it.
Obama is also having some problems with the courts on Obamacare. The recent ruling in Virginia on the ObamaCare challenge is a prime example. Judge Hudson believes that "never before has the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause been extended this far." Are you hearing this? The Obama administration has managed to push our Constitution to its absolute limit to the point where the courts cannot determine whether or not this is even within the bounds of our Constitution. Judge Hudson goes on to say, "While this case raises a host of complex constitutional issues, all seem to distill to the single question of whether or not Congress has the power to regulate-and tax-a citizen's decision not to participate in interstate commerce. Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any circuit court of appeals has squarely addressed this issue. No reported case from any federal appellate court has extended the Commerce Clause or Tax Clause to include the regulation of a person's decision not to purchase a product, notwithstanding its effect on interstate commerce."
What is the matter with the "decisions have consequences" mantra? OK, fine. So someone makes the choice not to buy health insurance. What does that mean for them? In the past it meant that you head to the emergency room for your ordinary medical care and the insured patients and taxpayers end up paying for your irresponsibility through higher hospital bills and taxes. Now this just isn't a workable model. We need to return to a system where individuals are expected to show at least a modicum of responsibility for their own lives ... and where they will be expected to face certain consequences if they do not. Let's put it bluntly. If someone makes stupid lifestyle and financial choices, and then reaches the point where those stupid choices have created a situation whereby that person is unable to adequately address resulting illnesses ... that situation should not constitute a liability for another American who has paid attention to the details of a responsible and healthy life. When people figure out that the failure to address their own healthcare needs and a healthy lifestyle is going to work out very poorly in the end --- and that includes their not being able to use the government to plunder those who have lived more responsibly --- things will change.
Just remember that to many "rulers" in Washington, the Constitution is an impediment to The Community Organizers' "fundamental transformation" of The United States of America. It would be a nation built on a vaporous definition of "fairness" and redistribution of wealth and resources, rather than a nation built on hard work, individual responsibility and freedom. Slowly but surely, these people in Washington have managed to chip away at our Constitution for years, all in efforts to promise the dumbmasses more and more, for the sole purpose of being re-elected and maintaining power.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)