tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-89412762024-03-07T15:13:01.799-08:00Digital BrownshirtAll the things I want to say and anything else that I find entertainingAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comBlogger666125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-89559452985049885602013-02-26T08:40:00.001-08:002013-02-26T08:40:26.096-08:00Fore!<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">On the heels of Barack Obama's golf trip to Florida with Tiger Woods at the same time Michelle and the girls went to Aspen, home to the world's rich and famous, once again made me understand the difference between Obama-style and Romney-style (aka member communist politburo vs. capitalist).</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">Obama: Ostentatious lifestyle funded by the people!</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">Romney: Worked hard, took risks and created the lifestyle of a successful capitalist funded by his own earned wealth!</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">Final Thoughts!</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">Barack Obama's incessant rhetoric concerning the plight of the middle class belies the actual actions of this President who is living the lifestyle of the rich and famous on our dime!</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">If he had any actual feeling or empathy for the plight of the everyman perhaps he would stay home and play board games with the family around the White House fireplace!</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">At the same time Barack Obama's constant fear mongering about the effects of sequestration highlights the fact that what this President cares about is not the middle class but rather using the country and its people as pawns in some destructive political game!</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">Because the reality is that $82 billion in automatic spending cuts are merely a drop in the federal budget bucket and the places that any cuts would actually be made are at the discretion of the President who will seek to make them as painful as possible so that the American people will point their fingers of blame at the Republican Party.</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">Think for a second about the fact that the Hurricane Sandy relief legislation alone was packed with over $40 billion of pork! Why not just start the spending cuts there?</span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-29006800921774036072013-02-20T10:12:00.002-08:002013-02-20T10:12:53.225-08:00Warren Hill “Not Competent to Be Executed”?<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 31.5pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; mso-outline-level: 1; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">Warren Lee Hill was scheduled to be executed in Georgia last
night, but he has been granted a stay of execution because the courts are now
convinced he might be retarded. Apparently, Georgia passed a law in 1988
prohibiting the execution of the mentally handicapped, and the Supreme Court
has also ruled that this would be unconstitutional. I didn’t know the
Constitution talked about mental health issues (must be in the interstate
commerce clause), but…<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">Warren Lee Hill was in prison originally for murdering his
girlfriend. He shot her 11 times. While in prison, he killed again, beating
another inmate to death with a nail-spiked board. Was he messed up in the head?
Clearly. Was he stupid? Undoubtedly. Does this mean he shouldn’t be executed? I
don’t think so.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">If we can for a moment assume that execution is a valid form of
punishment for certain crimes (and murder would definitely be on the list), I
fail to see how someone’s mental capacity before or after the crime matters at
all.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">Let’s take the materialist position briefly and say the man is no
more than a mass of tissue and chemical interactions. No different than an
animal, according to the materialist. Well, do you put down a rabid dog? It’s
not the dog’s fault that it’s a danger to society, but you still kill it before
it can do any more damage.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">And there will be people that say, “How dare you compare these
people to animals! They are human beings!” I agree. And execution has more
human dignity than imprisonment, just ask Michel Foucault. You put a man in a
cage and feed him dog food, and you force his victims to pay for it. I would
have him pay with his life for a life he took. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">Well, <i><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0in; padding: 0in;">two</span></i> lives now.
Which reminds me. If they had executed Warren Hill for the first murder he
committed, he never would have committed the second. That’s the first benefit
of capital punishment. Even if it didn’t deter other people from committing
similar crimes (which it does), it at least prevents the executed person from
committing any other crimes.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">But let’s assume Warren Hill has a soul, (which I don’t believe,
but for the sake of all religious which is an overwhelming majority of you, let’s
say you’re right). Then his soul must have some culpability for these murders.
If not, how can you blame anyone for anything? How intelligent do you have to
be to be culpable for your actions? And why does a person have to understand
what he’s doing in order to be responsible for it? I don’t think most big
government advocates understand fully how absolutely evil their political
schemes are. They are, shall we say, a bit retarded. Does that mean they’re not
responsible?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">I can’t seem to find the logic in this. Should punishment depend
on the understanding of the perpetrator? If you made it so, criminals would
suddenly cease to understand anything. “What? Stealing is wrong? Who knew? I am really, really sorry. I know nothing.” This method of escaping punishment is ancient.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">This has been the problem with measures like this from the beginning.
Insanity pleas are a sliding line, far too easy to manipulate. And this is no
different. Warren Hill loaded and fired a gun. He spiked a board with nails. He
was competent enough to kill. He’s competent enough to be executed. Whether or
not he understood the full import of what he did is immaterial. The crucial
thing here is not what he <i><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0in; padding: 0in;">knows</span></i>, but what he <i><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0in; padding: 0in;">did</span></i>. The punishment should fit itself to the crime… not
the criminal.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="border: 1pt none windowtext; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; padding: 0in;"><br />
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-80393663685795838932013-02-20T09:43:00.001-08:002013-02-20T09:43:13.960-08:00<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;">Are we breeding a generation of deluded narcissists?</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;">The answer is yes.</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;">Now add selfishness, entitlement mentality, victim mentality, me--me--me and you get a new level of unearned hubris. There is no guaranteed equal outcome as promised by the left.</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;">On its face narcissism would seem to conflict with the entitlement and victim mentalities, but they're all blended together into a spirit of colle</span><span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; display: inline; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px; line-height: 18px;">ctive narcissism, leavened with doses of paranoia and despair. I think it goes something like this:<br /><br />1. We are all special butterflies who deserve everything.<br /><br />2. Making stern demands of people is cruel. Making me do what I say rather than just allowing me to say it vindictive and malicious.<br /><br />3. Good people should never suffer from random misfortune - ranging from illness to job loss, or even the failure of entrepreneurial risk.<br /><br />4. Special interests are so powerful that even the biggest government in the history of the world remains the underdog in battle against them. What chance do individuals have against something like that?<br /><br />5. Therefore, our self-regard can only be expressed collectively - we must support even larger, more powerful, and more virtuous government with all of our hearts, because we see our own noble spirit reflected within it. And, as a happy side benefit, when the State does everything of consequence, it's easier to be indolent without guilt.<br /><br />I've often wondered how much the Nineties Cult of Self-Esteem contributed to all this, as it aggressively pushed the notion that respect (and the attendant material benefits) are deserved, rather than earned.<br /><br />These are the Obama voters..</span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-63348814166482938172013-02-18T11:14:00.001-08:002013-02-18T11:14:31.996-08:00Logic-Political Correctness and Zombies<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Common sense is anything but common. Like every action a human being
can perform, either physical or mental, common sense must be learned. A human
being is not born with such ability, fully developed. And logic must accompany
common sense. Logic is a discipline that is based upon fact and evidence of
whatsoever is true. Logic teaches one to think. Without it, “common sense”
would still dictate that the earth is flat. Logic used to be a required subject
in school. It isn’t anymore. That isn’t an oversight. In his book <i><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0in; padding: 0in;">The Intended Result of Education</span></i> Bertrand Russell
wrote: “Education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils
have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives,
of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">The left is never required to prove anything. Leftists make a
statement and whatever they say automatically becomes true because they say it
is so. We are expected to choke down their swill without a murmur of protest.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Every media outlet, whether entertainment, mainstream media or our
elected representatives tells us only what they want us to believe regardless
of how frequently what they tell us changes. And a dumbed-down populace meekly
swallows, without dispute.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Political Correctness completes the destructive circle. When
thinking is restricted thinking ceases to exist. Everything from eroding
personal freedoms to gun control to the blind acceptance of any and every
perversion stems from what is permissible thought and what is not. We have
“hate crime.” Hate crime outranks crime. Why? Isn’t murder still murder?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Still worse, certain interest groups, we are told, are exempt from
hate crime. Their status as minorities makes hate crime impossible. Christopher
Dorner is a prime example. He slaughtered nearly every racial type and gender
of human being yet excuses are made and the mainstream media urges us to
consider the discrimination he was “fighting against.” Dorner is considered a
folk-hero by many. The University of Wisconsin is teaching a course whose focus
is that it is “unfair to be white.” Who gets to decree what’s unfair and what
is not? What are the criteria? Dr. Benjamin Carson, an honored, world-famous,
pediatric neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins, had the audacity to raise the alarm PC
poses to thought at the National Prayer Breakfast in D.C. He did it with the
President sitting a few feet away.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">How unutterably sad that PC begs the question, had Dr. Carson <i><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0in; padding: 0in;">not</span></i> been a black man, would his reputation have
survived making that speech? Because he did so there is still doubt; a mindless
media is trying to marginalize and discredit him for committing the blasphemy
of speaking his mind.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">When logic, common sense and the ability to say what one thinks
become irrelevant how much easier does it become for any ruling class to supply
whatever “facts” they want their constituency to believe? Our current reality
is that fact no longer has standing; instead we pay court to emotion. The
danger in not understanding that <i><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0in; padding: 0in;">this</span></i> is the
real predicament is immense; if one doesn’t recognize the problem how can one
fix the problem?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Libtards have controlled education, social services and PC for
nearly 100 years. “Low information voters” are created when only low
information is made available; when indoctrination replaces education. An
eighth grade education used to be tantamount to what is currently taught in
college. The left’s agenda may well be the destruction of our ability to think,
to be logical. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Without such aptitude there is no rule of law. Everything becomes
mutable. The Constitution becomes disposable. Without thought we are unable to
protect ourselves. We become the pawns of whoever governs over us. Absence of
logical thought makes it easy to see how the man spearheading our ruin got
reelected.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">And it makes Libtards immune to Zombie attacks. Zombies <span style="background: white;">are slow, and stupid, and they groan.</span><span style="outline: 0px;"> </span>They say the zombie apocalypse is upon
us.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">But unfortunately, zombies won’t be eating any Libtards. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">See, zombies like <i><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0in; padding: 0in;">brains</span></i>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-38929873341113475382012-12-05T11:01:00.001-08:002012-12-05T11:03:56.428-08:00Yeah … I know … Obama won. He won because he and his Democrat pals did a really good job of building a moocher majority in this country .. and a really good job of promoting class warfare.<br />
<br />
He was also assisted by a pathetic GOP campaign and ground effort.
He may have won, but I’m not going to stop reminding you – especially you idiot ObamaVoters – of just what an unqualified hack Obama is.<br />
<br />
So I find this gem on the “U.S. Constitutional Free Press” website. It’s a list prepared by someone using the name “John Galt” of all of the things our Dear Ruler has NEVER DONE. And we hired this tool to run our country?<br />
Barack Obama is a man who has:<br />
* Never had to write a business plan<br />
* Never had to review a business plan to determine its worthiness<br />
* Never had to create a budget for a private business<br />
* Never had to calculate the economic worth of an existing or new employee for a business<br />
* Never had to worry about the cost of benefits provided to a business employee<br />
* Never had to worry about whether or not a business was making a profit<br />
* Never had to explain to a boss or to shareholders why a business was losing money<br />
* Never had to file a business tax return
* Never had to talk to an accountant about business matters<br />
* Never had to hire an attorney to deal with business matters<br />
* Never had to worry about the effects of government regulations on a business he owns or operates<br />
* Never had to tell an employee that he was being let go because business was slow<br />
* Never had to place a “help-wanted” ad looking for a new worker<br />
* Never had to look at a list of revenues and expenses to determine how much a new employee can be paid.<br />
* Never had to face competition from a new business down the street<br />
<br />
Good luck Obama voters you're going to need it.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-18657215193215694292011-10-10T07:13:00.000-07:002011-10-10T07:15:47.146-07:00Princess Pelosi is just too stupid..Let’s start out with a little quote, shall we?<br /><br />“I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this myself in the late 70s in San Francisco, this king of rhetoric. … It created a climate in which violence took place. … I wish we would all curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements and understand that some of the ears that it is falling on are not a balanced as the person making the statements may assume.”<br /><br />That was in reference to the recent Occupy Wall Street crowd, right? Wrong. That was Nancy Pelosi talking about the tea party in 2009. What does she have to say about the Occupy Wall Street kids? “God bless them.” Let’s take a look at some of the rhetoric from these “blessed” kids and those who are speaking at their rallies<br /> …<br />In New Orleans we have people marching who are apparently shouting to “Kill the cops!”<br /><br />This occupier in New York has a message for Republicans: “They want a class war? They’ll get one …”<br /><br />Sometimes actions speak louder than words .. a protestor in New York was photographed defecating on a police car.<br /><br />Actor Danny Glover spoke at an occupy demonstration in LA where he said, “We need 24/7 warriors.”<br /><br />This is just a smattering of the incidents being reported around the country. What does Nancy Pelosi have to say about this kind of behavior? She doesn’t. She only has a message for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, who referred to these kids at “mobs.” Pelosi says, "I didn't hear him say anything when the Tea Party was out demonstrating, actually spitting on members of Congress right here in the Capitol and he and his colleagues were putting signs in the windows encouraging them. But let's not get down to that." Perhaps the reason Princess Pelosi doesn’t want to get into that is because there is no documented proof that tea party protestors spit on members of Congress. Meanwhile, we have lots of documented proof of the antics of these Wall Street kids.<br /> <br />While the tea party protestors were calling for Congress to “kill the bill” (ObamaCare), the occupy Wall Street crowd is calling to “kill the wealthy.” Where is Nancy Pelosi’s comment on this type of behavior or rhetoric … the pot calling the kettle black?Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-20673144715019160442011-10-04T08:14:00.000-07:002011-10-04T08:18:34.103-07:00A Plan to run HaitiThe Libtards occupying Wall Street have come up with a proposed list of their demands. You are going to enjoy these .. are you ready?<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand one</span>: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand two:</span> Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand three:</span> Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand four:</span> Free college education.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand five:</span> Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand six:</span> One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand seven:</span> One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand eight:</span> Racial and gender equal rights amendment.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand nine:</span> Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand ten:</span> Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand eleven:</span> Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand twelve:</span> Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Demand thirteen:</span> Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.<br /><br />Let’s let the Occupy Wall Street crowd run Haiti for a few years utilizing these demands and see how well that works out for them. And do any of you think for one minute that Obama is not on board with these Marxists?Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-67743647096174974362011-10-04T08:11:00.000-07:002011-10-04T08:12:47.406-07:00A Dick is still a DickCheck out the cajones on this guy, Dick Durbin.<br /> <br />First he crafts new federal regulations to cap the amount banks can charge retailers for swipe fees for processing debit cards.<br /><br />Then the banks warn that this regulation will cost them millions, maybe even billions. And because businesses are in business to … make money … they will not just sit back and take it. This will force them to pass on the costs to the consumer.<br /><br />Dick Durbin includes his amendment in the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill and it passes and becomes the law of the land.<br /><br />Banks, such as Bank of America, announce that they will now start charging customers a fee for using their debit cards, thanks to Durbin’s financial regulations.<br />Then Dick Durbin gets up on the floor of the Senate and says, “Bank of America customers, vote with your feet … Get the heck out of that bank. Find yourself a bank or credit union that won’t gouge you for $5 a month and still will give you a debit card that you can use every single day.” He adds, “What Bank of America has done is an outrage.”<br /><br />An outrage? This is exactly what the industry warned about all along! What’s outrageous is the size of this guy’s gonads .. that he can impose these regulations and then blame the banks when they are forced to comply. Sheesh!Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-25943447019434446352011-09-22T09:32:00.000-07:002011-09-22T09:33:47.810-07:00Here’s a prime example of why this country is suffering from a crisis of confidence. The people --- even the ObamaBots --- are learning that you simply can’t believe a durn thing that comes out of Dear Ruler’s mouth .. or should I say, that a speech writer enters into Dear Ruler’s teleprompter.<br /> <br />Just a few days ago, Barack Obama gave a speech announcing his grand plan to reduce our deficit. He spent much of the time demonizing the wealthy, harping on the millionaires and billionaires and corporations, and telling people to pay their fair share. Throughout it all he insisted, "This is not class warfare.” He said, “I reject the idea that asking a hedge fund manager to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare. I think it’s just the right the thing to do.” Hate to tell you this Obama but even if you think it is right, doesn’t mean that you aren’t waging war against the achievers in our nation. But he insists, “This is not class warfare. It’s math.”<br /><br />However, just two days later during a speech in New York, Barack “this is not class warfare” Obama declares himself to be a warrior for the middle class.<br />“Now, you’re already hearing the Republicans in Congress dusting off the old talking points. You can write their press releases. “Class warfare,” they say. You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay the same rate as a plumber or a teacher makes me a warrior for the middle class, I wear that charge as a badge of honor.”<br /><br />Folks, there are only so many ways I can say this. Barack Obama is full of shit. He is a warrior for the middle class because he is championing the idea that the government needs to use its police power of government to take stuff away from wealthy people and give it to people more likely to vote for him. Even if Obama succeeded in doing that, it would hardly make a difference to our spending/debt/deficit crisis … though it would certainly affect (negatively) jobs and investment, seeing as these evil rich people are the ones who invest in companies and create the jobs. The Tax Foundation has some more enlightening statistics for you using IRS statistics:<br /><br />Taking half of the yearly income from every person making between one and ten million dollars would only decrease the nation's debt by 1%. Even taking every last penny from every individual making more than $10 million per year would only reduce the nation's deficit by 12 percent and the debt by 2 percent. <br />Not enough? Here’s another way to look at it!<br /><br />If the highest rate of 35% were raised by a factor of 20% to 42%, then the additional tax revenue would be $43.5 Billion, not much of a dent in our $1.665 trillion deficit. So, let's raise the rate by a factor of 50% to 52.5%; the additional revenue would be $108.9 billion. Still nowhere near enough, so let's just tax it at a rate of 100%, bringing in an additional $404.8 Billion. Unfortunately the country is still $1.26 trillion in the hole for the year.<br /><br />Despite the conventional wisdom in Libtardia, revenue is not the problem in this country. The problem with our system is not that we are allowing rich people to keep too much of their money … that’s lib logic, by the way … the problem is that we simply are spending too much. How can people forget that Obama increased government spending by more than 25% in his first two and one-half years? Just how does he get away with this? He increases spending by that amount and doubles our debt ... then he says that our problem is that the rich simply are not paying their “fair share” in taxes.<br /><br />And by the way, the “fair share” term is all you need to understand that this is a class warfare campaign. It’s all he has --- he has no record of accomplishment to run on in next year’s election. Stirring hatred and resentment for high-achievers is his preferred method. Not that Obama cares, but America simply cannot afford a European welfare state without sacrificing our freedoms to pay for it.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-44613566111595592552011-09-21T08:01:00.000-07:002011-09-21T08:02:24.921-07:00Lore PohlmanIt appears that about 40% of the country makes up a core of blue… people who are wedded to their leftist philosophy as if it were a religion… they believe it will succeed despite all evidence to the contrary. From the economic malaise it has inflicted on the United States to the economic meltdown that is playing itself out in Europe to the wholesale abandonment of the leftist policies by governments from Beijing to Delhi to Hanoi. Despite the complete lack of a single demonstrable example of a sustained success of the Marxist / Keynesian / Alinsky philosophy, they still believe and it appears that virtually nothing anyone in the red corner can say can change their minds.<br /><br />Today the aspirations embodied by their messiah are no longer just theoretical solutions and aspirational promises. This is not 2008 when the press could blame all of America’s woes on a reviled Bush White House. It’s not 2008 when Barack Obama could tell stories about how he plans on putting America back to work by rebuilding our infrastructure and creating green jobs. It’s not 2008 where Barack Obama could promise to make America respected again in the eyes of the world by closing Guantanamo and ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s not 2008 where Barack Obama could rail against George Bush’s “years of unprecedented fiscal irresponsibility.” On the contrary, in the summer of 2011 President Obama finds himself in the middle of a perfect storm of failure, yet it seems to have no effect on his followers.<br /><br />The most recent issue is of course Solyndra. The solar panel company that was the poster child for the green jobs that were the key to fulfilling his campaign pledge to future generations that (his election) “was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” In 2009 the Administration gave the company $535 million in loan guarantees and in March of 2010 the President toured the company, declaring “the promise of clean energy isn’t just an article of faith.” Today the company sits bankrupt and taxpayers are out half a billion dollars. What’s worse for President Obama’s green jobs agenda is the fact that apparently each of those touted green jobs costs $5 million…<br /><br />On the jobs front the President has just gone back to Congress and requested that they give him an additional $500 billion for a second stimulus program… because his previous $1 Trillion stimulus plan worked so well. The President suggested that his stimulus program (circa 2009) would bring unemployment down to 7.1% by August of 2011. In reality, his stimulus program did pass yet unemployment stands at 9.1% today. Fully two million more Americans are unemployed today than were promised by the President.<br /><br />On the single most important issue of the day, jobs, President Obama has demonstrated not only that he is out of ideas, but that he wants to double down on the same bad ideas didn’t work in the past… and he wants to pay for the whole thing by raising taxes by $1.5 trillion. Unfortunately for him, things don’t look any better anywhere else. Domestically, inflation is on the rise, the economy is on life support and federal deficits are larger than at any time in history. Internationally, America’s leadership is once again so strong that the Palestinians are heading to the UN to ask for recognition despite US opposition, the Arab spring threatens to put Islamists in charge across the region, Europe is crumbling and Asian allies wonder about America’s commitment to the region as Taiwan is left twisting in the wind by the administration’s decision not to sell the island nation 66 new F-16 fighter jets for fear of offending the Chinese. Politically, the President’s leftist policies have so pummeled the citizens of New York that last week the GOP captured a house seat that had been held by the Democrats since 1923.<br /><br />While the nirvana that was to be ushered in by Hope and Change has not materialized, it’s not because the administration has demurred from putting its policies in place. On the contrary, they’ve done so in most cases either by legislation or executive action. Despite all of this failure, a solid 40% of the electorate still supports President Obama and the discredited policies of the left. One wonders how is it possible that seeing all of this they could still believe? Then again, maybe it’s not so difficult to understand. A sign of a religion after all, is believing in something despite all empirical data that suggest it might not be true, or perhaps more accurately, the lack of empirical data that suggest it is true. The difference between a religion and the leftist policies of President Obama is that the former typically promises nirvana in the afterlife while the latter is supposed to be focused on this one. Nothing can prove Heaven doesn’t exist and therefore believers continue to believe. It’s called faith. History on the other hand, from FDR right up to Barack Obama, demonstrates clearly that the socialist, redistributive policies of the left simply do not work. Yet, the believers still believe, and vote accordingly. That fits Einstein’s definition of insanity. In this case it might just be called stupidity.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-33296276295710918642011-09-15T08:45:00.000-07:002011-09-15T08:45:08.366-07:00It's All Bush's fault
As you know --- every problem that Obama has faced – and failed to address successfully – is really Bush’s fault. It is rumored (not really) that Obama has a version of the Presidential Seal on his desk with a new slogan: “It’s Bush’s Fault.”
You’re probably aware of the Solyndra scandal. Here’s my best attempt to simplify the scandal into bullet points:
Obama decides that he is the one who will decide where the new jobs will be, and he wants green jobs. Green jobs make liberals happy.
Since Obama thinks that green jobs are cool, he decides to throw taxpayer money to private businesses who promise him green jobs.
Solyndra needs money. So Solyndra gets in line for some ObamaMoney.
Obama thinks that Solyndra is the perfect backdrop for his green jobs program, so he designates Joe Biden to go make a speech at the groundbreaking for a new Solyndra facility.
But wait! Solyndra has applied for a $500 million plus loan guarantee, and the application hasn’t been approved yet!
Obama’s own Office of Management and Budget tells him that the loan isn’t a very good idea.
Obama remembers, though, that Solyndra principal George Kaiser is huge contributor to his campaign.
Emails fly at the White House. Some suggesting that the loan guarantee isn’t a good idea, some saying we need to move ahead on this project.
Somewhere along the line the loan agreement is modified to protect Solyndra investors while putting the American taxpayers on the hook.
Obama administration officials actually sat in on some Solyndra board meetings while all of this, and Solyndra finances, were being discussed. (Imagine of Bush administration officials had sat in on Enron board meetings.)
The loan guarantee goes through. The administration gets their day in the sun with Joe Biden speaking at Solyndra headquarters.
About a year later Solyndra is in the tank.
The taxpayers take it on the chin for over $500 milllion.
The Democrats blame Bush, saying that the loan application happened during the Bush administration, not Obama’s.
The Republicans are rude enough to point out that the Bush administration rejected the Solyndra loan application. It only gained new life when Obama took office and started spouting off about green jobs.
The FBI raids Solyndra headquarters.
Democrats and the Obama folks go into pure defense mode.
Where does this go from here? That is going to depend on whether or not the ObamaMedia is compelled to really cover the story.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-2193670453189460542011-09-12T06:38:00.000-07:002011-09-12T06:38:13.886-07:00Solyndra and Green Jobs
Lest we forget that in 2009, Barack Obama appointed an avowed communist, Van Jones, to be his greens jobs czar. That’s right, a communist was the president’s “special advisor” on one of the pillars of his economic plan: green jobs. Actyually … that was pretty much what you might have expected, since so many communists went running to the environmental movement when the world communist movement collapsed. I just want us to remember this mindset as we approach this story about how the Obama administration then went and “invested” $535 million in the now bankrupt solar company, Solyndra.
In September of 2009, the Obama administration heralded a $535 million loan guarantee for Solyndra as a “game changer” for the green energy movement. Vice President Biden emphasized that Solyndra would be creating thousands of permanent jobs: “Jobs you can raise a family on, green jobs, jobs that will serve as a foundation for a stronger American economy.” Biden said, “These are the jobs that are going to define the 21st century and the jobs — going to allow America to compete and to lead like we did in the 20th century.”
So much for that.
In January of this year, Solyndra was able to refinance its loan. During the time of the loan’s restructuring, the Energy Department kept a close eye on the company, even having DOE officials sit in on board meetings. Then in the summer of 2011, the CEO of Solyndra made several visits to Washington, apparently maintaining that the company was stable. Then just weeks later, Solyndra filed for bankruptcy. Now we have federal agents scouring through documents from homes of Solyndra’s CEO and founders. There will be hearings in Congress this week as to whether the DOE was misled by Solyndra on the stability of their investment.
Look, folks. This is what happens when you have government officials picking the winners and losers, all with your tax dollars on the line. Barack Obama wouldn’t know how to create a job if his own job depended on it. The fact that this iconic green jobs investment failed so epically is an extremely bad PR situation for Obama. But more importantly, it is bad for those people who lost their jobs on the false promise of a green jobs future.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-60111009552488867432011-09-01T08:01:00.001-07:002011-09-01T08:01:40.421-07:00Too cute by half.The Big Zero caved. Now he'll deliver his usual shopworn leftists cliches on TV opposite the opening game of NFL football. He's also embarked on a desperation campaign to "run against Washington," as if he (or any) president isn't the very epicenter of what IS Washington.
<br />
<br />Obama's cave-in is being played in some media as "bowing to Boehner." Well, why not? He's bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia and half the Muslim dictators of the middle-east, so why not the Speaker of the House?'
<br />
<br />One wonders what the broader public reaction had been if he'd tried to stick with the date opposite the Republican presidential debate and no Republican House or Senate members even showed up and let him speak to a half-empty chamber. Of course, it would show a "lack of respect". But who's kidding whom? They don't respect this phony, anyway.
<br />
<br />Let's see ... I can watch Obama blather liberal -- and failed -- economic cliches, or I can watch the Packers vs. the Saints. It may take me as long as one second to decide ...
<br />
<br />This dyspeptic dude is the very antithesis of Churchill's classic description of an old British political hack as "a modest man, with much to be modest about." He flunks the first part, anyway. The second, he fills abundantly.
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-84091732700541608312011-08-25T07:24:00.000-07:002011-08-25T07:27:57.632-07:00
<br />We’ve all been waiting with pregnant anticipation for Dear Ruler to return from his vacation and explain to us his grand jobs plan … right? Oh yeah! We’re saved! Barack Obama, the smartest man ever to become president, has a plan! Finally, after more than two and one-half years in office, Our “sort of a God” president who had to “step down” into the office of the presidency is going to step forward and part the unemployment waters so that his people can march across a red-carpeted seabed to the wonderful world of employment!
<br />
<br />I feel this strange tingly thing going up and down my leg!
<br />
<br />Now since Obama is going to present us with his “plan,” we can imagine that it will be in the form of a comprehensive business plan, right? After all, that’s where we need to create the jobs. So I’m guessing Obama is going to present us with some goals for American Business and a detailed plan on how we will achieve those goals.
<br />This is going to be just swell!
<br />
<br />But, alas! Something has happened! After Obama left for his oh-so-well-deserved vacation and his handlers immediately started to downgrade expectations for his jobs plan. Now we are all saddened to learn that it isn’t actually going to be a plan any more. Drat! Not a plan? Now we’ve learned that suddenly it became an outline. Oh, okay .. so screw the specifics on how to achieve our goals. Now we are just going to get an outline. Fantastic. I’m sure it is still going to be a fantastic outline – something worthy of the Great and Powerful Obama.
<br />
<br />Uh oh .. hold on. Now we’re hearing that perhaps an outline became too much for us to expect of Dear Ruler. Now, according to deputy spokesman Josh Earnest, we can anticipate “some reasonable ideas that can have a tangible impact,” Left in the lurch again. Now we’ve been downgraded to some “reasonable ideas.” Well, I’m sure that with all of his experience in business and finance, and considering his understanding of the dynamics of private sector business growth and hiring, Obama will come roaring in the game with “reasonable ideas” that are sure to empty the unemployment lines in no time flat.
<br />
<br />Who the hell am I kidding here? The American people feel more negatively about our economy than they’ve felt in decades … and that’s because the American people know that we have a man in the White House that has no clue in the world what he is doing. He’s a freaking community organizer and leftist activist, for Gawd’s sake – not a brilliant economic mind. This man doesn’t have the knowledge or experience to run a sandwich shop, yet there he sits on his godly throne telling us that he is going to save our economy with some “reasonable ideas” that will be written on two stone tablets when he comes down from The Mount of Martha’s Vineyard. What a load of purified horse shit.
<br />
<br />So at this point, what sort of “reasonable ideas” can we expect from Obama? They damned sure won’t be ideas that will encourage private businessmen to start spending some of their money to expand and hire. Remember … to Obama, the private sector is “the enemy.” His words, not mine. We did, however, have two more have surfaced as of yesterday. These ideas, by the way, would be able to be accomplished without any legislation or need to battle with Republicans in Congress. They would be:
<br />#1: Increase the number of college graduates in engineering and give companies incentives to hire them.
<br />
<br />Really? How many small business owners do you know out there who are sitting on their hands right now because they’re concerned that there’s just not enough engineering graduates to go around? And incentives? What kind of incentives? Know what this sounds like to me? Do something to artificially boost the number of engineering students in colleges and then use taxpayer money to entice businesses into hiring them when the graduate. Yeah, that ought to work. I can see the Dow going through the roof right now.
<br />
<br />#2: Employ construction workers to retrofit commercial buildings to make them more energy efficient.
<br />
<br />Oh yeah. Weatherization II. Oh … and green jobs. Gotta love those green jobs.
<br />Roll the tape: “The Economic Development Department in California reports that $59 million in state, federal and private money dedicated to green jobs training and apprenticeship has led to only 719 job placements — the equivalent of an $82,000 subsidy for each one.”
<br />
<br />Then there’s that weatherization program in Seattle. You remember that one, don’t you? And that’s what we’re talking about here in Obama’s “reasonable idea.” Weatherizing commercial buildings. In April of 2010 Bite Me Biden and Mike McGinn, the mayor of Seattle, had a little soiree to announce a $20 million federal grant (borrowed funds your children will have to pay back) for weatherizing Seattle homes. Oh yeah .. what a big deal THIS was going to be. Think about it! It was going to create 2000 jobs! Amazing! So fast forward to now, and what do we have? A total of three homes have been weatherized and 14 jobs have been created; most of them administrative and temporary.
<br />
<br />But wait! There’s more! Here’s a peak at how that is working out for California:
<br />Federal and state efforts to stimulate creation of green jobs have largely failed, government records show. Two years after it was awarded $186 million in federal stimulus money to weatherize drafty homes, California has spent only a little over half that sum and has so far created the equivalent of just 538 full-time jobs in the last quarter, according to the State Department of Community Services and Development.
<br />
<br />The weatherization program was initially delayed for seven months while the federal Department of Labor determined prevailing wage standards for the industry. Even after that issue was resolved, the program never really caught on.
<br />
<br />Look, folks .. these ideas are all well-and-good but they are not based on any semblance of reality. This is nothing more than government picking the economic winners and losers: The government wants green jobs and construction workers to succeed, therefore it will create and fund a program to do something that otherwise would not be done in the private marketplace.
<br />
<br />At one point in his presidency, Obama pledged to create five million green jobs over the next ten years. Five million green jobs. Instead, we have 2.5 million fewer people working today than the day he was inaugurated. From the looks of things, pushing green initiatives seems to be a jobs killer, not an economic boost: “A study released in July by the non-partisan Brookings Institution found clean-technology jobs accounted for just 2 percent of employment nationwide and only slightly more — 2.2 percent — in Silicon Valley. Rather than adding jobs, the study found, the sector actually lost 492 positions from 2003 to 2010 in the South Bay, where the unemployment rate in June was 10.5 percent.”
<br />
<br />All Obama needs to do is unleash the private sector. Unshackle businesses from the binds of burdensome regulations and stifling taxes. Let the marketplace determine whether or not it needs energy efficient buildings or more engineers in the office place. Trying to create artificial demand will only hinder true demand and therefore true economic growth.
<br />
<br />Here's an idea---Stay in Martha's Vineyard, let Joe Biden stay in Mongolia, send Pelosi and Reid to Libya to organize the new government and just stay the hell out of the way.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-15806173678742959712011-08-22T08:22:00.000-07:002011-08-22T08:24:50.850-07:00Fool me 1,238,451 times shame on mePresident Obama and all 535 voting members of the Legislature.
<br /> It is now official that the majority of you are corrupt morons:
<br />
<br /> A. The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775. You have had 236 years to get it right and it is broke.
<br />
<br /> B. Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 76 years to get it right and it is broke.
<br />
<br /> C. Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 73 years to get it right and it is broke.
<br />
<br /> D. War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 47 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.
<br />
<br /> E. Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 46 years to get it right and they are broke.
<br />
<br /> F. Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 41 years to get it right and it is broke.
<br />
<br /> G. The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 34 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.
<br />
<br />You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars.
<br />
<br /> AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM ??Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-73894177100995721152011-08-09T07:11:00.001-07:002011-08-09T07:11:42.960-07:00Real World DCImagine that Barack Obama was voted to become CEO of a large corporation. At the time he assumed leadership, the company was headed downhill. Fast. The first thing he did was fire anyone who actually had any business experience, either with that company or another in a similar field. After three years at the helm, all that Obama managed to do as CEO of that company was increase its spending by 25%, lose 2.5 million workers and grow the company by less than 2%. Do you think that he would still be the CEO of that company or do think that the board of directors would have yanked him out of there?Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-40704694956266221852011-08-08T08:21:00.000-07:002011-08-08T08:25:28.895-07:00It's not Obozo's fault.
<br />Libs, Progs, Dems .. all of them are upset that their guy Barack Obama is a tragic failure, so they are going to try and blame these failures on something else. I cited two main sources of blame for Obama’s failures: The Tea Party and George Bush.
<br />
<br />The downgrade of our credit rating has validated this theory. Unable to cope with the idea that their guy, Barack Obama, royally screwed up and is now responsible for the first credit downgrade in U.S. history … they are pointing fingers. Big time.
<br />So the #1 scapegoat over the weekend was … the Tea Party! Let’s take a look at some of the highlights:
<br />
<br />Obama’s 2012 campaign strategist/chief dogwasher David Axelrod says that this “a tea party downgrade.” He says that we would never have been in this position if the tea party hadn’t put up a fight in debate over raising our debt ceiling. Axelrod said, “It was the wrong thing to do to push the country to that point. It was something that should never have happened that clearly is on the backs of those who were willing the see the country default: those very strident voices in the tea party.”
<br />
<br />John Kerry echoed Axelrod’s comments about this being “a tea party downgrade.” He said on “Meet the Press”: “This is the Tea Party downgrade because a minority of people in the House of Representatives countered even the will of many Republicans in the United States Senate who were prepared to do a bigger deal.” Remember that this is the same man who said that the tea party should not be given equal air time. On Friday’s “Morning Joe” he said, “The media has got to begin to not give equal time or equal balance to an absolutely absurd notion just because somebody asserts it or simply because somebody says something which everybody knows is not factual … It doesn't deserve the same credit as a legitimate idea about what you do.”
<br />
<br />Howard Dean also chimed in to blame the tea party’s influence on the debt ceiling debate for the recent U.S. credit downgrade. He said on CBS's "Face the Nation”: "This is a tea party problem … They are totally unreasonable and doctrinaire and not founded in reality. I think they've been smoking some of that tea, not just drinking it."
<br />
<br />The progs at MoveOn.org are upset with Dear Ruler for being too soft on the Tea Party, which is ultimately to blame for this mess. The executive director MoveOn.org Justin Ruben said over the weekend, “It’s hard to see how we avoid a Tea-Party recession if the president who has the biggest megaphone in the country is not willing to speak clearly on the issue.”
<br />
<br />New York Times columnist Paul Krugman blogged over the weekend: “On one hand, there is a case to be made that the madness of the right has made America a fundamentally unsound nation. And yes, it is the madness of the right: if not for the extremism of anti-tax Republicans, we would have no trouble reaching an agreement that would ensure long-run solvency.”
<br />
<br />The next victim of the Lib, Prog, Dem blame game was the Bush tax cuts or our failure to increase taxes on the evil, filthy, disgusting rich.
<br />Daniel Gross is the Yahoo Finance economics editor. He wrote over the weekend that it was our failure to increase taxes that led to this downgrade, which was intentional sabotage by the GOP: “Recent events have sapped the agency's confidence that the government can and will do what is necessary to align revenues with spending commitments. And it's difficult to escape the conclusion that America's credit rating was intentionally sabotaged by Congressional Republicans … It has long been obvious to all observers -- to economists, to politicians, to anti-deficit groups, to the ratings agencies -- that closing fiscal gaps will require tax increases, or the closure of big tax loopholes, or significant tax reform that will raise significantly larger sums of tax revenue than the system does now.”
<br />
<br />Former Obama administration car czar Steven Rattner recently called Tea Partiers economic terrorists. In light of the credit downgrade, he took to the airwaves to blame our deficit crisis to begin with on … the Bush tax cuts! He said on Sunday’s “This Week”: “But you do have one group of people who are saying no tax increases, never, no how, when in fact the tax decreases under President Bush partly got us in this problem. If you take today’s one and a half trillion dollar deficit, a trillion of it is from excess spending. 400 billion of it is from the Bush tax cuts.”
<br />
<br />The Obama administration itself is seizing on one portion of the S&P’s report to try and convince the American people that if we had agreed to Obama’s plan, which included tax increases, that our credit rating would never have been downgraded. But as I pointed out above, tax increases are not what forced the S&P’s hand … it was our massive spending and the inability of the S&P to feel confident in our future ability to cut spending that ultimately led to this downgrade. Increasing taxes on the evil rich will have no bearing on that.
<br />
<br />Perhaps the most asinine of all these excuses over the weekend was this one from ABC's Cokie Roberts. She manages to blame this all on … our Constitution!
<br />In a discussion on “This Week,” Cokie Roberts said the following: 'The problem that we have here is the Constitution of the United States of America which actually does require people to come together from different perspectives.”
<br />The Constitution is the problem?
<br />
<br /> What sort of yak squeeze is this woman sniffing?Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-26638886666595894432011-08-08T08:16:00.000-07:002011-08-08T08:17:44.223-07:00Prog Speak
<br />A little lesson in ProgSpeak. This is where liberals take common words or phrases that have become tainted in public discourse, and assign new words that will pass public scrutiny but which, to the left, means exactly the same thing.
<br />
<br />One of the first things the left had to do was to get rid of the word “liberal.” People instinctively (and with good reason) don’t like the word “liberal.” So … now the word among the enlightened is “progressive.” I just shorten it to “Prog.” Sounds nicer, and reminds me of the frog in the frying pan routine. Then you remember “spending” of course. Well the people aren’t all that comfortable with government spending right now, so the new word for the left is “investing.” Yup! The government does “spend” on projects anymore; it “invests” in them.
<br />
<br />Here’s the latest. Liberals have figured out that the term “tax increase” doesn’t exactly send a tingle down our collective legs. So … now “tax increases” have become “revenues.” Who, after all, can object to the government increasing revenues in the middle of a debt crisis? Don’t we need revenues to pay off our debts and to cover the costs of government’s essential services? Well of course! But there are at least two ways the government can increase revenues. One, the method preferred by Progs, is to raise taxes. The other, favored by the right, is to grow the private sector economy.
<br />
<br />You might remember the last time we even came close to a balanced budget. The Republicans were in control of the House and Clinton was president. There was also something happening in the private sector called the “Dot-com revolution.” Sure, that later became the Dot-com bust and erased projections of budget surpluses – but the point is that it was growth in the private sector that brought the revenues that almost led to a balanced budget.
<br />
<br />I did a lot of reading over the weekend about this credit rating downgrade. A common theme in these articles and opinion pieces was that the United States needed to cut spending AND increase revenues. But … when you read these pieces you will see that the only type of revenue increase they recognize is raising taxes! Where is the discussion about growing our economy? A growing economy means increased government revenues --- but you would never know that listening to the Obamatrons and the ObamaMedia! It’s all about tax increases.
<br />
<br />Bottom line --- these people think that dollars spent by the private sector carry not near the economic impact that a dollar spent by government does. It’s all about government – and political power.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-10702636489713565682011-08-08T08:12:00.000-07:002011-08-08T08:14:05.593-07:00Downgrade
<br />How about that credit downgrade to round out an immense week for Obama and our political elite in Washington?
<br />
<br />Let me give you a brief look at how it all went …
<br />
<br />April 2011: There is “no risk” of a downgrade to our AAA credit rating – Treasury Secretary tax cheat Timothy Geithner.
<br />
<br />August 2, 2011: After months of debate, Obama signs a debt ceiling increase, which potentially includes $2 trillion in spending cuts.
<br />
<br />August 5, 2011: Standard & Poor downgrades the U.S. credit rating to AA+ from AAA for the first time in our history.
<br />
<br />August 7, 2011: A Standard & Poor's official says there is a 1 in 3 chance that the U.S. credit rating could be downgraded another notch if conditions erode over the next six to 24 months.
<br />
<br />August 8, 2011: We waiting for the Treasury Secretary/tax cheat to tell us that there is “no risk” of a downgrade to our AA+ credit rating.
<br />
<br />After all that, how did we get here? According to the S&P, they were dissatisfied with how politicians in Washington handled the haggling over budget cuts.
<br />
<br />Additionally, S&P is not at all confident that we will be able to follow through on the proposed cuts. The head of sovereign ratings at S&P is a guy by the name of David Beers. He says that the S&P was worried about the "degree of uncertainty around the political policy process. The nature of the debate and the difficulty in framing a political consensus ... that was the key consideration." The key to maintaining our current rating, not slipping further, and hopefully bumping back up to our AAA rating will be spending cuts. Period. End of story.
<br />
<br />While the S&P says that tax increases would be nice, that is not the key for any future downgrade. The key will be spending cuts.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-40300164281444749802011-07-27T19:35:00.001-07:002011-07-27T19:35:59.490-07:00I own guns--Do you?"I've decided to have guns in the house."<br /><br />Those were the simple words of Iowa Congressman Leonard Boswell, after fending off an armed intruder in his house.<br /><br />His wife, daughter and grandson were about to hit the sack late Saturday, when the thug broke in, attacking his daughter.<br /><br />The wily 77 year old tried to stop him, but it was Boswell's grandson's loaded shotgun that caused the punk to flee in the opposite direction.<br /><br />Yep, if there's one thing you can learn from a shotgun: you never run at one.<br /><br />Now, publicizing tales like these do nothing but good, for they remind the common thug of a key life or death question: what house would you rob, if you could?<br /><br />One in which the owner is armed, or not?<br /><br />And it poses a question to everyone else: if you're the victim, would you rather be armed - or not?<br /><br />Me - I don't want to depend on the kindness of strangers, I prefer to depend on the accuracy of my shot.<br /><br />Of course, the biggest gun control advocates will disagree, but they all work in well-protected media networks, surrounded by well-trained, well-armed security.<br /><br />You don't.<br /><br />Guns are a conservative, libertarian way of privatizing safety.<br /><br />It's also the best way to keep good people free.<br /><br />And bad people scared.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-11751975827409157892011-07-18T07:58:00.000-07:002011-07-18T07:59:43.151-07:00Obama is completely in over his head.At the end of last week, Goldman Sachs dropped a bomb that does not bode well for reelection chances of The Chosen One. It goes a little something like this … <br />Following another week of weak economic data, we have cut our estimates for real GDP growth in the second and third quarter of 2011 to 1.5% and 2.5%, respectively, from 2% and 3.25%.<br /><br />Our forecasts for Q4 and 2012 are under review, but even excluding any further changes we now expect the unemployment rate to come down only modestly to 8.75% at the end of 2012 …<br /><br />But the slowdown of recent months goes well beyond what can be explained with these temporary effects. … final demand growth has slowed to a pace that is typically only seen in recessions. .. Moreover, if the economy returns to recession—not our forecast, but clearly a possibility given the recent numbers …<br /><br />So much for keeping our unemployment rate under 8% if we passed his grand stimulus plan. This is also coupled with news of the worst consumer confidence since March 2009. A Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan index of consumer confidence fell to 63.8, which is the lowest level since the early months of Obama’s presidency. Of course, Bloomberg News reported this fall in confidence as “unexpected.”<br /><br />I know you’ve heard this before .. but this is the worst recovery from a recession since World War II. In the past we’ve relied on growth in the private sector to bring us out of recessions. Government stimulus programs have NEVER done the job. So what’s the big difference this time? The difference is an anti-capitalist named Barack Obama in the White House and a Democrat Party that has become even more radicalized. <br /><br />Since being sworn in Obama has done absolutely NOTHING that would cause a small businessman – the ones we depend on for new jobs – to say “Now THAT’S more like it! Now let’s get this business going!” <br /><br />At this point we’re not going to see business become energized until after the 2012 presidential election – and the defeat of Barack Obama.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-52276930178740409722011-07-16T12:29:00.000-07:002011-07-16T12:30:26.997-07:00Let's make a Deal---(No Thanks)Could we see a deal today? This is apparently what Barack Obama has told Congressional leaders .. that we need a deal by today or we must start to make contingency plans. This must be because these talks are really starting to crimp the Democrats’ style up there in Washington. Democrat leaders like Nancy Pelosi “are almost too busy” to continue listening to what is going on in the debt limit meetings. Yup, you heard the woman! We need to get this situation resolved because we can’t be bothered to keep up with the debate .. it is taking up too much precious time. Princess Nancy was particularly perturbed at the thought of having to drive all the way to Camp David for meetings. God forbid our rulers in Washington have to actually put themselves out to do the job they were hired to do.<br /> <br />But Barack Obama says that he is willing to risk his job over this battle for a long-term deficit deal. Dear Ruler says, “This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this.” This is a crock. You can bet the farm that to Obama his presidency comes first and the fiscal health of this country comes second … or third … or wherever. Any attention he is paying to this situation is centered on preserving his reelection chances. The polls say the voters are concerned – so suddenly Obama is concerned. <br /><br />But consider his recent history …..<br /><br />Barack Obama wasn’t insistent on a long-term deficit deal when he ignored the recommendations for his own deficit commission for months. <br /> <br />Barack Obama wasn’t insistent on a long-term deficit deal when he proposed a budget earlier this year that would produce 10 years of deficits totaling $9.5 trillion. <br /> <br />Barack Obama wasn’t insistent on a long-term deficit deal when he signed ObamaCare into law, which will likely add $4 to $6 trillion to the deficit over its first 20 years.<br /><br />Barack Obama wasn’t insistent on a long-term deficit deal when he increased discretionary spending by nearly 25% his first two years in office.<br /><br />You can’t help but feel, though, that it will be the Republicans who will probably get the blame for any repercussion from this debt ceiling battle. A new Quinnipiac poll released yesterday shows that most voters (48%) would blame congressional Republicans if the debt ceiling isn’t raised. These results were fueled, I believe, by Mitch McConnell’s hair-brain idea to give the president the power to raise the debt ceiling on his own; Republicans are so worried about being blamed and how this will affect the election in 2012. <br /><br />The Republicans need to remember that they are in charge in the House because of the energized voters on three basic issues in 2010. It was really very simple:<br /><br /> Smaller government.<br />Lower government spending.<br />Lower taxes.<br /><br />Mitch McConnell needs to remember that the voters did not turn out to the polls and put Republicans into office so that they could make phony spending cuts, increase taxes or come up with hare-brained ideas on giving Obama the power to increase our debt ceiling on his own.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-54783790289347137812011-06-24T06:38:00.000-07:002011-06-24T06:40:48.920-07:00For the last six weeks, Joe Biden has been hosting “talks” on our budget crisis. As of yesterday, the shit hit the fan. GOP representatives in the talks Eric Cantor and Jon Kyl pulled out of the talks. The reason? The inability to come to an agreement on taxes. We’ll get to more on that in a minute, but the Democrats insist on raising taxes in order to come up with a deficit-reduction package of $4 trillion, which would be tied to an increase in the federal debt limit. The Republicans do not want to raise taxes. And after six weeks of this song and dance, Cantor and Kyl realized that they weren’t getting anywhere. So now the task rests in the hands of Barack Obama, John Boehner and Harry Reid. Meanwhile, Eric Cantor says that he will propose a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution.<br /><br />Barack Obama … it’s time to take a stand. Will you fight to increase taxes as your fellow Democrats insist, or will you recognize the effect of lower tax rates on economic behavior? I assume that wealth envy will ultimately prevail. <br />So what if Democrats manage to convince the Republicans (not like with a Republican-led House) that we need to end the Bush tax cuts and return to the tax rates we had under Bill Clinton. That’s no longer good enough. Why? Because our government spending has grown tremendously since the days of Clinton! Don’t they get it? This isn’t a revenue problem. <br /><br />It’s a spending problem. Here are some specifics from the Washington Examiner: <br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">In 2000, the last full-year of President Clinton’s administration, tax revenues were 20.6 percent of GDP, according to the CBO. (The White House Office of Management and Budget puts it slightly higher, at 20.9 percent, which places it in a tie with 1944 for the highest ever level in U.S. history). But the CBO’s long-term fiscal outlook released yesterday predicts that by 2035, total spending will reach a stunning 33.9 percent of GDP if lawmakers pursue their predictable course. That means even if revenues returned to the coveted pre-Bush tax cut levels, there would be a 13 percent difference.</span><br /><br />Yet President Obama’s former OMB director Peter Orszag has written that, “a sustainable level is more like 3 percent (of GDP) or lower.” So that would put the deficits, even with Clinton-era revenues, at more than four times their sustainable levels.<br /><br />Increasing taxes is a Democrat strategy to pander to wealthy envy voters. This has nothing to do with our debt or deficit and everything to do with re-election.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-78928740202810782332011-06-23T07:50:00.000-07:002011-06-23T07:52:58.759-07:00Off the cliffYesterday the CBO rocked the news cycle by releasing new estimates on our future fiscal situation. It wasn’t pretty, though that shouldn’t come as a shock to you. The CBO released what is being referred to as a more “politically-realistic alternative scenario.” So these numbers are based on what the CBO expects to happen in the future: the Bush tax cuts will be extended and Medicare spending will not be cut.<br /><br />So what was the result of these new numbers?<br /><br />Federal debt as a share of our GDP will be 109% by 2021. By the year 2035, it will be closer to 190% of GDP.<br /> <br />Wow. How in the world did we get to this point? Well Barack Obama surely didn’t help. His own stimulus plan managed to nearly DOUBLE our debt. The Washington Examiner reports:<br /><br />The 2011 Long-Term Budget Outlook, released Wednesday morning, reports that the “the combination of automatic budgetary responses” and Obama’s stimulus “had a profound impact on the federal budget.” According to CBO projections, before Obama’s stimulus became law, federal debt equaled 36 percent of GDP and was projected to decline slightly over the next few years. Instead, thanks in large part to the stimulus, debt reached 62 percent of GDP by 2010.<br /><br />So in the wake of this news about our debt, what are the Democrats planning to do? They have two ideas.<br /><br />#1: Spend more money. No, this is not a joke. A headline from Reuters, not from the Onion, reads: Democrats call for new spending in US debt deal. Yesterday, Democrats in the Senate called on Joe Biden to include “new economic stimulus spending” in his deficit reduction talks. You just read the information above … Barack Obama’s grand stimulus plan nearly DOUBLED our debt, and what do we have to show for it?<br /><br />#2: Increase taxes. Because the CBO numbers assume that the Bush tax cuts will be extended, the Democrats immediately claim that if it wasn’t for the Bush tax cuts, these CBO estimates wouldn’t be nearly as dire. Guess what, they would be. According to the CBO’s own alternative scenario, even if the Bush tax cuts are extended along with the Alternative Minimum Tax, “federal revenues as a share of GDP will still exceed the post-war average by the decade’s end.” Even if the Democrats managed to repeal the Bush tax cuts, therefore increasing taxes on millions of Americans … would that solve our debt crisis? Of course not! I’ve shared the following information with you before, but considering this latest push to repeal the Bush tax cuts, it is worth sharing again …<br /><br />In a static world repealing these tax cuts would get you about $3 trillion over ten years. Our federal deficit is almost one half of that every year. Static world? That’s the wonderful world of liberalism where you operate on the assumption that nobody ever changes their economic behavior when tax rates go up or down. History shows that when tax rates go some people reduce their economic activity, and other simply shift their earnings around to avoid the higher taxes … and they do it legally. <br /> <br />But don’t believe me; believe the experts at the Heritage Foundation. I’d highly recommend that you read this column in the Wall Street Journal by Brian Riedl:<br /><br /> The Bush Tax Cuts and the Deficit Myth. I’ll give you just a few of the highlights:<br /> <br />… the much-maligned Bush tax cuts .. caused just 14% of the swing from projected surpluses to actual deficits (and that is according to a "static" analysis, excluding any revenues recovered from faster economic growth induced by the cuts). The bulk of the swing resulted from economic and technical revisions (33%), other new spending (32%), net interest on the debt (12%), the 2009 stimulus (6%) and other tax cuts (3%). Specifically, the tax cuts for those earning more than $250,000 are responsible for just 4% of the swing. If there were no Bush tax cuts, runaway spending and economic factors would have guaranteed more than $4 trillion in deficits over the decade and kept the budget in deficit every year except 2007.<br /><br />Why are Democrats pushing the repeal of the Bush tax cuts? Because they can’t stand the idea that you can spend your money better and more efficiently than they can. And by “better” I mean that you have the power of choice to spend your money wherever you see fit, without the point of a gun. It takes politicians out of the equation, thereby diminishing their power over you.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941276.post-4436767090310675672011-06-10T07:31:00.000-07:002011-06-10T07:32:52.537-07:00The Obama EconomyThe ObamaMedia is beside itself right now .. it can’t seem to understand why or how Barack Obama’s economic policies aren’t translating into jobs and growth. This must be the case because they seem to be caught quite off-guard with all of these “unexpected” jobs figures. Unwilling to blame their savior, Barack Obama, they are now trying to come up with other ways to justify this lousy economy.<br /> <br />I know … let’s blame the Republicans!<br /><br />Take a look at this headline: Are Republicans Intentionally Sabotaging Economy For Political Gain? Can you believe that? The headline doesn’t ask if Democrats are scaring the diapers off old ladies for political gain. Not, it’s the Republicans sabotaging the economy.<br /><br />Even though the Democrats held the presidency and the Senate since 2009 (the Democrats have held both houses from 2007 until last year), somehow it is all the Republicans’ fault. The Democrats haven’t presented a budget in how many years now? And it’s the Republicans who are sabotaging the economy? I’ve said it since the day Barack Obama was inaugurated .. I hoped that he would become the greatest president this nation has ever seen and that our economy would flourish over the next years. This is because I care about this country that I love more than I care about a Democrat getting credit for ‘saving’ it. Unfortunately that has not turned out to be the case. I now believe based on the decisions that Obama has made as president, that he has a fundamentally different idea of what makes this nation and our economy great. He is a man who believes in a centrally planned economy and bigger government. How is that working out for us? <br /> <br />If the rate of labor force participation in June 2011 were the same as it was in June 2009 (65.7%), the reported unemployment rate would be 11.2% rather than 9.1%. If June 2011 labor force participation were 66.2%, which is where it was when Obama promised that his “stimulus” program would prevent unemployment from exceeding 8.0%, the June 2011 unemployment rate would come in at 11.9%.<br /><br />Being a leader means taking ownership of your triumphs and your failures, but with the ObamaMedia in tow, Obama isn’t really forced to do that.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886230262433237140noreply@blogger.com