How Obama's Stimulus Driven Road To Recovery Affects Japan's Recovery

Disasters always call for charity. Whether it's a hurricane in Louisiana or Florida, fires in California, terrorist attacks in New York, or disasters in Haiti and Japan. Every time some form of a major tragedy strikes we are all called upon to assist in the relief efforts. While there has been much reaching out with aid to Japan due to the recent earthquake and tsunami there has been criticism to a point as how it's not as much as it should be. Not even matching the relief efforts in Haiti despite the fact that the devastation is far worse. I'd like to address that by tying together a few things.

We often hear about the road to recovery that we are supposedly on by this administration and it's supporters. We hear talk about this "jobless recovery" and the excuse that jobs are a lagging indicator that come later. The economy always affects charity on a personal level. If you feel confident and secure in the economy, if you have a stable job and are making enough money to have a decent amount of disposable income than you are more likely to give to charity. The lack of charity towards Japan as compared to disasters of recent years is telling not of what we think of the Japanese disasters scope but rather how we think about our own economy and personal security economically.

Our own families have to come first and there's nothing surprising about that. So many Americans have found themselves struggling to get by and provide for their own families that it is in many cases impossible to be very charitable. Maybe this will shine a light on the fact that we need more jobs and more confidence in order to be more charitable. No more talk about extended unemployment, denial of a failed stimulus, or a trillion dollar health care program that is guaranteed to worsen our health care system at a greater cost to each of us.

Many of us have been consistent in our refusal to support failed economic policies such as the Bush TARP bank bailouts, and the Bush and Obama failed stimulus spending policies but I'd like you to think about this.

Stimulus, Bush's was over $700 billion dollars and the TARP, (Troubled Asset Relief Program), bank bailout added to it made an easy trillion. Then we get Obama who passes his own stimulus, ($787 billion tied to an additional $410 billion earmark filled omnibus bill), that's over a trillion dollars again. Hundreds of billions to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac while doing little for the homeowners who pay their mortgages to those two government entities. Next comes the socialist health care program, that could be another trillion when all is said and done.

Auto maker bailouts, union bailouts, extended unemployment, and on and on and on. Our debt has now exploded to over $14 trillion dollars and increases to the tune of billions of dollars a day. Now, what does that have to do with the disaster in Japan?

Most of us are aware that stimulus only made things worse and did jack in terms of fixing the economy. Imagine if we hadn't spent all of that money and think of how much more money that would have given us for disaster relief in Japan. To date we've given I believe roughly $65 billion in aid to Japan......that's nothing. Look at the figures I provided you regarding all of the bailouts. $65 billion is a pathetic joke considering how much our government has been willing to waste, (oops I mean spend), on dismal failing Keynesian economic policies.

Our failing economic policies and wasteful government spending, as well as our high unemployment have caused us to be unable to assist with charitable donation as must as we usually do. I do, however, want to give you something to ponder. Taking the kids to a fast food restaurant can easily cost $30. Buying a new DVD movie is an easy $20. A new video game tends to run $60. Going to the movies, grabbing a coffee or muffin every day is a good $10 to $20 a week. How many of these things do you regularly do?

There are over 300 million people in this country. If a measly $10 per person were donated, (a family of 5 gives $50 for example), to the Red Cross for efforts in Japan, that would be an additional $3 billion dollars for relief. If you can give more, and many of us probably can, then we would generate a massive amount of money very quickly. Even if Obama doesn't realize how tough this economy is for many of us we do realize it. Hopefully everyone who reads this will think about it the next time they order a pizza or grab a coffee.

It's easy to criticize other people, especially the rich, about how they spend their money but perhaps it's time for each of us to take a quick look in the mirror and ask ourselves what we're doing to help other than running our mouths.

Even my own charitable donations have been scaled back in comparison to recent years yet I still sponsor a few feed the children kids, donate to the DAV (Disabled American Veterans), and the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars). As well as give a little money to the church each week, (and the church is regularly helping shelter the homeless). I tell you this not to make myself look good, simply to prove a point that there are those on the left who would consider me evil and selfish because I'm a Conservative. Maybe instead of criticizing others it's time to look in that mirror and sincerely ask yourself:

What am I really doing to help others?

I hope I've got you thinking about that with this post.

Read more...

What STRATEGIC Means and the Next Test Of The UN, (Useless Nations)

Tragedy seems to come at us through the news fast and furious these days. The most recent of course being the earthquake that just rocked Japan, 5th largest ever recorded, and my thoughts and prayers are with the Japanese people as they work to overcome this tragedy. It's amazing how nature can instantly create a tragedy that dwarfs things like 9/11. While as of yet we aren't sure how many people have died in this tragedy you can bet it'll be much more than the 3,000 lost on 9/11. Not to mention the damage to infrastructure and the potential for nuclear meltdown at several nuclear power plants in Japan.

I'm not going to criticize President Obama on his response to this as of yet because there was no warning of this tragedy and we have yet to see how our response will play out. I am, in fact, going to be watching with much more criticism the United Nations, (useless nations as I regularly refer to them).

After all, the UN owes Japan. Did you know that Japan is the #2 funder of the United Nations overall budget behind only the U.S? In light of the tragedy currently facing Japan the UN is expected to spring into action with relief. I'm not going to be overly critical as of yet being that it's still to early to judge results. That will take some time.

The UN's blind-eye pacifism isn't all that successful with preventing human rights violations or armed conflict but perhaps disaster relief is one area where they can step up and actually salvage some pride with success. We'll find out soon enough.

Putting all that aside I'd like to discuss another issue, oil prices and the U.S. strategic oil reserve. Oil prices fell due to the tragedy in Japan for the moment only because the country isn't in dire need of oil at the moment, it's in need of humanitarian and disaster relief at the moment. The situation is rather awkward but it does reflect a short term decline in demand and thus a decline in the price. It won't matter to most of us as the price at the pump isn't going to go down since this is a short term market fluctuation based on the rare circumstances of a large scale natural disaster.

President Obama has begun talking about tapping the strategic oil reserve if needed in order to help with gas prices. That isn't an energy policy and it would do little to help with gas prices. I criticized it when President Bush proposed it as well back in 2008. It seems that in light of rising prices presidents are so quick to start talking about the strategic oil reserve as some magic energy fix.

Perhaps you should look at the name. It's called the STRATEGIC Oil Reserve, keyword being strategic. It's not intended to save you .10 a gallon at the pumps when gas is $4.00. It's an emergency backup supply in the event that we are cut off from Mideast oil. It's a resource that we could tap into in the event of a worldwide supply crisis while we transition into vastly more domestic supply that would be necessary in the event of being cut off from mid-east oil.

President Obama used a typical left-wing energy lie in his talking points and American Solutions exposed it. Obama said:

“We can’t place our long-term bets on a finite resource that we only control 2 percent of,” Obama added, referring to the U.S. share of global oil reserves. The U.S. consumes more than a quarter of worldwide production, he said.

Let's look at the facts about energy for once. Since the left-wing of the political spectrum are so dedicated to a policy of proven failure in "green energy" and green jobs.

More and more Americans are no longer falling for the lies from the left when it comes to energy. The higher gas prices climb, the more devastating the economy feels to individuals on a personal level. You can't talk recovery to someone bringing home $400 a week and spending $100 a week on gas.

Relying on the strategic reserve is anything but a sound strategy. Relying on domestic energy production as opposed to reserves is a real energy plan. It's time for plan D....drill, baby, drill.

Read more...

The Constitution Matters To President Obama....Sometimes and Can The Socialists Handle Socialism?

So a lot has been going on in the time since my last post sometimes it's hard to know where to begin. Let's start with this. President Obama has decided to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act.

"Holder wrote that the president has instructed government lawyers to no longer defend the law in those two lawsuits.

However, administration officials pledged to continue to enforce the law, which remains in effect unless Congress repeals it or a court strikes it down."

So, a lower court decides that the Defense of Marriage Act, (signed into law by that evil Conservative President Bill Clinton), is unconstitutional and Obama agrees so he decides to stop defending the law. Wait a minute.......

Didn't a lower court also declare that the individual mandate in the President's health care law unconstitutional? Look, it's simple, questions about the constitutionality of laws should head straight to the U.S. Supreme Court. Why waste countless hours and millions of dollars watching decisions like these float through various courts when we know that regardless of the outcome it will be appealed by the losing side only leading to a lengthier and more expensive process?

The U.S. Constitution serves as the blueprint for how our government should act. The problem is that we have so many lawmakers who try and twist and spin various "interpretations" of the U.S. Constitution in order to pretend that somehow the agenda they are pushing is backed by the Constitution. The various expanses of government authority and power, especially under President Obama, have absolutely no basis with the U.S. Constitution. For the most part lawmakers know this so they have to convince the public that it's a necessary step for government to act in our interest.

Whether it's stimulus or health care, housing or education, it seems the more government involvement there is the worse the situation becomes. Yet the answer being constantly fed to us by government officials, unions, professors, and many others is that more government is necessary. In fact, it's more government that has expanded most of these problems and it's the more government answer that is causing these problems to get worse instead of better. It's hard to get more government involvement than you get with Socialism and that's where we head next.

We have all of these left-wing groups pushing for socialism in America, sometimes they decide to call it other things like social justice or state capitalism but policies are socialist nonetheless. We have kids in school, from grade school to college being taught that socialism is great and works out fairly for everyone. No greedy heads of corporations making money on the backs of the people etc. It's funny that we have so many people who've never actually lived under socialism talking about how great it is. If you ask them to name one socialist nation that has had more prosperous people than the U.S. throughout history and none of them can do it. Yet they still blindly believe that somehow socialism will yield different results if we adopt it here.

Advocates for socialism in America believe that a few greedy, rich businessmen in America control all of the money and get that way by screwing over the people who work under them. Yet, these same socialists believe that giving almost total control of our economy and country to a few high ranking politicians will yield better results. I find that manner of thinking not only ignorant, but irrational. Do you really think that the businesses that we work and shop at are more disconnected from the average person than the politicians?

They show up at campaign rallies, (paid for by special interests), make promises they know they can't keep in order to make us feel good, and then when it doesn't work out they point fingers and make excuses as to why it's not their fault that it didn't work out how they planned. It's no longer about why you should elect them so much as why you shouldn't elect the other guy.

Take President Obama for example. He got elected promising hope and change. He was giving great speeches. He inspired people with his great campaign speeches. He did have a gift for giving people hope. The problem is that hope entails believing in something before actual results. For example, you hope something will work out, but hoping means that you aren't sure if it will actually work out. Therefore, the other side of hope means facing the realities of results.

We already have plenty of socialist programs and we've had many of them for a long time. Subsidized housing, food stamps, welfare, even social security. They could all be considered socialist policies. Guaranteed housing, guaranteed food, guaranteed income, (that applies to both welfare and social security). How are those programs working out? The housing market crashed, more people are now on food stamps than ever before in the programs history, welfare is treated like a lifestyle, and social security is headed for complete financial collapse.

I'd like to know what evidence the socialist propagandists are pointing to that gives them the belief that socialism will work in America. Every socialist-type program America has ever adopted has only led to an increase in the problem the program was intended to fix. Isn't the saying, "good intentions pave the way to hell". Every single one of these socialist programs was sold to us with good intentions, whether it's taking care of the poor, or the sick (as in health care), or the old, etc. Yet every one of those programs have only left the people it was intended to help worse of and left everyone else with the burden of supporting those programs financially.

Deny it if you want to but I'd really like to know how it's even debatable. Why do you think the socialist and communist groups are so interested in teaching the youth? Young people are the easiest to influence. If you've spent your entire life learning how great something is, like socialism, then it's incredibly difficult to get you to realize the lie you've been led to believe. That is why they need the young in America, who've never lived under full blown socialism, to believe that it's so great. The unions are largely socialist in the way they work and negotiate yet they are falling apart and dragging entire states and therefore the entire country down with them. Yet they are still trying to convince you that socialism would be wonderful for the U.S.

We are now in the 3rd year of President Obama's presidency and what has he got to show for it? The re-election campaign will be in full gear very soon and what can he say to justify another term? Hope? Change? Do you still think of that when you see him speak? Do you still feel hopeful with the course we are taking as a nation? Do you really think we've changed for the better?

If you think life is so unfair in this country, (life isn't fair....deal with it), how can you expect to make it under socialism? Maybe it's time for the young socialist in this country to ask themselves that question. You won't have money or prosperity under Socialism. Life would be a lot less fair for you as well as everyone else. Political leaders rarely make good on campaign political promises, how can you expect them to make socialism into a prosperous model for growth within this country. We've tried tidbits of socialism plenty of times in this country, from FDR, to Bush, to Obama and where has it taken us. The lie has been exposed and the game is over. It's time to wake up.

I've said it before, socialism will leave us all equal in poverty, not prosperity. Those who we've given all of the power to and who are well connected to those people will poorly micromanage our entire lives. The rest of us who don't have a seat at that table will be forced to take whatever scraps they are willing to throw us. That is the reality of socialism. That is not freedom. That is most certainly not the American dream. Socialism for most of us will instead be the American nightmare.

Never forget the fact that Socialism is also very difficult to get rid of once you have it. Just look at how hard it is to reform the various social programs we already have. Social security, welfare, housing, food stamps, look what happens when you push for reforming these broken systems despite the fact that everyone knows they are broken. If we adopted total socialism and it didn't exactly work out how those who embrace it say it will how difficult do you think it would be to get rid of?

The saying goes that you don't know what you've got until it's gone. Maybe it's time for people to take a serious look at what so many, from the teachers to the students, from the politicians to the public, are willing to trade our system for. It's easy to sell socialism to a bunch of people who've never lived under it before. It's not so easy to get rid of socialism when it doesn't work and you live under it.

I'd like to return to America: land of the free, before we fully become Socialist America: land of the freeloader. We must take these points seriously and really think about it. By all means debate your beliefs and stand for something. Just make sure you know what you stand for and why. If you claim to want socialism in America then make sure you understand the realities of socialism and what it has historically led to in the past. Don't be a socialist because you think it's "cool" or fair. After all, as we grow up we learn that most of the cool things we did as kids proved to be some of our biggest mistakes. Most people know that to be true.

The difference is that most mistakes we make set us back as individuals. Whether it's drugs or alcohol, laziness or craziness. Many adults know that the mistakes taught us valuable life lessons and led us to better decisions in the future. The mistakes being made by the socialists in this country will set us all back as a country rather than being held back individually due to your own choices. How can you call that a system that's more fair?

Read more...

As Usual, Teachers Unions Don't Give A Damn About "The Children"

I'll make this one quick and let you decide. I stand with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker on this one and I suspect that most Americans do too. Wisconsin taxpayers fund those schools and teachers salaries yet they get to avoid the classrooms and deny much needed education time for "the children" the bleeding heart liberals claim to care so much about. If you cared about the children then you'd accept that you already have a better deal than most workers in Wisconsin and you'd get your whining asses back to class.

Let me give you two different points of view on this one and then you can decide for yourself who deserves your sympathy on this one: the governor or the labor unions. The first point of view comes from Dick Morris and Eileen McGann via DickMorris.com. This is their take on the situation in Wisconsin.

IN WISCONSIN: DEMOCRACY IS ON THE LINE

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on February 18, 2011

Democracy is on the line in the streets of Madison, Wisconsin. Will the popularly elected state legislature and governor (both now Republican for the first time in forever) get to run the state or will the union thugocracy, now crowding the streets, prevail?

The spectacle of Democratic legislators hiding out in the woods to avoid creating a quorum in their legislatures illustrates, more profoundly than anything else ever could, the extent to which we have lost control of our destiny and government to the public employee unions.

The teachers unions, the Service Employees, and AFSME have hijacked state government and are now holding them for ransom.

We are all citizens of Wisconsin now! Our freedom is on the line.

At last some real leaders are emerging within the Republican Party - the newly elected governors! Governors Chris Christie (NJ), Mitch Daniels (Ind), Scott Walker (Wisc) John Kasich (Ohio), Jim Corbett (Pa), Jan Brewer (Ariz), and Butch Otter (Idaho) are showing America how it is done.

The union mobs have taken to the streets in Wisconsin to protest hotly against having to pay 12.6% of their health insurance (the private sector average is 20%) and 5.8% of their pensions (private sector average is 7.5%). They want us to subsidize them so they can get to be richer than we are! Upward redistribution of income!

Governor Scott Walker, the courageous, young Republican just elected in Wisconsin also wants to limit teachers union bargaining to wages and benefits, but to leave work rules in the hands of school administrators. His ideas are vital to good schools but outrageous to the entrenched defenders of bad education in the teachers unions.

The most innovative governor in America - and also a likely GOP contender for president - is Bush's former OMB director Mitch Daniels. He is pushing forward with an exciting bill for statewide choice in schools, limits on teacher collective bargaining, caps on salary increases, and tenure reform. He has already pioneered using Health Savings Accounts to reduce health insurance costs - voluntarily - for state workers.

In Tennessee, with no noticeable leadership from the Republican governor Bill Haslam, the GOP state legislature is taking matters into its own hands. Senate Education Committee Chairwoman Dolores Gresham and Representative Bill Dunn have taken the lead in pushing legislation to prohibit collective bargaining with teachers unions entirely. They are also planning moves to expand school choice. Their landmark bill has just been reported out of the Senate Committee and, with Republican majorities in both houses, is likely to become law.

In Idaho, a gutsy Education Commissioner (elected) Tom Luna had his car vandalized and his family got death threats for trying to expand the pool of teachers to include all college graduates so as not to be limited to the indoctrinated graduates of education schools.

In Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Arizona, bills to advance school choice and reform schools are advancing.

And then there are the cowards - Governor Rick Scott of Florida who electrified the state with his bold proposal for education vouchers for statewide school choice only to shelve the bill and abandon it when the going got tough. He was aided and abetted by State Senator Stephen Wise (R-Jacksonville) who acted like a RINO by surrendering to the unions and letting the voucher proposal die in his education committee.

But there are enough courageous and true conservatives out there to move the cause forward...rapidly!

Now, let's compare that to what left-wing propaganda site MoveOn.org is saying about the situation.

Dear MoveOn member,


Madison, Wisconsin, is electric right now.


Tens of thousands of middle-class Americans—teachers, nurses, firefighters—are demonstrating at the capitol today. They're trying to stop the new, tea-party governor from ramming through one of the worst union-busting bills in recent history. He's using the pretext of a budget crisis, but it's one he created by giving tax breaks to business owners.1


Yesterday afternoon, 14 Democratic state senators walked out of the chamber in defiance to stop the vote on the bill. They're in Illinois now, speaking to the press from undisclosed locations to evade capture.2

Today protesters from all over Wisconsin are holding the biggest rally yet, with tens of thousands of people expected to come. But the national media is not giving the story the coverage it deserves, and without more attention, the Republicans may push the bill through.

We need to show that millions of Americans are standing with the protesters and help draw the nation's eyes to Madison today. Can you take a moment right now to change your Facebook status to this:

"Today I stand with the teachers, nurses, and all public employees of Wisconsin who are fighting for their rights. If you do too, change this to your status for the rest of the day."

Click here to go to your Facebook profile and change your status.
For Wisconsin's schools and kids, the stakes today couldn't be higher. Kim Hoffman, a middle school music teacher, spoke for hundreds of great teachers across the state when she said: "I love teaching, but [if these cuts go through] I'd have to start looking for another job, period."3

Gov. Walker's budget represents one of the boldest assaults on workers and the middle class in memory, and it comes at the worst possible time for Wisconsin's weakened middle class.
Today is the critical moment. With the bill temporarily stalled after Democratic Senators fled the state to deny the Republicans the ability to vote on the bill, there is a chance to kill the bill for good.4 Organizers expect their largest crowd yet, but they need to know that we have their back.

Can you help draw national attention to Wisconsin by changing your status on Facebook for the rest of the day?

Click here to go to your Facebook profile and change your status.

Thanks for all you do.

–Daniel, Laura, Lenore, Duncan, and the rest of the team

P.S.—If you don't have Facebook, that's fine—to spread the word, just forward this email along to five (or more!) friends, and ask them to do the same.

The Tea Party is back in action rallying in support of the governor and that's the side I'm taking.

At a time when those of us who still have jobs feel lucky just to be able to keep our jobs it's a disgrace to see these unions rising up claiming they are getting an unfair deal. What's unfair is tenure for a bad teacher. What's unfair is a pension that most workers don't get and no states seem to be able to afford.

WHAT'S UNFAIR IS THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS UNIONS GIVE TO POLITICIANS LIKE PRESIDENT OBAMA WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THEY ASK FOR A BAILOUT.

We do care about the children and we don't want the unions to continuing to bankrupt the futures of our children so we stand with Governor Walker. As for the rest of you union thugs out there protesting in Wisconsin.....round up the student's you brought with you as propaganda props and GET YOUR ASSES BACK TO THE CLASSES. That's how you can show that you really care about "the children".

Read more...

Why The Left Rising Up Isn't All That Scary Here And A Government Shutdown Doesn't Sound So Bad

Before we get started I just want you to always remember the fall of Egypt. If it goes bad as I suspect it will the many on the left and others will have to remember that they thought this was a great thing for Democracy. As the future will most likely prove them wrong they will do what they always do.....lie about history when teaching in order to maintain the feel good lie that is progressivism.

I'm going to explain a couple of things that progressivism has brought us but with a bit of a different twist. One of the very things that threaten progressivism with failure are in fact the results of progressive policies themselves. Let's start with some progressive history. Not the BS you get from some of the propagandists, (we tend to call many of them teachers), but the realities of progressive policies.

This will explain why at the present time I'm not all that concerned about a bunch of lazy, whining, ignorant, students and a handful of entitled, manipulative, propagandist, (remember, some call them teachers).

One of the biggest growth periods in the U.S. for progressivism was the 1930's under the failed New Deal policies of FDR. FDR wasn't the first president to believe in such big government control by any means but he created much of the modern problems we currently are faced with.

One that many Americans are beginning to be willing to accept as a big lie and failure is Social Security. We all, (well okay not all, Huffington Post, MoveOn.org, I'm looking at you), most of us know it isn't going to last. It was begun under FDR as a way for the government to take more money from workers and never pay them back. If you are a worker of my generation then you know the program will work exactly as planned as we will be paying the Social Security tax our entire working lives and will never be paid for it because we are many years away from retirement and the program is already on the verge of collapse.

I've said if before and it says it all. The average life expectancy for white people in the 1930's was only about 62, (conveniently the very year you began being paid benefits). For black people it was even worse, average life expectancy was only around 50. The program has remained unchanged for 80 years now because every time someone calls for reforming the system the propagandists keep telling you is fine the liberal, nanny-state groups start bitching about how the program is fine. Then the typical cries about how would be reformers are trying to leave grandma out starving in the cold begin. Life expectancy has increased very much, but the Social Security entitlement hasn't. High unemployment has only made it worse because that means less workers paying into the system that is already on the fast track to being broke.

This causes politicians to refrain from touching the system for political purposes. It reminds me of the saying that ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away. It's like a cracked pipe leaking water, eventually it will rupture and the problem will be far worse than if you fix the crack now. The same rule applies to the entitlement programs right now, today. The Social Security pipe is about to burst and yet we keep ignoring it because of the cowards we call politicians refusing to take a stand and say, "I'm sorry you fell for the government lies America but it's time to wake up." Chris Christie in NJ is one of the few who takes such a stand on some of these issues, especially with the unions.

There were other programs that were equally disastrous economically with FDR, the WPA was used to pay people to fix roads etc. but in fact paid many people to stand around doing nothing, (today we call that stimulus).

LBJ, another loser of a liberal president that the propagandists love to lie about, took it a step farther with his "great society". This was the establishment of the modern welfare state. As the liberal nanny state began to take responsibilities away from families, families began to break apart. This was made worse with the liberal feminist movement and other such feel good liberal movements that led to a rise in single parent families and abortions. Even though all research proved that single parent homes were far more likely to end up in poverty, which is exactly what has been happening for many years.

We continued to take responsibility away from people and shifted the thinking from personal responsibility to the government's responsibility. Government assistance became the breadwinner, entitlements began to be thought of as rights, and taking care of your family began to take a back seat to taking care of yourself. That is the truth of progressivism, like it or not.

This is in fact part of why I'm not all that afraid of an uprising of students etc. here at the moment. We have young people in this country that don't have the work ethic to make it through a part-time job at the supermarket without feeling like they have it rough. Do you really think a group like that can stand up to the message of the Tea Parties? If you can't handle a part time job, you can't lead a revolution, period.

The big government promise of taking care of everybody is in fact only screwing everybody over and letting everybody down. The founders understood this, Conservatives understand this, why is it so hard for the left to understand this?

Now we're hearing talk of a government shut down and how disastrous that would be. I have to tell you, considering all we've seen government screw up in recent years a shut down doesn't sound all that bad. We should all understand that rushing into major decisions often leads us to the wrong decisions. Wasn't that the lesson of the stimulus packages, health care, and subsidies like housing? In rushing to do something we only made it worse. It is not only time to slow the growth of government down, it's time to stop and reverse it all together.

As for those who want socialism altogether in this country they should do some research into how socialism leads to tyranny. Need proof? Watch a speech by Hitler, he himself refers to his Nazi party as the "National Socialists Party", look it up since you aren't going to learn that in school. The propagandists are too busy telling you that the Nazi's were right wing conservatives, a lie so easy to disprove that it's laughable.

Put aside your pride and just look at the facts of history. When government grows in America, freedom weakens. When politicians are protected, they lose principles because there are no consequences for failure. It then comes down to each of us as individual Americans, as it always has and always should, to fix what's wrong with our country. The answers have never come from our government, or from the growth of it, and the right answers never will.

Read more...

The State Of Our Union....Better Than Some Others

President Obama has now delivered his third state of the union speech and I found this one pretty interesting. There is no doubt that President Obama has entered back into campaign mode. What I found most interesting was how much he was trying to be a centrist leader again.

There didn't seem to be much as much energy as usual in this speech though. You could tell as you watched it that it was another speech full of feel good rhetoric and little in the way of an actual plan for the future of the country. Actions speak louder than words and all of the centrist rhetoric in the world can't erase the course you've charted with past actions. President Obama seems oblivious to the real problems facing not only this country but the entire world.

It's not that much of a surprise really. After all he doesn't really have any experience, much less a successful record, in facing these kinds of issues whether it's the recession or foreign policy. One thing we've learned in the last few years is that we needed much more than a "community organizer" full of hope and change to face the major problems that seem to be materializing and growing all over the world.

The major focus of late has no doubt been the riots and protests happening all over the world, most notably Egypt and Tunisia. I've been watching as the stories develop and wanted to take you back to Tuesday and this story from Reuters. Keep in mind this story was the same day as the State Of The Union speech.

"FACEBOOK DEMANDS

Their complaints echo those of fellow Arabs in Tunisia: soaring food prices, a lack of jobs and authoritarian rule that usually crushes protests swiftly and with a heavy hand."

I can't help but wonder if that's the order the demands were stated in and if it was based on priority. I say that because I see the first two reasons as things we here in the U.S. are in very imminent danger of facing ourselves.

One of the great blessings we have here in our Constitution is the freedom of speech. Sure the President has the right to speak out and call Tea Party members right wing extremists or whatever other names those in disagreement with the conservative message of the Tea Party movement may choose to use, but in the end both sides are protected by the freedom of speech. Here, we stand with the protesters, but do not face the issue ourselves. More proof that our Constitution is not, and never will be, outdated.

However, now we get to the other two issues; high unemployment and "soaring" food prices. One is easy to talk about. We've had fairly high unemployment for the last couple of years and despite President Obama's best rhetoric it doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Sure, he'll mention the "1 million private sector jobs created" last year, but he forgets to mention the amount of jobs lost. As an generous example let's say you lose $75.00 but then make $25.00. I know this is complicated stuff but I don't think you made 25 bucks, I think you lost $50. If job creation was more than just feel good political rhetoric than the unemployment rate would go down since more jobs = less unemployment, anybody having trouble with that one?

"The population is growing 2 percent a year and has a "youth bulge," with some 60 percent under 30 years old. Nine out of 10 jobless Egyptians are in this age group."

High youth unemployment......well it's a good thing there's nothing like that going on here.....oh, wait.

"They included calling for Mubarak to step down, Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif to quit, parliament to be dissolved and the formation of a national government. A union activist repeated the demands to the crowd in the square by megaphone."

A union activist?!! I'm shocked how about you? It looks like workers of the world unite isn't just a (communist) slogan anymore, it's the way we have to do our work. What's that? Oh that's right, Obama's debt commission member Andy Stern already said that. I'm sure it's no big deal so just ignore that.

"The ministry blamed the Muslim Brotherhood for rioting that took place, although the banned Islamist group has only played a bit part in the protests"

Well, now I'm relieved, if this group gains control of the country then we'll potentially have a second Iran on our hands and I'm sure that'll be fantastic. After all the people of Iran have it good don't they? Remember the protests there? Isn't it funny that President Obama and the left seemed to be more harsh talking about the tea party protests than they are when they see actual violence and riots? I'm sure it's just a coincidence so never mind.

What about high food prices? We all know that food has been on the rise lately but it has yet to really soar, the keyword there is yet. One thing we routinely take for granted here is the fact that America hasn't seen severe inflation since the 1970's. Now, that means that people in my age group and younger haven't seen heavy duty inflation our entire lives, unless of course you count the soaring housing bubble which has since burst and hurt thousands of families.

During the state of the union President Obama said, "we stand with the people of Tunisia". That's great but if they are protesting because of high unemployment, and food inflation then why are we following economic policies that are delivering those same results?

Another thing I found fascinating was President Obama speaking out against the government of Egypt shutting down the Internet and social networks. Condemn it all you want to on TV Mr. President but isn't that exactly the kind of control you want over our Internet?

I had a conversation with someone today and he claimed that the government can't shut down the Internet here because there are more providers than there are in Egypt and the government can't shut them down. This is not true.

A statement issued by Vodafone Egypt said it had been instructed to suspend services in some areas.

"Under Egyptian legislation the authorities have the right to issue such an order and we are obliged to comply with it," it said.

Do you really think that giving President Obama control of the Internet here won't allow that statement to potentially read:

Under U.S. legislation the authorities have the right to issue such an order and we are obliged to comply with it.

Given all of the things that this administration keeps trying to tell us it has to "regulate" which really means control this sounds plausible to me. Like I said, I found it fascinating that the President is criticizing Egypt for doing the very thing he himself wants to be able to do here.

Then we have the price of oil. This story from Forbes spells it all out.

"The situation could have ripple effects worldwide if the Suez Canal becomes jeopardized or even shut down. According to Canaccord Genuity, “this may be impactful as approximately 1.8 million bb/d of oil was transported through the Suez Canal in 2009. A closure of the canal would result in an extra 6,000 miles of travel for any oil being transported out of the region, an additional cost which could drive up oil prices.”"

Now, we were already hearing fears of $5.00/gallon gas coming our way. You may remember that when oil was trading at $147/barrel the price at the pump was $4.00/gallon. If this crisis persists we could see $200+/barrel and that translates into a pump price of over $5.00/gallon. That means a $100.00 fill up for a 20-gallon tank. At a time of declining wages and the struggles average families already face this will be devastating for many of us.

Never mind how devastating that would be to so many who are already struggling due to this recession. Think about all of the businesses in this country that have to ship the stuff to the stores for us to buy. That will cause inflation in and of itself even if all of the other inflation figures prove to be wrong, (which they aren't). The price of literally everything will go up as oil does.

In closing, the state of our union is fragile and the struggles we are facing are bigger than any politician seems to have the courage to tell you. It'll take more than a charming, charismatic, feel good speech to fix the problems we must confront. I for one am sick of hearing about 25 year plans that a president has, (considering a president only serves a max of 8), and that goes for president's of the past as well.

We face very severe challenges in the near future and I fear far too many of us are falling for the same old political rhetoric that we hear from both sides all the time. Too many people are not prepared for what may be coming our way. That, I fear, is sadly the real state of our union.

Read more...

Bailout Green Jobs Bail Out Of Mass While Obama's Economic Advisory Door Keeps Rotating

There are 2 things I'd like to address with this blog post. The first is a story out of what is, (unfortunately), my home state of Massachusetts regarding those wonderful "green jobs" and bailouts.

Evergreen Solar, a company that manufactures solar panels etc. here in Massachusetts. They have received $40 million in "state financing", basically bailout money, to build a plant and created some of those fantastic "green jobs" you hear so much about. This story explains all of the details and as usual I'd like to highlight some of the finer points of the story.

"Evergreen makes the case that the China move will make everything better and, on paper at least, it looks like it has potential.

But in Massachusetts, the nearly 1,000 people employed by Evergreen — in Marlborough and at its Devens manufacturing plant — might not be as rosy about China."

You see, the main point is that the company is shifting it's manufacturing to China where it's cheaper to do so. The bailout funds came with strings attached as they had to maintain the Massachusetts jobs for a few years but that gives them plenty of time to get established in China. The article points out the problems with these "green jobs" and the facts that may well show just how temporary they may be.

"• Everything that Evergreen Solar is doing in Devens — wafers and cells — is also being done in China
• Evergreen Solar will no longer be making its own solar panels by the end of 2011
• Evergreen’s Massachusetts job requirements will start expiring in 2012, and the company will be free of its commitments by 2014"

Translation: All of you in Massachusetts who received these great "green jobs" with that bailout money are almost guaranteed to be out of the job come 2014. That's only 3 years away. These bailout led economic plans are garbage and that leads me to part 2 of this post.

President Obama changes economic advisers more often than celebrities change spouses. His newest superstar is Jeffrey Immelt of GE. Under Immelt's superstar leadership GE has lost some 50% of it's stock value but he's of course tied into the light bulb industry which now has all sorts of new regulations regarding energy use. Do you still not see the trend America? It's just like the labor unions being in collusion with government despite bankrupting many states.

I'd like to leave you with one last link. This video takes awhile to watch but it's fascinating and will teach you more about history and economics than all of Obama's so-called economists could ever hope to know. This video will show you what's going on in such a clear way and with so many facts of history that even the most daring progressive liberal will just hide over at the Huffington Post cracking jokes about right wingers rather than risk engaging in a debate.

Watch and learn.

If you've taken the time to watch that entire video I have to ask you something. Did that video make sense to you? Or do you still think we're on the road to recovery simply because Obama keeps telling you that we are? "Back from the brink" my ass.

Read more...

The Arizona Shooting

Unlike most of the media I decided to wait for as much information regarding the Arizona shooting before I headed to the blog to speculate and place blame on a group or ideology. There is something I want to show you though. Some of what I will say here has been said by others, like Glenn Beck and President Obama. Take a look at this:

"Before the liberals try to blame the AZ shooting on some gun toting right winger they should take a look at some of his favorite books including the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf. This is a tragedy caused by a crazy person and we'll find out more about the motive of Jared Loughner soon. I liked some of Gabrielle Giffords' positions and disagreed with others. I hope she makes a full recovery and my prayers are with all who were injured or killed today and their families. This isn't the Liberals fault or the Conservatives fault. This is the fault of a crazy person doing a tragically crazy thing.

I have to admit that I feel worse about the 9 year old who was killed than the others, especially since most of the focus will be on the congresswoman. I think most will understand and forgive me for feeling that way though. When tragedies such as this happen to children it can't help hitting us in the heart just a little bit harder. God Bless all who are suffering on this tragic day."

Take a second and re-read the bold text there. You know who said that? I did on facebook. Do you know when I said that? Saturday, January 8, 2011 at 6:35pm

I had that position the day of the shooting and I maintain that position now. It's unfortunate that so many others have an inability to do the same. Of course the left and the right want to go immediately into the partisan political debate whenever someone crazy does something crazy. The left immediately tried to liken this guy to a gun toting tea party member. The right considered him a crazy leftist.

While I pointed out that two very leftist books are included in his favorite books, I also pointed out that I did not and do not blame Liberals or Conservatives for this guys actions. You'd think that the left would do the same considering the following.

When you talk about the violence on the border and the problem with illegal immigration as legitimate reasons to increase border security, (as Gabby Giffords supported), opponents of that view instantly accuse you of wanting to punish hard workers who just want to support their families.

If a Muslim extremist blows themselves up and kills a bunch of innocent people, (including children), there's instant outcry as to how this isn't the Muslim religion as a whole. We all agree on that but it's rather hypocritical for the left and right to begin attacking each other on ideology regarding the AZ shooting.

There are countless similar stories where tragedy is used to make a political point. Remember how after 9/11 some people were attacked because they were perceived as being Muslim? George Bush even made a statement to try and calm people down and even those on the left who hated damn near everything about George Bush agreed with this speech.

I'm also not going to criticize the Obama speech at the memorial on Wednesday because I liked the speech. The cheers and applause at times from his college kid base seemed a bit inappropriate as it was a memorial service for those who died and not a campaign stop. I can forgive that to a point though because if you're a fan of President Obama then I understand that it's exciting to see him.

I really don't have much else to say as I think I've covered all I was hoping to cover. Hopefully, this makes you reflect for a moment on how you saw this tragedy. From what I can see, Glenn Beck, President Obama, and I seemed to get it right. While so many pundits from the typical partisan podiums got it wrong. I've said it before and I'll say it again.

It's not about right and left, it's about right and wrong.

Read more...

A New Year And A New Set Of Resolutions

It's the new year and I hope everyone has had a good holiday season but now it's back to work. Did you make a new years resolution to yourself this year? It's something we always seem to do but never spend much more than a month really focusing on.

We tell ourselves things like, "I'll quit smoking" and by March we're lighting them up. Another favorite is that "I'll lose weight this year". This proves much easier to say after stuffing yourself regularly for the past month with Thanksgiving and Christmas. Cutting back is easy in January but it usually doesn't pan out so well as the months go past and the new years resolution moves further and further into the back of our minds.

Well, I decided to pick something easier to stick with this year. I've decided to start going to church and bringing my daughters in with me. It had been several years since I last went to church, (my daughters baptism to be exact), and even then I pretty much never attended. I've always worked on Sundays and thus couldn't make attending church a priority, although I can't help but think that maybe it was more of a personal excuse than a real reason.

I'm not going to start getting all religiously preachy to you hear but a relevant story regarding politics came out of my attending church and it's almost amazing considering that it was the first time I'd been to church in so long.

Now, before I explain the story let me set it up by saying that it was the preacher who started it. I would also like to clarify that I'm not accusing the preacher of using the pulpit to take a bias political stand in favor of one ideology or another. I didn't take the message as such after listening to the whole point but it did worry me for a moment as this particular section of the service began. For the record, after the service, even though I'd only met the preacher at the start of the service 1 hour and 15 minutes before it ended, I took a minute to talk to him about what was said. Let me explain what happened.

This story starts with me asking you something. Have you ever heard the story of the grasshopper and the ant? I'll give you the whole story soon but most of us who know it are aware that it basically goes like this:

The ant works hard all summer storing food and preparing for the winter while the weather is nice and food is abundant. The grasshopper sings and wastes time all summer figuring he has lots of time to prepare for winter and through that procrastination he never actually does prepare for that coming winter. The grasshopper ends up pretty much begging the ant for help when winter does hit because of his lack of preparation. Moral of the story....too much play and not enough work leaves you screwed and begging those who have worked hard to prepare for help.

Simple, right? Now here's where it gets interesting and why the preacher caught my attention with the story. He didn't go into detail much about the story but he did refer to the grasshopper as what we would call more liberal and the ant as more conservative. The words liberal and conservative actually used by the preacher are what really caught my attention.

Now, at first I was worried that this was about a social justice farce, (essentially liberal propaganda being pushed by the church), as he began to talk about the how the ant should be generous and not charge the grasshopper for help since the singing of the grasshopper etc. helped make the work environment better for the ant and the grasshopper deserved the ant's help since he didn't charge the ant for those songs.

That of course is bull as the grasshopper wasn't slacking off for the benefit of the ant, he was only being lazy and putting what was fun ahead of what needed to be done. The reason I don't hold the point of view made by the preacher against him was because he continued to talk about the need to be generous with what you have and that's how he saw the ant's situation. Given the fact that this church is currently trying to help the local homeless people, (yes, even though we have that wonderful governor Deval and the man of the people Barney Frank as a congressman, there are in fact homeless people here. Shocking, I know), that message of generosity is the one the preacher was trying to convey.

The story itself is practically ancient, Wikipedia will give you more info about the history of it. Here's one version and it's worth noting that none of the versions are more than a page. The version I have comes as a preloaded classic in the kobo ereader. This is exactly what the story from that version says:

"The Ants And The Grasshopper

THE ANTS were spending a fine winter's day drying grain collected in the summertime. A Grasshopper, perishing with famine, passed by and earnestly begged for a little food. The Ants inquired of him, "Why did you not treasure up food during the summer?" He replied, "I had not leisure enough. I passed the days in singing." They then said in derision: "If you were foolish enough to sing all the summer, you must dance supperless to bed in the winter."

That's it, directly out of Aesop's Fables. Now back to the preacher, the actual story seems to have the ants pretty much saying tough to the grasshopper. Keep in mind that the grasshopper wasn't singing for the benefit of the ants, it was only his own laziness. He wasn't singing out of generosity, he was singing out of stupidity. While I understand the preacher's twisting of the story to fit in line with the generosity of the church the message is in fact an inaccuracy of the actual story.

I mentioned to the preacher after the story that while the point he was making about generosity was good and I liked the fact that he likened the attitude of the ants to conservatives and the grasshoppers to liberals, (anyone really want to argue with that one?), in truth had both the grasshopper and ants worked together to stockpile food for the winter then perhaps both would have had time to play as well as work. Stick with me on this as I'll now tie it into modern day politics.

The problem with our current situation is that the government under the Liberals has been doing all it can to turn everyone into grasshoppers using things like stimulus money, (3 years of unemployment anyone?), when what we need are in fact more ants, (workers). Another truth to the story that's lacking from government is the fact that the ants didn't have some government praying mantis showing up to take what the ant had to give to the grasshopper, yet isn't that what the government tries to do to the workers in order to pay for the non-workers?

Would the ants keep stockpiling for winter if they knew they wouldn't be able to keep the fruits of that labor? Would you continue to work hard if you knew the government would be taking your money just to pay for it's own greedy special interest? After 3 years of unemployment and living off of the government would you really even have the desire to return to the work force? That's assuming you could even find a good job or retain all of your skills. Or would you just decide that living off of the government is easier and requires little work and effort so why stop. That is the tragedy of the government rushing in to save the day.

So tell the government to stop using stimulus money, (our money), to breed a bunch of human grasshoppers. Get out of the way and let us grow more ants so we can get down to business and save our country.

As for those reading this, speak up and join the debate, left or right it doesn't matter. The problem with blogs is that I say something, you read it and at best leave a quick comment. Join the debate and let me know what you think on Facebook.

Read more...

Christmas Eve

It's Christmas Eve. The fight against Christmas has been quieter this year than in the last few years. I always find it fascinating listening to the atheists etc. who try a act like the season is offensive simply because they don't believe in Christianity. The best part is knowing that they don't mind giving and receiving gifts.

I can't help but wonder: what are you doing with those gifts if you don't believe in Christmas? There's one thing I've wondered as I've looked at the Christmas season this year given the recession we're still stuck in, (despite the administration's insistence that we're on the road to recovery).

Given that fact that so many people have lost their jobs and thus have less money to spend, I wonder how many of those people have started looking at the Christmas season differently? Perhaps one positive of this recession will be in the fact that people begin to remember, or maybe even for the first time realize, what the Christmas season is really about.

We're not very used to severe recessions, think about it. The last really big recession before this one was in the 1970's. That's over 30 years ago. As we try our best to stretch our dollars as far as we can the Christmas season gives us a great opportunity to look at what Christmas means to each of us personally.

Do you feel guilty if you can't give as much this year as you perhaps have in the past?.....If you do then you need to rethink your own concept of the Christmas season. After all, would giving someone a dozen hand picked flowers really mean less than a dozen flowers bought at the store?

Let me give you a true story to ponder from my own past. When I was 17 I was living with a friend and his parents who didn't have much money, as I didn't. They were willing to take me in and I paid rent to them as much as I could but it was tough.

Christmas day came around so my friend and I came up with a plan. We each took $1 and wrapped it up to give to each other. All of us had a good laugh at that one and it didn't cost anything. To his parents I gave a heartfelt letter of appreciation thanking them for all they had done for me even though they had no obligation to.

As it turned out, that letter meant more to his parents than I ever expected it to. At the time I was a bit disappointed that it was pretty much all I could give. I was told by my friends father, (RIP), that his mother had taken that letter out unbeknown to me just to re-read it. He told me that the simple letter that I was rather disappointed in when I gave it meant more to her than any gift I could have given.

That's the kind of message we need to remember this Christmas. A simple letter or a long overdue phone call to a distant friend or relative can mean more than the most expensive of gifts.

Santa's bag may not be as full this year but does that minimize the heart of the season? Does it really make a family get together any less joyful? By not having as much money to spend you begin to appreciate that which doesn't cost much money a whole lot more.

So this Christmas take a minute to just relax and enjoy the season. If it's been a bad year for you, you've lost a job, there's been the death of a friend or family member, or perhaps it's just been a pretty rough year in general, take a minute to just relax. Ease yourself of the stress and just enjoy this Christmas. You have most of the year to drive yourself crazy over all of your problems. Give yourself a break for just a few days, (at least today and tomorrow). If it hasn't been a bad year for you then the message is just as, if not more, important for you.

Make sure your children know that Christmas isn't about toys and gifts. Get your children to realize that Christmas is about family. The Christmas exchange of presents is about feeling good giving a gift more than getting one. Those of you with young kids know that it's the smiles on their faces that put a smile on your face more than anything you've received.

It's not the money you've spent on Christmas that makes it special, it's the time you get to spend with family and friends that make it special. Make sure you take a minute to think of our troops who can't be home with their families this Christmas because they are abroad helping to protect ours. I'd like to give a special Merry Christmas and thank you to them. Now why are you still reading this blog? Turn off that computer and go spend some time with your families.

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYBODY!!

Read more...

DC Has The Worst (Omni)buses

Yes friends, Washington D.C. has done it again. 2,000 pages and $1.2 Trillion in new spending just before Christmas in the lame duck session. Congress is giving us another wasteful spending omnibus bill for Christmas. Perhaps it's better to show you the spending with the numerals instead of the word, it's a bit more powerful. That's $1,200,000,000,000 of our money, (which we don't have), going to things the politicians want that we don't need.

Both parties, as usual, are guilty here. They don't seem to understand that the old argument of, "without this money the government will shut down" blah, blah, blah....bull**it. You know what else? I for one don't think most of the country would mind if the government did in fact shut down and all of Congress went home until the new session starting on January 4th of next year.

Let me ask you something else. Were you even shocked when you heard about this massive spending bill? This is what Congress does every damn year. Those who actually pay attention to politics have been speaking out against this sort of thing for years. It's what gave rise to the Tea Parties and it was a big part of the landslide defeat of incumbent politicians this past November. Here are just some of the reasons that you should be outraged at this bill.

It's no wonder that Congress currently has the lowest approval rating EVER in the history of tracking it. Republicans, who railed against the spending when the country was criticizing President Obama are by no means innocent in this one. Personally, these Omnibuses are starting to make me feel like a snowman in the road. It's time for congress to stop driving these omnibuses right over the American people. They seem to forget that they are spending our money when you get right down to it and elections are never more than a few years away.

Read more...

The Tax Cut Compromise Sparks Class Warfare....As Usual

Well, it's dominated the news recently, President Obama and the Republicans in Congress have struck a deal on extending the Bush tax cuts. While there are a few objections coming from those on the right the bulk of opposition to this plan is coming from the left. As usual we're hearing the same arguments that the high-taxation promoting progressive liberals always use.

Obama's debt commission was unable to get the required votes to actually send it's recommendations to congress, (I told you they wouldn't). More on that in a little while though. There's certainly no shortage of articles out there from the left displaying their disappointment at President Obama for this compromise. The typical tax cuts for the rich sentiment that they always use even though those same tax cuts for "the rich" hit a large majority of small business owners that the left so often claims to care about.

Here's an article from Robert Kuttner off of Obama's propaganda blog the Huffing and Puffington Post that describes why bipartisanship is a bad thing and how Nanci Pelosi is right to reject it. Apparently he wasn't paying attention to the election in November. Here are some highlights:

"The economy will be fixed only with more public investment, more progressive taxation, and more regulation, but partisan compromise dictates less of each." - Robert Kuttner

By "public investment" he means more stimulus and if you still don't think the stimulus was a total failure than you're denial is astounding. More "progressive taxation", he would say that means more taxing of the rich but he actually means more taxing of everyone, which would reduce tax revenues as I've covered many times before, (The Laffer Curve). The last one here is my favorite, "more regulation", by that he means more government micromanaging of our economy. Just look at the last blog I did and you'll see I've already covered this one.

I've explained previously how the President's debt commission was a re-election rouse that was never going to accomplish anything. It was just meant to look like President Obama actually cares about the debt and deficits. Robert Kuttner in all his wisdom fell for it though.

"will very likely come out with a plan to narrow the federal deficit by slashing what's left of public investment. The whole tilt of this commission is somewhere between conservative Democrat and far-right Republican." - Robert Kuttner

Remember, public investment in his eyes means stimulus. He also links to a few other plans that you can view from his article. One of which he references here:

"One of these, Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, issued her own alternative plan, which increases social investment in the short run in order to get a stronger recovery going, then reduces the deficit over time with higher growth, progressive taxation and cuts in military spending." - Robert Kuttner

The higher growth is a projection that just assumes the progressive plan will actually cause growth. Sure, it'll grow government but not the economy, or have you been living in a cave for the last couple of years?

"One other progressive on the commission, former SEIU president Andy Stern, has held out hopes of a grand bargain but no bargain that might appeal to Stern seems to be forthcoming." - Robert Kuttner

Andy Stern is a Communist who calls himself a progressive. I'll prove that in a little while but we've got a few things to cover before then.

Here's another article, this one is from Bob Burnett, off of Obama's propaganda blog The Huffington Post, (remember, this is where Obama tells people to go for news, I'm just taking his advise).

"For months, Barack Obama knew that Republicans were cutthroats, who wouldn't hesitate to hold the working people of America hostage in order to secure a tax-cut "ransom" for the rich and powerful." - Bob Burnett

So all of those "rich and powerful" people that create all of the real jobs in this country are just holding Americans hostage and it's the progressives who are here to save you from those evil vipers. It's funny considering that every time the progressives are in control of our country we end up with a recession and a growing government and welfare state. Never mind that though, I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

"Negotiating out of fear is bad practice, in general, but wildly inappropriate in an era where Progressives are battling to maintain Democracy in America." - Bob Burnett

Well, Conservatives are battling to maintain our Republic and Constitution. Democracy means majority rules, right? Well, didn't a vast majority of Americans throw the Democrats out of office in November? Just as they did to the Republicans in '06 and '08. It seems a compromise with the Republicans is what a majority of Americans did want doesn't it? So, whose really fighting for Democracy here? As usual it isn't those that claim to.

The next two lines are not next to each other in the article but show something very telling as to how mad the left is at Obama.

"The good news is that we now know who are dealing with and have two years to take corrective action."

"I am confident we can do this, with or without Barack Obama" - Bob Burnett

See? They are going to push forward with the agenda that Americans overwhelmingly rejected in November "with or without Barack Obama". Looks like they'll be looking for a primary challenger if Obama doesn't change course.

There are plenty of other articles from the left out there saying similar things about progressive taxation etc. Some want to push a new deal system like a new unionized WPA, (Works Progress Administration). That was a new deal stimulus-esque job program where FDR used government jobs to help get Democrats elected in struggling districts. Add a union and I'm sure that will work out great. Wait a minute...isn't that pretty much what the stimulus has done?

To those of us that have done our research based on facts rather than biased ideology, we know that the tax cuts for the rich is an argument made again and again. Whether it's Calvin Coolidge, JFK (though the left is quieter about that one), Ronald Reagan, or George Bush, any tax cuts that actually lessen the tax burden on businesses that create jobs is always called tax cuts for the rich. Bill Clinton cut the capital gains tax also by the way, which helped those evil rich businessmen. This latest hissy fit by the left is no big shock and the arguments are nothing new.

In closing I'd like to get back to former SEIU union leader Andy Stern, the most common visitor to the Obama White House, and a member of the debt commission. In this video he's quoted as saying:

"Workers of the world unite, it's not just a slogan anymore, it's the way we're going to have to do our work" - Andy Stern

Now why would I call him a Communist? Look at that quote. Now I'd like to show you another:

"WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!"

The quotes seem very similar don't they? Well the quote in all capitals, (which is exactly how it appears in the book), is the very last line in the Communist Manifesto written by Karl Marx. Remember, Obama was influenced by the "Marxist Professors and structural feminist". Andy Stern's presence on the President's debt commission proves that Obama hasn't forgotten who he is. This was all expected and planned.

Next year, as I've said before, will be very telling. He will go around congress as much as possible using executive orders. Dick Morris covered this well. I'd link you to this story from his website but the site wouldn't load for me so I've just put the text here.

Via Dick Morris.com

Obama Using Executive Orders To Implement Radical Agenda

Does President Obama plan to move to the center in response to his overwhelming rejection at the polls on November 2nd? No way! Instead, he is moving to implement, through executive action, two of the most controversial items in his 2010 agenda -- a carbon tax and pollution permit system and a ban on the use of secret ballots in union elections. Through executive action by the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the Obama Administration is planning to effectuate both policies without asking Congress.

Never mind that he couldn't persuade even a top heavy Democratic Congress to pass either program. Or that public opinion polls show massive rejection of both measures. Or that each is a sure job killer by itself -- and together, they are even worse. This arrogant, ideologically-driven radical is determined to have his way and the public be damned!

The EPA is currently soliciting public comments for its plan to use the Clean Air Act of 1970 to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. The Clean Air Act, as the name indicates, is designed to fight against pollution -- unhealthy chemicals that are belched into the air by smokestacks. It was passed to fight sulfur dioxide, particulates, nitrous oxides and other chemicals that cause human diseases. To use it to fight carbon dioxide -- which we all breathe without ill effects -- because of concerns about global warming -- is a perversion of the law.

Worse, because the Clean Air Act is designed to protect public health by measuring aggregate pollution in each geographic area, it limits economic development in communities where the pollution levels exceed prescribed standards. But carbon dioxide doesn't poison anyone. It makes no sense to ban factory expansion in areas where the nature of the industries is that there will be high carbon dioxide levels (like oil area of Texas and Louisiana). But that's what the EPA plans to do, virtually making economic growth illegal in large parts of the United States.


Meanwhile, Craig Becker, the former chief counsel of the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) -- now the head of the NLRB -- has secured a 3-2 majority party line majority to repeal the Dana decision which mandates secret ballots in unionization elections. The NLRB will rule that if a majority of workers check off that they want a union on cards then the union will automatically be approved without a secret ballot vote of the entire workforce. Currently, if a majority of the workers sign the cards, a secret ballot vote is then triggered. Frequently, the union loses these elections, proving that the card check off is subject to coercion and bullying. The Democratic majority in the Senate wouldn't approve the card check change so the NLRB is planning to accomplish the same objective administratively, trapping workers into unionization they would reject if afforded the opportunity to vote by secret ballot.

Both the pollution permit/carbon tax and the forced unionization proposals will be job killers. The U.S. has maintained its 25% share of global manufacturing by replacing workers with energy driven machines. In the past ten years, the number of manufacturing employees has declined by 33% but our production has risen by 50%. But automation takes energy -- lots of it -- by taxing energy, we are eliminating the strategy that has preserved our jobs. And massive unionization of the private sector will also drive out our jobs. Since 1990, unionized manufacturing jobs have declined by 75%. But non-union manufacturing jobs have actually risen over the same period by 15%.

After he lost Congress in 1992, Bill Clinton, too, resorted to executive orders to maintain his momentum as president. With Congress unwilling to pass anything he proposed, the president canvassed the Administration for ideas that could be implemented by executive orders. A very productive period followed during which tobacco regulation, higher educational standards, affirmative action reform, and other key measures were implemented without asking Congress' permission. But Clinton's executive orders were on subjects on which Congress had not voted. They did not contradict the express will of the body. Obama is using the strategy to act in direct defiance of Congressional action. He is passing ideas Congress refused to pass, even when he had huge majorities.

Obama will live to regret these moves. Republicans in the House will defund these actions and insert legislative language making it a crime to spend appropriated funds to implement them. By this strategy, all of the controversial Obama legislation will be at issue during the budget fight -- taxes, Obamacare, cap and trade, and card check. The more these issues are inserted into the budget fight, the greater the chances of Republican victory.

So President Obama has not learned the lessons of 2010 and likely never will.

We'll soon find out, 2011 should be very interesting.

Read more...

Spending vs. Investing, Social Security's Not So Secure, and Regulating Becomes Micromanaging

First of all Happy Hanukkah to all of the Jewish folks out there. Now let's get down to business.

Spending vs. Investing

Do you know the difference? Unfortunately, far too many people, (especially in Washington D.C.), don't. Unemployment rose in November to 9.8% despite increased retail sales. That's another thing that always bothers me when I hear it.

We're all supposed to act surprised when the retail sales increase in November and December. This is just a guess but it might have something to do with Thanksgiving and Christmas. It's not recovery, it's called the holidays and retail sales always jump for the holidays.

I find the so-called economists fascinating that talk about government spending as if it's all an investment. That's not to say that it can't be done to a certain degree. Some government spending is necessary and could be seen as an investment, such as the military and national defense. The problem with far too many in Washington, (mostly on the Democrats side but that's by no means exonerating the Republicans), is that they see all government spending as an investment regardless of what the money is spent on.

You see this mentality routinely from those who say that the problem with the stimulus is that it didn't spend enough. If trillions of dollars aren't enough, do you honestly believe that there is a figure high enough to be enough in the eyes of the fools with that opinion?

Let's look at that stimulus spending for a moment. Did it help you? Did your rent or mortgage get paid off? Did your car payment go away? Did it save your job or do you believe it had anything to do with why you still have one? (If you still do).

Then we have the president's deficit commission. When President Obama issued an executive order to create the deficit commission he made a majority of 14 out of 18 needed in order for the proposals to make it into the Congress for debate. Obama knows that's unlikely given who the members are and what truly needs to be done in order to address our deficit problems.

Now, if President Obama knows that the deficit is unlikely to accomplish anything then why would he appoint one in the first place? The answer is simple, he has to make it look like he's actually trying to address the deficit. His propaganda blog Huffing and Puffington Post is on board.

Take this story for example.

"Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) met with labor unions, seniors organizations, and liberal members of Congress Thursday afternoon to develop an alternative proposal to the deficit commission's draft report released last week"

So, labor unions: (whose pensions are collapsing several states and who Obama has been bailing out with our money), seniors organizations: (I'll bet that means AARP who recently announced that Obamacare will make health care more expensive for it's employees), and liberal members of Congress, (keyword liberal, so much for bipartisanship) to develop an alternative.

If Obama believes in his own deficit commission then why would his strongest supporters, labor unions and liberal members of congress, be so against the deficit commissions proposals when we haven't even really had time to pick apart their suggestions?

Social Security

This also brings into play more Social Security propaganda. This is along the same line as MoveOn.org's propaganda that I showed you awhile back. Read this for a refresher of what I'm talking about. I showed you the propaganda on social security back in June and this recent Huffington Post story I've been talking about shows it again.

"Sanders said the Simpson-Bowles proposal to raise the retirement age for Social Security, when the entitlement program is solvent until 2037 and contributes nothing to the national debt, seems to be something of a non sequitur."

This is a lie, Social Security is not solvent and will not last until 2037. It's full of IOU's thanks to Lyndon Johnson, need proof? Here.

From Snopes:

"Q: Which political party took Social Security from the independent "Trust" fund and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically controlled House and Senate."

So the Democrats are the ones who started filling the Social Security Trust Fund with IOU's in the first place, I knew that but did you? Do you think Bernie Sanders or the labor unions know that? I'm not saying Republicans are innocent here but the left should stop trying to act like Social Security saints.

Think about this, they claim that Social Security is solvent until 2037. What about lost jobs? Every worker has money taken out of their paychecks to go toward Social Security. However, there have been millions of people in the last few years who've lost their jobs. No job means no Social Security tax, millions of people no longer paying that tax means less revenue for Social Security. Less revenue for Social Security means less time that it remains what they call "solvent".

The positions of those like MoveOn.org and others who agree are truly ignorant positions on this issue and prove the unwillingness to address this very real crisis.

Government Regulation Continues To Grow

Banks, health care, car companies, Wall Street, big business, small business, and now even more regulation for food. There are some misconceptions about the recently passed S. 510 bill regarding regulations for farming. Red Mass Group put out an article that eases some of the panic regarding the government getting too involved with our food supply. Here's the article. I worry about what else there will be that we find out about in time, like health care.

Here's what I worry about with the increased food regulations by the government. The problem I see with this is the fact that it's another step of government control. While this article may prove some of those more fearful of increased government control over farming wrong to some degree, with encroaching government it always starts with a foot in the door. Bits of control granted over time that ...lead to total control in the end.

Take the income tax for example, it started out small and only affected a small amount of Americans when implemented, since then it has only grown more and more over time. This next step gives the government more control and could lead to another farming crisis, the last thing we need. The government wont stop with this bill, it's just a foot in the door. Need proof? Just look at health care and the auto industry.

Think of government regulating like managing. No managing and there's chaos, too much managing and efficiency is crippled. Anyone whose worked for a micro manager before knows what I mean. It's harder to do your job with someone standing over your shoulder watching every move you make like a hawk or trying to do your job for you assuming you can't do anything yourself.

A manager has to trust the workforce to do it's job thus allowing you to be productive, innovative, and efficient. When there is an actual problem then it's management's responsibility to help respond to the problem.

Government regulation over our economy works in exactly the same way. If the government has too little control then those who are actually corrupt criminals get away with anything they want and everybody gets screwed. However, if the government has too much control then it can't manage the job and the economy can't be innovative and efficient. This creates an inability for the economy to grow.

That's exactly what's happening under the Obama administration. The government has increased regulatory power so much that the economy is in a stalemate. He even has a "regulatory czar" Cass Sunstein. After all, isn't that exactly what health care reform was? It's government regulation of health care. Thousands of pages of regulation, (just look at our 40,000 page tax code as another example of this), becomes thousands of pages of micromanaging.

Despite what all of Obama's supporters are trying to get you to believe you probably understand the micromanaging analogy of our economy because we've all worked for a micro manager and seen the adverse effects it's had on our various jobs. Go after the slackers, back off the productive workers, and it'll all work out. Unfortunately, being in the tank for the unions is the opposite of this.

Our economy is reacting predictably to all of this government micromanaging. If the government doesn't back off, (which under Obama, it won't), then don't expect the results to improve much. Despite all of the Spending this chart is very telling about unemployment under Obama. We've hovered between 9.5% and 10% for well over a year now.

If the tax cuts expire it will get worse. Throughout history higher taxes have never lead to vast economic growth. With the economy as weak and fragile as it is the taxes going up next year will turn this great recession into another great depression. Don't expect propaganda sites like The Huffington Post, (where Obama tells you to go for news), or groups like MoveOn.org to tell you any of that though. They're too busy telling us that Social Security is in good shape. I don't think you're that dumb, yet they clearly do.

Read more...

Outrage Over The Scanners, Where Are The Progressives? Pelosi Now At The Top...Of The Bottom And MoveOn Gets Restless And Starts Moving

It's a long title I know but there's several topics I need to address with this one. Let's start with the re-election of Nancy Pelosi to lead the Democrats in the House of Representatives as minority leader. After that I'll get to the scanners and conclude with the latest from MoveOn.org as all 3 issues are very telling about the mood of the Progressive left, (formerly known as Democrats).

I for one am thrilled about Nancy Pelosi's victory to lead the Democrats. With this vote the Democrats have shown that they couldn't care less about the will of the majority of Americans as their agenda, (Socialism in America), is more important than that pesky old will of the people thing. This shows me that the left is basically betting all or nothing on their vision of what America should be to them. The Democrats who actually stood against Pelosi to lead the party should be commended to a point but let's look at the results.

Here we have one of the most out of touch radicals in the history of the congress trying to lead one of the 2 major political parties in this country and the vote wasn't even close 150 - 43. That means that more than 3 times the amount of Democrats in the house voted for her to lead as opposed to those who didn't. That should be very telling about where most of the Democrats stand as to the will of the majority of Americans.

They've been planning this, don't think for a second that President Obama didn't know he was going to lose at least the house. After all, that's why a majority of the bills the Democratic Congress voted on weren't even read, they knew the goal, damn the consequences. They weren't about to let a Republican majority stop Obama. The next 2 years will be very telling.

Now on to the scanners and I'll be brief about this one because we've all seen the outrage from everyday passengers over the scanners and invasive searches. I don't need to tell you about the anger for obvious reasons but I do wonder something and you should think of this as well.

Remember the wiretapping of suspected terrorists that President Bush did? The left went nuts over that program. Meanwhile they are practically fondling and taking nude pictures of travellers at the airports.

Also, just to add insult to injury, they are considering exempting Muslims. Now, all of a sudden it's about security. Liberal hypocrisy at it's best, if Bush was pushing for the scanners the way the Obama administration is there would be Bush protests in the streets. Yet with Obama it's about security and best for the majority of travellers.

"every dictator who ever lived justified the enslavement of his people based on the theory of what was best for the majority" - Ronald Reagan

Now let's look at the latest from MoveOn.org and how it relates. Obama's running out of time and losing the support of the American people. The latest problem MoveOn.org has with the president is over taxes. Despite all the rhetoric about how evil those damn tax cuts President Bush passed for some reason a lot of Democrats are all of a sudden scared to let them expire. Now MoveOn.org is trying to keep Obama on track with the progressive agenda:

Dear MoveOn member,

Remember Barack Obama in 2008? The guy who refused to go along with a "dumb war" and said, "In the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope."

I miss that guy. Imagine if someone told you in 2008 that Barack Obama was actually thinking about signing legislation to extend the Bush tax giveaways for the rich.1 I wouldn't have believed it.

Now more than ever, we need the Barack Obama we elected in 2008—the smart, tough, hopeful progressive champion who inspired millions of us—to stand up and say "no" to a millionaire bailout.


Right now, with the change we all fought for hanging in the balance, President Obama needs to hear from those of us who supported him the most.


So we're asking MoveOn members nationwide to record a video message from the heart to tell President Obama to go to the mat to stop any extension of the millionaire tax giveaways—and to bring back the progressive fighter we all knew and supported in 2008.

Can you record and share a video message to President Obama today? Click here to get started:


http://pol.moveon.org/obamavideo/?id=25271-17182837-FQoHc9x&t=2


A personal appeal from so many of us who worked hard to elect President Obama will send a strong message. And to make sure the White House and millions of Americans hear it, we'll take the best videos and turn them into an ad that we'll air on national television.


Can you share a video message today? Just click here to get started:


http://pol.moveon.org/obamavideo/?id=25271-17182837-FQoHc9x&t=3


Thanks for all you do.

–Nita, Marika, Duncan, Steven, and the rest of the team

We'll see what happens. I doubt that President Obama's going to listen to those who favor lower taxes and keeping them low and predictable in order to promote economic growth. The only growth he's seemed to favor since taking office is government growth. Now, who do you expect him to listen to, MoveOn.org or the Republicans, (and several Democrats astoundingly enough), who favor keeping taxes low in order to promote economic growth?

My bet's are on MoveOn.org because there's one thing President Obama has proven several times since taking office. The will of the majority of Americans isn't as important to him as the progressive agenda. We'll find out what he plans over the next 2 years and I suspect that it isn't going to be pretty. The President and the Republican majority in the house are at opposite ends of the spectrum on many issues.

Despite all this talk about working together I suspect both sides will come out swinging. The most unfortunate part of all this is that it's everyday Americans who will suffer the most from what is being done to our country. The politicians will work hard to protect the one class that they usually prove to care for the most....themselves.

Read more...

Stay Focused, Or This Lame Duck's DREAM Could Become Your Nightmare

This is a very dangerous time for our country. No, I'm not talking about the war on terror, I'm talking about the "lame duck" session of Congress that begins on Monday.

One of this Pelosi Congress' biggest problems was a refusal, (not an inability, a refusal), to listen to the will of a majority of the people:

A majority of Americans didn't support Obamacare....it didn't matter to this Congress so it passed anyway.

Most Americans didn't support the stimulus, (Bush's or Obama's), it passed, (and failed), anyway.

Most Americans didn't support earmarks, often referred to as "pork" spending. The stimulus packages and the $410 Billion "Omnibus" bill passed with it had thousands of earmarks costing billions of dollars.

Here's what bothers me about the next 2 months. I fear that with the election victory and the looming holidays, I know it's a little late but happy Veterans day and thank you to all of our Veterans who've served and who are serving, too many of us may get lazy and stay uninformed as we go into holiday mode.

That provides a dangerous window of opportunity for this largely outgoing Congress. Think of what they were willing to pass when they still had a near election coming to pass? All of those same congressman are still congressman until January. They could still pass bills this month and next whether you like it or not, and you won't.

They've already talked about the DREAM Act, (that's bleeding heart progressive talk for amnesty for illegal immigrants). They know most Americans don't support it but what do they care, you've already voted many of them out so what do they have to lose?

Think about that for a minute. It creates millions of new voters for the Liberals who will need all the help they can get in 2012. Do you think they care more about your opinion, or the chance to get a lock on millions of new voters next election? The only chance there is to stop this "lame duck" may be the Democrats that have to think about saving their own asses in 2012. We'll soon see just how important this progressive agenda truly is to them. Many of them proved some of these things were worth committing political suicide, we're about to see how many of those left are willing to do the same.

Cap and trade could pose a similar problem but it appears that for now we may be safe but only if we stay vigilant. You never know what a panicky lame duck congress may try to do. There's also what I'll call "the hissy fit factor". Many of those who've lost may just have one last big middle finger for the will of the voters since they are angry over losing their elections. It's like a kid throwing a hissy fit because they couldn't have their way. It's something worth watching for.

Then there's one last part of this and it doesn't come into play until next year. If Obama knows anything of history he had to anticipate some pretty heavy losses in the first midterm election of his presidency. Most presidents historically lose seats in the midterms though there have been a few exceptions, (George Bush's 2002 midterms for example, but 9-11 played a major role in that one). I'm sure that was in the back of President Obama's mind as the debates of his first 2 years were playing out.

That makes me worry about something. It's no secret that most of Congress didn't read many of the things they were passing. To most of us everyday folks that never made any sense because most of us wouldn't sign onto something we knew nothing about. Congress of course is nothing like most everyday folks and that's one of it's biggest problems.

I fear that next year we're going to learn about much of what's in those bills. We may find that there are all sorts of new powers granted to the executive branch, (in other words granted to President Obama himself). At a glance this may seem like a simple fix because of the U.S. Constitution but it may not seem that simple.

For example, crazy critics of Obamacare repeatedly called it a massive tax despite those who tried to label us liars. However, once individual states began challenging the Constitutionality of Obamacare, the Obama administration began arguing that the individual mandate to buy insurance was in fact a tax and the Constitution does grant the Federal government the authority to tax.

This proves that President Obama was anticipating this kind of a move by the states who are also using the Constitution in an attempt to stop the government from controlling damn near every aspect of our lives through this new progressive nanny state.

Obama's argument basically rests on the interpretation of Article 1: Section 8 of the Constitution:

"The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

The Obama administration would argue that the part I highlighted in bold here is a justification to mandate a health care program as a new tax. The problem with that is that "common defense and general welfare" aren't tied together by accident. They are referring to the welfare of the nation in a security and debt sense, which I see as pretty clear here. The founders aren't talking about health care or the welfare of individuals, they are talking about the "general welfare" of the nation. Easy to understand unless you're a progressive who aims to undermine the Constitution for your own agenda's purposes.

On December 15, 1791 the founders made another thing pretty clear with the passage of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. You know them as the "Bill of Rights":

Amendment 10: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

There you have the basics of the States argument against the administration on Health care. Amendment 10 clearly says "to the people", to me that means that if an overwhelming majority of "the people" are against a big government health care plan, and the Constitution doesn't specifically "delegate" the power to control health care to the government, then get your big ass progressive hands off of it.

In closing, keep your eyes very closely fixed on this lame duck session and pay close attention to the debates that will become front and center as the administration goes to bat against a new Republican controlled House of Representatives. The powers potentially granted in those bills could open the floodgates of an all out battle between the branches of government. It's a battle that will affect all of us if as it plays out and it's a debate that we the people can't afford to lose. Stay sharp, stay focused, and stay on top of every move this government makes.

Keep your eyes on the lame duck congress, the new incoming congress, and this administration. None of them are deserving of our complete trust as of yet and we have no reason to grant them that trust lightly, it must still be earned. So I have only this to offer our ever growing government.

"It's you government that has grown too large and truly has a problem with obesity and it's time that the government's fat ass goes on a diet!" - Brandon Edsall

Take that Michelle.

Read more...