Beware The Leopard

Guess what Obama Stooge Loretta Lynch will not being doing this year? And the Liberal Media will bury under 600 Feet of concrete BS.

“What difference does it make?”

Hillary is the Once and Future Queen. The Left ordained it. The Leftist Media works 24/7 to bring the peasants in to vote for it.

The truth is utterly irrelevant.

Liberal Media:  YAWN!!

But I bet if you talked about Nixon ordering someone to break into the Watergate Hotel to sneak a peek they’ll have your rapid attention for hours…

The latest batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department early Friday contain what may be the smoking gun that forces the Justice Department to charge the former secretary of state with a crime, according to former federal prosecutor Joseph diGenova.

“This is gigantic,” said diGenova. “She caused to be removed a classified marking and then had it transmitted in an unencrypted manner. That is a felony. The removal of the classified marking is a federal crime. It is the same thing to order someone to do it as if she had done it herself.”

On the June 17, 2011, email chain with senior State Department adviser Jake Sullivan, Clinton apparently asked Sullivan to change the marking on classified information so that it is no longer flagged as classified.

Clinton, using her private email server, asks for “the TPs,” apparently a reference to talking points being prepared for her. Sullivan, who is using his official State Department email, responds, “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton responds, “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w[ith] no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”

It’s not clear if Sullivan actually followed through on Clinton’s orders. But if he did, it may expose Clinton to serious legal jeopardy.

“This makes it impossible for the bureau not to recommend charges,” diGenova said of the FBI. “This makes it impossible not to go forward, and it certainly ties the hand of the attorney general.”

Some have speculated that while the FBI may recommend charges, Attorney General Loretta Lynch might try to avoid doing so for political reasons.

” …You hadn’t exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.’ But the plans were on display…’ o n display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.’ `That’s the display department.’ `With a torch.’ `Ah, well the lights had probably gone.’ `So had the stairs.’ `But look you found the notice didn’t you?’ `Yes,’ said Arthur, `yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of The Leopard”.’ — Douglas Adams.

The revelation also appears to put the lie to Clinton’s claim that she never handled classified information on her server.

“What difference Does it make?” 🙂

Hillary is incapable of telling the truth. She’s a Reverse Pinocchio, her nose would only grow if she actually told the honest truth. 🙂

“I did not send nor receive anything that was classified at the time,” she has claimed. By instructing her aide to send her material marked classified, it is clear that she not only may have received classified information, but that it was indeed “classified at the time.”

“I did not have sex with that woman…”

“This means that when she said, ‘I never received anything marked classified,’ she in fact did,” diGenova said.

And a Little blue dress says you did, Bill. 🙂

David Bossie, president of the watchdog group Citizens United, said the email could become the emblem of Hillary’s email scandal.

But the Media will put a “Beware the Leopard” sign on it.

“It proves that Hillary Clinton affirmatively instructed senior staff to send classified data to an unsecured server,” he said. “With that, it cements into history, much like the famous Bill Clinton finger wag.”

Now let me be Clear… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

 

Making Society Better

Allen West: I found a definition of Yin and Yang to be, “In Chinese philosophy, yin and yang (also, yin-yang or yin yang) describes how opposite or contrary forces are actually complementary, interconnected, and interdependent in the natural world, and how they give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another.” It appears that our 2016 presidential election cycle is early on being defined by that philosophy. The question is, can this media-driven divide be good for the future of our Constitutional Republic?

In 2008 it was all about the “anti-Bush” sentiment in America – heavily fueled by a complicit media. The rallying slogan was “Hope and Change.” Some of us will never forget the statement, “we are the change that we have been waiting for.” Huh?

Pronoun Trouble… 🙂

None of this was challenged, but embraced as a historical moment that truly was the Yang to the existing Yin. Amazingly, there were little to no questions about policy; just the simplistic retort that “I will not be like the current president.” Furthermore, any challenge to the issue of a lack of policy proposals and experience in 2008 was met with the Alinsky tactic of personal demonization by way of being castigated as racist. And so in 2008 America replaced the Yin with the Yang and we had a new Yin – progressive socialism.

In 2012, the new slogan became “Forward,” and that was even as we recognized that so many quantitative assessments evidenced we were not going forward. We were certainly not progressing, and that situation continues to today. There were deceptions of jobs report numbers and we know that the economy was suffering under one of the most anemic recoveries in American history. But what was most telling was that we actually believed that we were safer; that Islamic terrorism was quelled. That was because Osama bin Laden had been double-tapped by U.S. Navy SEALS. However, the reality was far from being such. And so another deception took place when on 9-11-12 four Americans were abandoned to die in Benghazi – a place which had been destabilized by a horrific intervention by the current administration. Yet the new Yin, aided by a dedicated media campaign told us it was just a video.

So in 2012 we kept the current Yin.

Today, the situation is completely reversed. There is a new Yang that has risen due to the failures of the current Yin. The new slogan is “Make America Great Again.” This Yang has tapped into the evident weakness of the current Yin and has garnered a solid support base. Funny, this new Yang is not being embraced by the liberal progressive media, but its incessant assaults have enhanced the popularity of this new Yang in many aspects. And why is this happening? Simple: because the media clearly established and continues to establish itself as the protector of the progressive socialist ideal in 2008 and 2012. They have lost their credibility.

However, I would caution America to carefully assess whether this new Yang presents any viable policy solutions – similar to 2008.

My concern is that we Americans are once again being driven by media news cycles and not focusing on the prevailing issues or the future of America. Instead of basing our decisions about the future leadership of America on individual personalities, we must seek out a vision. Sadly, the social culture in America forces us to pay more attention to personas rather that principles. Now, I will be the first to admit that consideration of policy solutions may seem boring, but a base understanding is essential.

 

We have become more drawn to the person than the ideal. And what is lacking is a representation of the embodiment of that American ideal. Some would say that it does not exist, and God knows there are many who are trying to eradicate it – “we are five days away from fundamentally transforming America.”

What is necessary at this time in the current election cycle is for the American electorate to listen, and not be emotional. How do we restore the free enterprise opportunity society in order to get Americans back to work and productive in their own lanes? How do we develop a strategy to defeat militant Islamic terrorism? What needs to be done to reasonably stem the flow of illegal immigrants into America, secure our sovereign borders, yet also streamline our legal immigration system? How do we repair a healthcare system where individual premiums are rising, the individual mandate tax is increasing, and the level of care is decreasing? How do we advance the idea of parents being in charge of educating their children and being responsible for determining their outcomes – not the government?

The current Yin has done an exceptional job at focusing America on emotional “feeling” oriented issues. The reality is that the American public feels less safe. They know their beloved America, the land of individual economic empowerment, is becoming a breeding ground of collective economic enslavement, wealth transfer to grow the dependency society, a playground for social egalitarianism, and abject weakness.

And so we have the rise of the new Yang, a new slogan, but a lack of defined policy vision. The interconnection of the Yin and Yang of politics in America is that demagoguery has no favorite side. It can appear anywhere and finds a way to feed off the other.

As we close out 2015, enjoy a blessed Hanukkah, have a Merry Christmas, and celebrate a joyous and Happy New Year. May your favorite college football team win its bowl game – unless they are playing mine. But was we enter into a pivotal presidential election season, seek out an American leader, not an American celebrity.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

The Housewife of DC From the Arkansas Shore,Madame President

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Let’s be honest: It is just an unfortunate fact that Hillary Clinton stands a good chance of becoming the next president of the United States.

As unappealing as that prospect is, it’s true. It has nothing to do with policy – aside from being old enough, Hillary lacks any qualifications a nation should desire in a leader. It has everything to do with celebrity, and the Clintons are the political Kardashians.

Aside from making millions upon millions of dollars, what do the Kardashians do? Yes, they have businesses now, but they’re all based on, and sell, the celebrity they have. They didn’t create anything; they didn’t start companies that employed thousands of people and then become famous. They did all of that afterwards to wring every last dollar out of that fame. And God bless them for it.

The Kardashians are true capitalists – they saw an opportunity, seized it, and made hundreds of millions of dollars off it. Sure, it all started with a sex tape that only a decade earlier would have had the entire family hanging their heads in shame, but the moral degradation of society they spearheaded aside, they earned their money.

Granted, they earned it through no real talent, skill, intellect or any other attribute that could be considered beneficial to society, but they played the cards they were dealt and made a fortune. They are the embodiment of the American Dream, at least in concept (execution is a different story).

The Clinton family has done pretty much the same thing.

The Kardashian wealth came from patriarch Robert, who made a fortune as a lawyer and businessman. The fame came from a porn tape of then-unknown Kim with a then-famous rapper time has all but forgotten.

The Clinton wealth comes from Bill Clinton being elected president. It’s safe to say that no one in history has milked more personal wealth from past elected office than he has. Hillary’s fame comes from having married him and not divorced him after numerous affairs. Although there (thankfully) wasn’t a sex tape, Hillary’s parlayed her victim status from the Monica Lewinsky affair into a U.S. Senate seat from a state she’d never lived in.

Hillary had gone to good schools and practiced law, but she was nothing special, just Bill’s wife. Kim had grown up around rich and famous people, but no one cared who she was because she hadn’t done anything.

Media attention elevated both, especially after the sex scandals in which they were involved. Sympathy was drummed up for Hillary; curiosity for Kim. But the result was the same: elevated, unearned status to the point of being culturally important.

Hillary Clinton had accomplished nothing in life that hadn’t been accomplished by 100,000 other female lawyers in the country except for one thing – she married a guy who became president. Deciding to live life as an enabler of a sexual predator has rewarded her with fame, incredible wealth and unimaginable power. But she didn’t really earn any of it; it was, for the sake of brevity, given to her.

In a very real sense, Kim Kardashian has accomplished more than Hillary has. Yes, Hillary was twice elected to the Senate, but that came largely as a result of sympathy and a famously inept opponent. New York Democrats essentially cleared the field for her, the general election (after former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani dropped out because he had been diagnosed with cancer) was a formality. It could not have been easier if she’d been appointed.

Hillary had no real qualifications to represent New York in the Senate, and she had no real accomplishments in the Senate. But she was portrayed as a star because of who she was, much like celebrity magazines put Kim on their covers because she exists.

From the Senate, Hillary ran an awful, aimless campaign for the 2008 Democratic Party nomination for president, losing to a man with even fewer achievements on his resume. She was appointed secretary of state not for her ability, but to prevent her from mounting a primary challenge in 2012.

With zero foreign policy experience, Hillary was a disaster running the State Department. Her ineptitude was so obvious from the start that President Obama did not involve her in the most complex foreign policy area on the planet – the Middle East. Three days into his presidency, President Obama created the position of “United States Special Envoy for Middle East Peace” and appointed former Sen. George Mitchell to fill it.

Kim Kardashian is paid to show up to events and be seen as a way to draw attention to the events. She is not expected to say or do anything important. As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton was paid to show up to events, draw attention to them and be seen as showing the United States cared about them. But she didn’t do or say anything important. That job was left to Mitchell.

In many ways the Kardashians are better than the Clintons. Sure, they’ve lowered the bar of celebrity and degrade our culture, but people have to voluntarily choose to empower and enrich them. The Clintons have been empowered and enriched at our expense.

If someone sucks up to a Kardashian it costs only that person. If someone sucks up to a Clinton, it costs all of us. The Kardashians can only annoy; the Clintons can grant government contracts, special permissions, taxpayer dollars, etc., etc.

Given the choice, I’d rather see Kim Kardashian in the White House than Hillary Clinton in 2017. We’ve literally seen everything both have to offer, and although what Kim offers is worthless and damaging, at least she doesn’t complete the Clinton trifecta of being corrupt to boot. (Derek Hunter)

We could call the new show on Bravo: MY Clinton Life! 🙂

Hosted by, this guy…

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The Case For Hillary

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

1) After being accused of racism every time they disagree with the President, Americans will enjoy the change of pace by being accused of sexism every time they disagree with the President.

At least we’d get rid of “race relations” being the problem. We’d replace it with “gender relations” and White Males would STILL be the ultimate enemy!! 🙂

2) America’s military would be unstoppable because of three little words that Hillary would bring to the White House, “Flying Monkey Legions!”

Vast Right Wing Conspiracies would be true. 🙂

3) It would be terrible for our first black President to be the worst POTUS of all time and Hillary can take care of that problem.

4) Americans LOVE dynasties! Next it’s Jeb Bush’s turn. Then Chelsea Clinton. THEN Michelle Obama. Then Jenna Bush. Then Malia Obama and so on and so on into infinity. If Americans didn’t like being ruled by royal families, then you’d think there would have been some small indication of it in our history by now, right? 😉

5) We Americans take pride in giving good value for the money that’s paid to us and all those foreign governments that paid off Hillary when she was Secretary of State would REALLY hit the jackpot if she became President.

You wouldn’t have to worry about whether the President was corrupt because you’d already know she is BEFORE you elected her so nothing would be a surprise. The media wouldn’t would have to cover it as a “scandal” because that would just be Hillary being Hillary so nothing out of the ordinary there.

6) She’ll be a fantastic role model for young women who’ll learn that as long as you marry the right man and ride his coattails at every opportunity – you, too, can succeed!

7) Well, if she could handle being Secretary of State with no problems, then obviously…oh wait, she didn’t, did she?

8) Eight more years of complete and utter servile capitulation to a President of the United States should be enough to destroy the whole liberal mainstream media’s reputation for good.

9) If Hillary were to win, then all the people who tell America how incompetent she’ll be will be able to enjoy being proven right about her over and over again just as they have been about Barack Obama.

10) It’s long since time that small children were shown The Vagina Monologues before the White House Easter Egg Roll.

11) Everybody THINKS he can be President, but for hundreds of years, Americans have insisted on choosing Presidents based on “merit” and “accomplishments.” If both Obama and Hillary can be President, then that proves any undeserving idiot can do the job as long as he or she checks the right diversity box.

12) Despite the many credible claims that the money she made was part of a shady bribe, obviously parlaying $1,000 into $100,000 in highly speculative commodity market trading proves that Hillary Clinton really is…THE SMARTEST WOMAN ON EARTH!

13) Who could possibly be a better role model for young women in America than a politician who has been endorsed by Larry Flynt AND Hookers for Hillary?

14) Replacing Air Force One with a broomstick would mean tens of millions in savings for the taxpayers!

15) Like duh, she’s an incompetent lying socialist who will drive the final nails in America’s coffin after 8 years of Barack Obama and…oh wait, the goal here IS to destroy America, right? Oh, wow…it’s not? Then maybe she’s NOT the right candidate. (John Hawkins)

Naw, she the only one LEFT according to the Media… 🙂

And imagine how how annoyed the Jihadists will be with a Woman in charge! How dare we do something so vulgar and such a heresy! Maybe we can get her to wear a Burka. 🙂

Imagine what Bill could do for fundraiser for her re-election in 2020! The Hookers For Hillary could become his extended family, especially with Bill around to “entertain” them.

Imagine his School Lunch program. Wieners for everyone!

Think of the possibilities! Maybe even get Monica Lewinsky for a Cabinet “position”.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Go ahead, make my day…

Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, concluded, “President Obama is begging to be impeached.”

“For all I know, Obama is preparing to process five million illegal immigrant kids and teenagers into the United States,” Stockman said upon observing border operations near McAllen, Texas.

“He wants us to impeach him now,” Stockman theorized, “before the midterm election because his senior advisors believe that is the only chance the Democratic Party has to avoid a major electoral defeat. Evidently Obama believes impeachment could motivate the Democratic Party base to come out and vote.”

Egging on the mindless to do their Kings bidding? Yeah, I do think he’s that calculating. And yes, I think the Republicans are that stupid.

Imagine how much “right wing extremist” bashing the Liberal media could get out of that circus?

And that’s what they want. The results of King Fiat’s immigration policy, plus ObamaCare failures would fade to black as the Liberal Media when on an all out Nuclear Annihilation Attack against these “extremists”.

They would be Liberal slob heaven.

Vote you us, we aren’t that “extreme”. They are worse, but by Orwellian Doublethink comparison and 24/7 Alinsky bashing they just might win.

And that is all that matters.

The country and it’s people sure as hell don’t.

But I doubt “jar jar” Boehner and company smart enough not to take the bait. And there is a nagging doubt in the back of my mind that says that they want to deliberately lose but look “patriotic” and “strong” while doing it.

That voice won’t go away.

Stockman observed that rather than begin impeachment proceedings now, what the House of Representatives should do is to take away money from the Obama administration.

“The only way we’re going to stop Obama from opening the border is to take away the money he needs to operate,” Stockman concluded. “What we should do is shut down the White House.” (WND)

The House controls the money. Use that power, if your smart enough and brave enough because the Liberal will come at you with Annihilation in their eyes.

The beautiful thing about the Left is that they’ve trained the general public, via the public school system for the last four decades, to believe their blather; and thus anyone who disagrees with “them” is deemed by their ubiquitous foot soldiers to be the scourge of the earth.

Which brings me to their latest bunkum they’ve been bantering about, namely, if you aren’t cool with this tsunami of illegals then you must hate babies and Latinos. Yep, you are an infantophobe and a xenophobe and you must repent, you evil spawn of Satan.

Y’know, if it were just a bunch of nursing infants and their milking mamasitas that are pouring through the mesquite and prickly pear down on the Rio Grande, I might feel a little weird about wanting to send them back to their dreaded casa in their suck-ass country. But what I keep seeing, via the images that have slipped through the cracks of the heavily guarded media, is not a bunch of babies. That is, unless of course, the definition of “baby” has changed to include scruffy gangbangers who’re sporting more tats than a Maori warrior.

Another thing that’s difficult to swallow in their heavily invested and publicly foisted fairy tale is, according to law enforcement and white crackers like the “suspicious” Governor Rick Perry, if that is indeed his real name, is that these “poor babies and their mommies” have committed 8000 rapes and 3000 murders in the last five years in Texas alone. So, if we are to believe the Left regarding who’s coming over the border, then that sure is strange behavior for infants and their nursing moms. (Doug Giles)

So “impeachment” is precisely what they want you do. Go ahead, make their day!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

 

The King’s Rule

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Among the many costs of the Barack Obama presidency is an intentional corrosion for its own political gain of public faith in so many American institutions, among them Congress, the Supreme Court and the media.

If numerous sectors of society are feuding or distrustful of each other, then a well-controlled central authority like a chief executive can more easily rule the pieces. It’s classic Chicago politics, the way the mayor there controls the city’s feuding neighborhood fiefdoms of Democrat pols and workers.

We’re going to examine the American media today and urge some temperance and caution in the now endemic condemnation of the much-reviled MSM for the country’s own self-interest.

To be honest, it has done much to earn widespread public distrust. This stems from the inherent institutional and individual arrogance of its long-time monopoly over the information flow through broadcast networks and large daily newspapers.

And from its laser focus on conflict as “news” and its do-good social agendas that instinctively turn to government intervention instead of far more effective individual responsibility and action. The traditional media’s disconnection from its audience became even more starkly visible with the Internet’s welcome explosion of information sources, many of them responsible.

Reporters Without Borders released its annual World Press Freedom Index the other day. Much of it was predictable. Few would be surprised that China, Syria and North Korea inhabit the bottom rungs of press freedom.

What was shocking to those of us who favor a strong, independent — and, yes, imperfect — media as a constitutional check on government’s power was the ranking of the United States, the world’s largest economy and most enduring democracy.

The U.S. during the fifth year of Obama’s reign plummeted 13 spots to 46th in the world, right between — are you ready? — Rumania and Haiti. The group based that embarrassing ranking largely on the Obama administration’s unusually determined efforts to curb dissent and plug and track down leaks. (For the five countries deemed most free, scroll to the bottom.**)

Not all leaks are bad. With a twinkle in his eye, a knowing politician once authorized me to leak government information with the order: “See that you suppress this widely.”

Trying to gain dominance over each 24-hour news cycle, the Obama administration leaks like a sieve with the advantageous info it wants out — a new cabinet member, EPA policy shift, some nickel-and-dime small ball gimmick Obama intends to announce to placate a segment of his base. None of this is unique to him.

And no president or wannabe likes un-orchestrated leaks.

But no other administration in recent memory has gone to the lengths of this one to plug leaks, catch leakers and intimidate would-be news sources.

Atty. Gen. Eric Holder even signed a court document certifying that a Fox News reporter was a criminal co-conspirator, when he wasn’t, in order to obtain authority to wiretap him, his emails and his parents’ phone to track the reporter’s source.

Then, under oath, Holder told Congress he could not contemplate ever doing such a thing.

Obama is notorious for dodging responsibility, professing ignorance of a problem or blaming others.

In his Super Bowl interview with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, a jolly Obama virtually dismissed the IRS scandal of intimidating conservative groups as a bevy of “bone-head decisions” by confused local agents free of even a “smidgen” of corruption. And the president as victim implied that Fox News harps on the case to drive its own anti-administration agenda.

This from the same cynical mouth that less than nine months ago denounced the same affair as an outrageous abuse of power, promising a thorough investigation to ensure it never ever reoccurred.

Now that the Obama crowd has separated media from many who once trusted it, comes an even more dire threat.

The Federal Communications Commission this spring will launch a nationwide “study” of newsroom values, priorities and processes to see if they meet a list of government “critical information needs.” This will also involve print media over which the FCC has heretofore had no authority under the Constitution.

This process, similar to ones employed by Communist regimes behind the Iron Curtain during the Cold War, is not designed to gather any information at all. It’s designed to sow doubt, fear and intimidate traditionally independent news media into self-censorship, which can be a very powerful tool limiting critical news coverage.

And — oh, look! — there’s an important midterm election coming in nine months.

Americans need not trust, respect or even like the nation’s disparate news media to see this campaign for what it is: A bold political move by an omnivorous government that threatens, like a clogged human artery, to limit the flow of independent information envisioned by the Founding Fathers as so essential to the daily health of this democracy. (IBD)

The Roots of Success Part 1

In 2008, Barack Obama promised, “We’re going to work with your employer to lower the cost of your premiums by up to $2,500 a year.”

Of course, like everything else he promises, he’s LYING. But the American people are too narcissistic and too stupid to know that. And too programmed to put two-and-two together Now.

But middle-income consumers face an estimated 30% rate increase, on average, in California due to several factors tied to the healthcare law.

Some may elect to go without coverage if they feel prices are too high. Penalties for opting out are very small initially. Defections could cause rates to skyrocket if a diverse mix of people don’t sign up for health insurance.

Pam Kehaly, president of Anthem Blue Cross in California, said she received a recent letter from a young woman complaining about a 50% rate hike related to the healthcare law.

“She said, ‘I was all for Obamacare until I found out I was paying for it,'” Kehaly said

“This is when the actual sticker shock comes into play for people,” said Gerald Kominski, director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. “There are winners and losers under the Affordable Care Act.”

Fullerton resident Jennifer Harris thought she had a great deal, paying $98 a month for an individual plan through Health Net Inc. She got a rude surprise this month when the company said it would cancel her policy at the end of this year. Her current plan does not conform with the new federal rules, which require more generous levels of coverage.

Now Harris, a self-employed lawyer, must shop for replacement insurance. The cheapest plan she has found will cost her $238 a month. She and her husband don’t qualify for federal premium subsidies because they earn too much money, about $80,000 a year combined.

“It doesn’t seem right to make the middle class pay so much more in order to give health insurance to everybody else,” said Harris, who is three months pregnant. “This increase is simply not affordable.”

Blue Shield of California sent termination letters to 119,000 customers last month whose plans don’t meet the new federal requirements. About two-thirds of those people will experience a rate increase from switching to a new health plan, according to the company.

HMO giant Kaiser Permanente is canceling coverage for about half of its individual customers, or 160,000 people, and offering to automatically enroll them in the most comparable health plan available.

The 16 million Californians who get health insurance through their employers aren’t affected. Neither are individuals who have “grandfathered” policies bought before March 2010, when the healthcare law was enacted. It’s estimated that about half of policyholders in the individual market have those older plans. (LA Times)

So they won’t see the 1000 lb gorilla in the room and vote for Liberals again. Because, it’s not hurting them, after all.

And if it doesn’t hurt them personally, it’s ok.

All these cancellations were prompted by a requirement from Covered California, the state’s new insurance exchange. The state didn’t want to give insurance companies the opportunity to hold on to the healthiest patients for up to a year, keeping them out of the larger risk pool that will influence future rates.

Forcing good consumers out of their plans and their doctors to make the exchange look better.

Gee, Obama didn’t promise that either. 🙂

Here’s another one:

Forbes: A growing consensus of IT experts, outside and inside the government, have figured out a principal reason why the website for Obamacare’s federally-sponsored insurance exchange is crashing. Healthcare.gov forces you to create an account and enter detailed personal information before you can start shopping. This, in turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the government verifies your information and decides whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS bureaucrats knew this would make the website run more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s insurance plans would scare people away.

HHS didn’t want users to see Obamacare’s true costs

“Healthcare.gov was initially going to include an option to browse before registering,” report Christopher Weaver and Louise Radnofsky in the Wall Street Journal. “But that tool was delayed, people familiar with the situation said.” Why was it delayed? “An HHS spokeswoman said the agency wanted to ensure that users were aware of their eligibility for subsidies that could help pay for coverage, before they started seeing the prices of policies.” (Emphasis added.)

Misdirection? Never sen that from Obama and his Alinsky-ites before…:)

The answer is that Obamacare wasn’t designed to help healthy people with average incomes get health insurance. It was designed to force those people to pay more for coverage, in order to subsidize insurance for people with incomes near the poverty line, and those with chronic or costly medical conditions.

P.T. Barnum couldn’t have done better.

The middle class that liberals go on about endlessly will pay more for their insurance so the poor can have more.

After all, socialist societies don’t have a middle class, do they… 🙂

Wayne Root: The GOP needs to stop calling ObamaCare a “trainwreck.” That means it’s a mistake, or accident. That means it’s a gigantic flop, or failure. It’s NOT. 

Message to the GOP: This isn’t a game. This isn’t tiddly-winks. This is a serious, purposeful attempt to highjack America and destroy capitalism. 

This is a brilliant, cynical, and purposeful attempt to damage the U.S. economy, kill jobs, and bring down capitalism. 

It’s not a failure, it’s Obama’s grand success. 

It’s not a “trainwreck,” ObamaCare is a suicide attack. He wants to hurt us, to bring us to our knees, to capitulate- so we agree under duress to accept big government.

Obama’s hero and mentor was Saul Alinsky — a radical Marxist intent on destroying capitalism. Alinksky’s stated advice was to call the other guy “a terrorist” to hide your own intentions. 

To scream that the other guy is “ruining America,” while you are the one actually plotting the destruction of America. To claim again and again…in every sentence of every speech…that you are “saving the middle class,” while you are busy wiping out the middle class.

The GOP is so stupid they can’t see it. There are no mistakes here. This is a planned purposeful attack.

I said that years ago, myself.

The real sign that this is a purposeful attack upon capitalism is how many Obama administration members and Democratic Congressmen are openly calling Tea Party Republicans and anyone who wants to stop ObamaCare “terrorists.” 

There’s the clue. Even the clueless GOP should be able to see that.

But they are too busy agreeing with them.

And the people are too programmed by “Vote for me the other guy’s an asshole”

The asshole being the person who disagrees with the Alinsky Liberal!

Here’s to the successful launch of ObamaNation.

To be continued tomorrow.

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

The Grand Distraction

Wanna know how warped the Left is?

From here…

“As we peer into society’s future, we — you and I, and our government — must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”

President Dwight D. Eisenhower (D)
Farewell Address to the Nation; January 17, 1961

To Eternity…

Here are Obama’s thoughts on the debt limit in 2006, when he voted against increasing the ceiling:

    The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

In 2007 and in 2008, when the Senate voted to increase the limit by $850 billion and $800 billion respectively, Obama did not bother to vote. (He did vote for TARP, which increased the debt limit by $700 billion.)

I guess he was running for President by then…funny that…It was all for show. He didn’t mean it then, he was just be a partisan contrarian, and he doesn’t mean it now.

Now you get the latest and most whacked….

Actor Danny Glover (who I respect as an actor only) folks.

“I don’t know if you know the genesis of the right to bear arms,” he said. “The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect themselves from slave revolts, and from uprisings by Native Americans.”

“A revolt from people who were stolen from their land or revolt from people whose land was stolen from, that’s what the genesis of the second amendment is,” he continued.

It isn’t. But it feeds the ideological beast so it must be true.

Alleged Non-Liberal “Journalist” CBS’s Bob Schieffer: The NRA are Nazis.

The Obama era of liberal civility just keeps on getting better. A gun control discussion that should be about policy has once again given way to leftist bloodlust. As usual, everything with them becomes personal. The multi-billionth example comes from CBS correspondent Bob Schieffer. Stressing the urgency to restrict the freedoms of law-abiding citizens, Schieffer lamented that “defeating the Nazis, was a much more formidable task than taking on the gun lobby.”

BOB SCHIEFFER: …Let’s remember: there was considerable opposition when Lyndon Johnson went to the Congress and…presented some of the most comprehensive civil rights legislation in the history of this country. Most people told him he couldn’t get it done, but he figured out a way to do it. And that’s what Barack Obama is going to have to do…what happened in Newtown was probably the worst day in this country’s history since 9/11. We found Osama bin Laden. We tracked him down. We changed the way that we dealt with that problem. Surely, finding Osama bin Laden; surely, passing civil rights legislation, as Lyndon Johnson was able to do; and before that, surely, defeating the Nazis, was a much more formidable task than taking on the gun lobby.

SCHIEFFER: This is a turning point in this country, and the President is going to have to do more than just make a speech about it. This is one of the best speeches I’ve ever heard him deliver, but it’s going to take more than that from the White House. He’s going to have to get his hands dirty. He’s going to have to get in there and – and work this problem until he gets it done. But unless we figure out a way to make sure that something like Newtown never happens again, we’re not the country that we once were. I think we still are. I think there’s hope. I think something’s going to happen here.

So being for the Second Amendment is now Racist and Nazi-esque. Gee, where has this process of mental limitation occurred before on the left?

Every time they want something from their ideological grab-bag.

Fascinating.

So yet again, if you disagree with the LEFT eventually you are are a Racist Nazi in the end. 🙂

IBD: President Obama has settled on a political communications strategy for his final term that begins Sunday:

Talk about admirable aspirations, ignore the nation’s economic and fiscal realities, keep everyone fighting amongst themselves over anything at hand while calmly deploring all the disputes, rancor and chaos that this president has helped to engineer.

“My starting point is not to worry about the politics,” Obama said with a straight face. “My starting point is to focus on what makes sense, what works, what should we be doing to make sure that our children are safe and that we’re reducing the incidents of gun violence.”

Everyone faint in awe of HIS GREATNESS, The King.

Such stunning cynicism has actually worked pretty well for the Real Good Talker this past year.

Never mind stratospheric millions of jobless, an amazingly ineffective economic stimulus program, historic highs in poverty rates, a national debt larger than a national economy and nearly 50 million people collecting food stamps tossed out like free candy from a parade float.

Instead, talk about educating every single American child for their own fair shot at some kind of idealized future, delivering better healthcare to millions more people for less money with no additional doctors and protecting ill-defined middle-class Americans from someone doing something to them.

None of it will ever come to pass on his grand rhetorical scale. But the community organizer doesn’t care. By the time enough figure it out, Obama will be back in the Pacific golfing with Choom Gang buddies while another ghostwriter drafts the next autobiography.

Now that he’s got Washington and Republicans fighting over how to address his briefly postponed sequester cuts and a national debt that grows by $2.8 million every single minute of every single day, Obama this morning launches his next divisive distraction: More controls on firearms.

While the media has been full of stories of booming post-election gun sales, less attention has been focused on another fact: As the estimated count of non-military U.S. firearms now exceeds 310 million, the annual number of gun homicides has declined strikingly: From more than 17,000 in 1993 to 9,900 in 2011.

No one believes that anything Washington orders will stop the awful occasional outbreaks by a few twisted souls among the more than 315 million Americans. But it’s admirable to try, isn’t it? It sounds pretty good, doesn’t it? Can you prove it won’t work?

And fortuitously for Obama and his mob from Chicago, the nation’s newest gun homicide capital, a renewed emotional if useless, constitutional debate over bearing arms will keep folks from discussing other issues potentially more embarrassing to this White House.

Like Benghazi. Fast & Furious. Unemployment. Inflation. Foreign Policy. Energy Policy. ObamaCare…

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

 

Pyrrhic Victory For The People

Economy: President Obama and his acolytes are gushing over his fiscal cliff victory. But the glow isn’t likely to last long, once everyone figures out that the tax hikes Obama wrangled from Republicans only made matters worse.

But this wasn’t a battle about economics to begin with, as you will see…

Let’s look at what Obama has managed to achieve with his $620 billion tax hike on the wealthy and the boost in the payroll tax rate.

• They’ll hurt the economy. Economists are admitting the fiscal deal will slow the already sluggish economic growth.

Moody’s Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi says the higher taxes on the wealthy and the increase in payroll taxes will shave close to 1 point off GDP growth this year and result in 600,000 fewer new jobs.

Pantheon Macroeconomic Advisors chief economist Ian Shepherdson figures the deal will cut GDP by 1.5 points. And Gallup’s chief economist Dennis Jacobe says the deal has created a “higher probability of recession — just the opposite of what fixing the fiscal cliff was intended to do.”

• They’ll do nothing to fix the debt crisis. Even with the Obama tax hikes, deficits are likely to reach nearly $1 trillion this year and top $6 trillion over the next decade. Worse, by slowing economic growth, the tax increase makes tackling the nation’s debt crisis all the harder. Getting deficits under control means tackling the massive growth in entitlement spending. But Obama still hasn’t put forward a credible plan to do so. If he fails again, he’ll pay a price with the public. And if he does put forward a plan, he’ll find himself at war with his own party.

• They won’t raise as much as advertized. History is clear: Tax hikes rarely produce as much revenues as expected, particularly when they’re targeted at the rich, who can more easily avoid the new taxes.

President George H.W. Bush’s tax hikes in 1990 generated $135 billion less than expected. And revenues as a share of GDP came in lower than predicted after Clinton’s tax hikes went into effect.

But this was not about economics per se, it was about Ideology. And he won that battle, the only one he was actually fighting.

Want more proof: The Evil scourge from hell “The Bush Tax Cuts” that the Democrats have been railing and wailing about incessantly for years now were made permanent, mostly.

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) (BOY IS THAT AN ORWELLIAN TITLE TO BEAT THEM ALL! 🙂 ), which President Obama signed into law last night, makes permanent 82 percent of President Bush’s tax cuts.

The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) and Congressional Budget Office estimate that making permanent all of the Bush tax cuts would have cost $3.4 trillion over 2013-2022.

“The Bush tax cuts” has been practically a curse word for Liberals these last few years. Nothing was more evil than them, THEY are almost exclusively responsible for the crash in 2008 according to them (that and the Iraq War).

They are so evil, they just made them permanent for most people and not only gave up “getting rid” of them they made a selling point for how great they are and how they are “protecting the middle class”.

That tells you it was just an Alinsky tactic to win the Political battle. It wasn’t about economics at all.

Well, played, sir. Well Played. And the Ministry of Truth was in on it, or they were too busy being cheerleaders to care.

• They’ll hurt the cause of tax reform. By adding still more brackets to the tax code, Obama has made it harder to get needed tax changes enacted. His own deficit commission urged him to push for legislation that lowered tax rates and broadened the tax base to make the code simpler and spur economic growth.

Again, this wasn’t about the economy, it was about his ideology.

“Jar Jar” Boehner”: “You’ve managed to kill everyone else but like a poor marksman, you keep missing the target“-Admiral James Kirk of the USS Enterprise.

This chess, not poker. Obama is not bluffing and can’t be bluffed. This is ideology, not economics.

Charles Krauthammer: the ultimatum was designed to exploit and exacerbate internal Republican divisions. It worked perfectly. Boehner’s attempted finesse (Plan B), which would have raised rates but only for those making more than $1 million, collapsed amid an open rebellion from a good quarter of the Republican caucus.

At which point, power passed from the House to the Senate, where a deal was brokered. By the time the Senate bill reached the House, there was no time or room for maneuver. Checkmate. Obama neutralized the one body that had stymied him during the last two years.

2) Ideological Breakthrough.

Obama’s ultimate ambition is to break the nation’s 30-year thrall of low taxes — so powerful that those who defied the Reaganite norm paid heavily for it. Walter Mondale’s acceptance speech at the 1984 convention promising to raise taxes ended his campaign before it began. President George H.W. Bush’s no-new-taxes reversal cost him a second term.

On this, too, Obama is succeeding.

He not only got his tax increase passed. He did it with public opinion behind him.

Why are higher taxes so important to him?

First, as a means: A high-tax economy is liberalism’s only hope for sustaining and enlarging the entitlement state. It provides the funds for enlightened adventures in everything from algae to ObamaCare.

Second, as an end in itself. Fundamentally, Obama is a leveler. The community organizer seeks, above all, to reverse the growing inequality that he attributes to ruthless-Reaganism. Now, however, clothed in the immense powers of the presidency, he can actually engage in unadorned redistributionism. As in Tuesday night’s $620 billion wealth transfer.

Upon losing the House in 2010, the leveler took cover for the next two years. He wasn’t going to advance his real agenda through the Republican House anyway, and he needed to win re-election.

Now he’s won. The old Obama is back. He must not be underestimated. He’s deftly leveraged his class-war-themed election victory (a) to secure a source of funding (albeit still small) for the bloated welfare state, (b) to carry out an admirably candid bit of income redistribution and (c) to fracture the one remaining institutional obstacle to his ideological agenda.

Not bad for two months’ work.

The Republicans are still playing the wrong game.

Thomas Purcell: Right after the financial deal package was sent to Congress this week, the President held a press conference on the bill.
 
I say press conference on the bill, but I mean it only in the loosest sense of word, it was more like a campaign speech. Except, of course, he isn’t running for office. Because he isn’t running for office I can only really apply one answer for it: a propaganda speech. 
 
Since he didn’t take any questions or mention any detail of the packaged bill I have to assume he was just trying to tell the American people how great he was.
 
He even used people as cardboard cut-out props to sell his agenda to applauding sheep. Dictators, tyrants and false gods use the same technique. To make their case to the people they stand in crowd of people who support him and show that world the he is loved, he is right and therefore, he ideas must the right ones.
Obama used the same technique during the Obamacare debates. A mob of fronted people stood around them, and even wore white labs coats. It looked like Trident commercial, ‘3 out 4 doctors approve of this bill’. Only problem was the real doctors who are out in field every day don’t support the bill at all. In fact, several doctors in the white lab coats behind Obama that day have offices that are private pay only, and don’t accept Medicare.
And the mass retirement that’s coming will be very painful for the people, but not for the politicians and certainly not for our Dear Leader.
 
One has to assume that the people props used for the fiscal cliff bill are as phony as the supposed deal signed up on the Hill. Certainly in a few days word is going to get out who they are and it’s certain they will be as phony as the President. More than likely they will be party leaders, political hacks and willful stooges.
The President has yet to answer for this blatantly propagandist technique worthy of a second rate used car salesman. None of the White House press corps asked an obvious question; who are these people and how did they get here so quickly. After all, those people had to be ready on moment’s notice, so they had to be interviewed and pre-screened by the Secret Service and had a background check on them. Those sorts of things can’t be done in a few hours; it takes a few days at least. Therefore it meant the President planned that ‘spontaneous’ press conference ahead of time.
 
So much for honesty and transparency in the Presidency.
 
It seems that no one wants to, or no one has the courage to, ask these questions. More importantly, no one bothers to ask the President why he feels the need to do so. Is it merely propaganda for the willing masses to gobble up with a spoon, a self-aggrandizement to soothe his ever flagging ego? Or is it more sinister, a prelude to his trying to manipulate the voters again into giving him power in the 2014 elections, or worse, somehow finagling a third – or more – term.
The Ministry of Truth isn’t there to ASK him questions, they are there to make him look like a God. Nothing more, nothing less.

It begs more questions than it answers, and the answers to questions don’t bode well for the American people regardless of what they might be.

It’s a Pyrrhic victory for the people, but since, for Obama, this wasn’t an economic fight but a Political Victory expect him to go to the well again and expect yet another Crisis that must not go to waste. And expect the Republicans to cave again.

Meanwhile, your tired, your poor, your huddled masses will be stuck with high taxes and even higher inflation and debt.

Now that’s a victory worth celebrating! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

Over the Cliff

More from “Jar Jar Binks” Boehner:

Under the leadership of House Speaker John Boehner (R.-Ohio), the 112th House of Representatives has thus far approved legislation that has increased the debt of the federal government by approximately $18,944 for per American household.

The 112th House of Representatives has achieved this in a little more than 20 months time—and it may not be done yet enacting laws to approve new federal borrowing and spending.

On March 1, 2011, Boehner and President Barack Obama cut their first short-term federal spending deal. That deal took effect on March 4, 2011. Since then all new borrowing and spending by the federal government has been approved in laws enacted by Boehner’s House consistent with its constitutional power to control the borrowing and spending by the federal government. (KFYI)

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

AP
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY): There’s a lot of talk right now about an impending fiscal cliff. But we already went over a cliff economically in this country a long time ago.The current debate over tax hikes is an empty one built upon a false premise. The debate is whether raising tax rates will address our current crisis. The premise is that it is a lack of taxation that has led to the crisis. Both are hopelessly wrong.President Obama’s proposed tax increases on the top 2% of earners would fund the federal government for about eight days. Even if we taxed Americans earning over $1 million on 100% of their income, we would raise only about $600 billion in revenue.

Taxing citizens at this level is a tyranny even Europe hasn’t reached, and still it would only address about one-third of our deficit.

If one actually does the math, “taxing the rich” turns out to be no real solution at all, only fantasyland rhetoric.

Every dollar the government takes is another dollar used unproductively. Every dollar removed from the private sector and wasted in the hands of bureaucrats is a dollar that will not be used to purchase goods, to pay for services or to meet a payroll.

Every dollar the government ever takes — today, tomorrow and forever — is an attack on jobs and the economy.

Instead of sitting around trying to think of new ways to vote away someone else’s money, Washington leaders should finally begin to address the real crisis that has threatened us long before the current handwringing: spending.

With a $16 trillion national debt and well over $1 trillion annually in deficits, we barreled over the edge of fiscal insolvency long before this month.

Why do we lurch from deadline to deadline with no apparent action on our nation’s problems until the next deadline approaches? I presented Social Security and Medicare reform to the Senate over a year ago. I directly spoke to the president and vice president about my plan. And their response? Absolutely nothing!

Is it any wonder people are fed up with their government? The president announces we have no time for spending reforms, but when the deadline passes I predict not one committee will step into the breach to begin the process of reform.

Why? Because Democratic leadership still insists that Social Security and Medicare are just fine. Meanwhile, Social Security actuaries tell us that Social Security this year will spend $165 billion more than it receives. Medicare will spend $3 for every $1 it collects. Yet, the president says he doesn’t have time for entitlement reform.

The “fiscal cliff” scenario has come and gone. The only question now is: How do we recover?

The only solution is to cut spending. It’s no secret to anyone, except perhaps Washington leaders, that our current levels of spending are not only unsustainable, but the main culprit in our fiscal crisis.

Opponents of spending reductions — whether Democrats who insist on maintaining and expanding current domestic spending, or Republicans who insist on maintaining and expanding current Pentagon spending — make the case that any cuts to their preferred parts of government would be “Draconian” or “devastating.”

Like tax hikes, this too is a false narrative. According to the Congressional Budget Office, nominal spending in 2008 was $2.5 trillion. The outlays for the 2013 budget are an estimated $3.5 trillion.

This means the federal government plans on spending $1 trillion more next year than it did four years ago. By any measure, this is a significant and dramatic growth in spending.

Estimated revenue for 2013 is $2.9 trillion if the Bush tax cuts expire. Our 2012 revenues were $2.4 trillion, which included the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts would only make a difference of $500 billion this year — about one third of our entire deficit — but would also further harm our economy due to the job market decline that always accompanies any rise in taxes. History has proved this point time and again.

But if we spent only at 2008 levels combined with the revenues of 2012, next year we would have a deficit as small as $89 billion. An $89 billion deficit would represent less than 1% of GDP. The 2012 deficit was as high as 7.3% of GDP.

Did anyone think the size of government we had in 2008 was somehow not enough government? This is how drastically spending has increased in just the last four years.

Those who argue we can’t cut spending are basically saying that our federal government was far too small when Barack Obama entered the White House and that now we can survive only if government continues to spend at its current level. I know few if any Americans who honestly believe this, Republican or Democrat.

It’s also hard to imagine reasonable people actually believing that our government spending this obscene amount of money is somehow what makes our economy tick.

A real plan would extend the tax rates we’ve had for 12 years, reform entitlements and examine any and every way to significantly cut spending. Right now, House GOP leadership seems to want Republicans to be the party that raises taxes just a little less than the Democrats. This will not do.

Republicans are supposed to be the party of limited government and low taxes. These are our most core and basic principles. I don’t think it’s time to change who we are or what we stand for. It will not help our economy. It will also defeat the purpose of even having a Republican Party.

And that’s what Sith Lord Obama wants, By the way… “Those are not the Spending Cuts you are looking for…”:)
Sith Apprentice Harry Reid: “Now is the time to show leadership, not kick the can down the road,” Reid said. “Speaker Boehner should focus his energy on forging a large-scale deficit reduction agreement. It would be a shame if Republicans abandoned productive negotiations due to pressure from the tea party, as they have time and again.” (NBC)
But nothing the Democrats propose actually cuts spending or the deficit in anyway that is actually meaningful. But that’s the trick.
Make the stupid people think that it is meaningful and the Republicans are getting in the way so they take the fall for it when it fails miserably.
It’s tactical. not practical.
Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals: Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have.
“The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”
According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”
So Boehner Proposes and Obama and Reid Dispose, even if it’s a plan that essentially mimics on their own it still is “protecting the rich” and is not “good enough”.
Simple. 🙂

“He (President Barack Obama) is not willing to accept a deal that doesn’t ask enough of the very wealthiest in taxes and instead shifts the burden to the middle class and seniors,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said in a statement. “The president is hopeful that both sides can work out remaining differences and reach a solution so we don’t miss the opportunity in front of us today.”

Boehner’s spokesman said: “The White House’s position defies common sense.”

“After spending months saying we must ask for more from millionaires and billionaires, how can they reject a plan that does exactly that?” spokesman Brendan Buck said. “By once again moving the goal posts, the president is threatening every American family with higher taxes.”

Because that isn’t the goal, Jar Jar. This is Chess not Poker. Simple, really. 🙂
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

The Dance

Last week, the White House delivered to Capitol Hill its opening plan: $1.6 trillion in higher taxes over a decade, hundreds of billions of dollars in new spending, a possible extension of the temporary Social Security payroll tax cut and enhancing the president’s power to raise the national debt limit.

In exchange, the president would back $600 billion in spending cuts, including $350 billion from Medicare and other health programs. But he also wants $200 billion in new spending for jobless benefits, public works projects and aid for struggling homeowners. His proposal for raising the ceiling on government borrowing would make it virtually impossible for Congress to block him.

Republicans said they responded in closed-door meetings with laughter and disbelief.

That works out to spending cuts for 3 months of overspending by the Obama wannas for Trillions in new taxes. And he gets more power to boot!

Wow! that’s a bargain!!

No wonder there was laughter.

“It’s welcome that they’re recognizing that revenues are going to have to go up. But they haven’t told us anything about how far rates should go up … (and) who should pay higher taxes,” Geithner said.

So we can roast them alive for it. Notice, the Democrats aren’t saying much at all about their actual plans and their actual specific cuts… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

 Alinky’s Rules for Radicals: Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”
In an interview with Candy Crowley on CNN’s State of the Union, Geithner claimed that the Obama Administration proposal, which includes various spending provisions intended as economic stimulus, had “huge support in the business community” and that it would be “good for the economy.”The Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of the fiscal cliff projected that up to 300,000 jobs could be lost over the next two years if top tax rates were to rise.

 

“There’s not going to be an agreement without rates going up… If they are going to force higher rates on virtually all Americans because they’re unwilling to let tax rates go up on 2 percent of Americans, then, I mean that’s the choice they’re going to have to make.”

The Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of the fiscal cliff strongly advised against tax rate hikes and recommended that the best way to raise tax revenue is through deduction reform [pdf], not through rate hikes.

 

Increases in marginal tax rates on labor would tend to reduce the amount of labor supplied to the economy, whereas increases in revenues of a similar magnitude from broadening the tax base would probably have a smaller negative impact or even a positive impact in the supply in labor.

What Geithner and the Obama Administration are pushing for will hurt the economy far more than the approach that Speaker John Boehner has advocated. To be fair, Republicans have not been specific enough in their deductions reform proposals, but the Obama Administration’s ideological inflexibility when it comes to tax rates makes it nearly impossible to deal with them.

And they like it that way. You have to do what they want or else face the wrath of the Ministry of Truth.

After all, he has to feed the Class Envy beast. It’s eternally hungry for more.

Thomas Purcell: Team Obama is claiming Americans are not paying their fair share in taxes and has proposed increasing income taxation (albeit of people earning 250k or more) and postponing spending cuts until after the economy recovers more. Furthermore, he has argued that we should return to the ‘Clinton era tax schedules’ when we ran a surplus.

 
I’m all for that, assuming we return to Clinton era spending levels, and if I were the GOP that’s the deal I would argue for.
 
Ultimately though, what defines fair share? Here are some head spinning numbers.
 
There are approximately 114,825,428 households in the US (US Census numbers)
 
The average income of those households is 46,326 dollars. (ed note- using raw data to achieve an average mean result rather than a median result, this number would be closer to 102, 000, resulting in a number similar to the national GDP of about 13 trillion–see below)
 
If you multiply that out, you come to 5,319,402,777,528 – or 5.3 trillion dollars of annual income.
 
However, Team Obama’s proposed spending plan for 2013 is 3.803 trillion dollars to run the federal government.
 
Essentially, he wants to spend 60+ percent of your income next year—and that’s not even counting state and local taxes. A small tax increase will little to no difference on that ridiculously oversized budget, but it could have a dramatic negative impact on the economy. If you take out all the households below the poverty line, the federal government would only run for about 8 months before imploding.
 
It gets worse.
 
Assuming you factor in all the state and local taxes the government takes in, from state income taxes down to the local parking tickets, the GAO reports that as of last year the state and federal government (in total) raked in 5.1 trillion dollars nationally—OR 98% OF THE TOTAL (MEAN) INCOME GENERATED IN THE NATION LAST YEAR! (ed note– or approximately 33-43%– depending on budgetary calculations– of the total nation’s GDP on absolute raw personal income)
 
If you are wondering how that is possible, you have to realize that the GDP (gross domestic product) of the country is 15 trillion dollars and therefore as money exchanges hands taxation takes a hidden bite of it. You don’t directly feel it in your wallet, since income taxes are a small percentage of overall revenue. You feel it indirectly, as jobs are lost, your dollar gets pinched and prices go up while wages go down. It’s one reason why gas is 4 bucks a gallon and your grocery bill has doubled in the last 4 years.
 
Government is soon poised to make more money off of our businesses and labor than we are.
 
As for those ‘Clinton tax rates’ let’s examine that too.
 
In 2007, the national GDP was approximately 14.5 trillion dollars, the same as it is now—no growth in 5 years. The federal government spending plan was an astonishing 2.7 trillion dollars, almost a trillion dollars LESS than we are spending now- but at least Bush was taking in 2.3 trillion in taxes on essentially the same sized economy we have now. Clinton’s GDP numbers?  1.8 trillion in spending—more than half of what Obama was spending – on an 11 trillion dollar economy. As for the median income in 2000 (Clinton’s last year,) it was 42,148 on 106 million households (4.4 trillion in income), so the federal government was only consuming 30% of your tax dollar rather than Obama’s 60%. (ed note– again using mean income averages, that would be about half (15-30%) but the ratio relationship would be essentially the same since mean incomes from that time period were also flat)
 
So please, don’t tell me the government needs more revenues, it has almost entire income of the American people now, double that of ‘Clinton’s tax rates’ and wants more, despite being able to historically run fine on much less. What government needs to do is SPEND less, and get more productivity out of what it spends. 
 
Time for some fiscal belt tightening, and to stop redistributing the wealth of this nation.
Not going to happen. Washington runs on Drug Money. (the addiction to money is the drug). They just have to figure out how to make it look like they care and rob John to pay Paul, George, and Ringo. 🙂
But make it good political theatre so it looks convincing, and not a pantomine.
Too many times during this last Presidential election, an important message about conservatism was lost in the debate due to poorly chosen words. The art of communication has almost been lost in the past few generations and that lost art is being exploited by political opponents and forced politicians into the game of essentially not saying anything important in order to avoid saying the wrong thing.
Unless you’re a Liberal, then the Ministry of Truth will cover for you. But if you’re not, you’ll be hung out to dry for even the merest perceivable hint of the “wrong thing”. Even if it doesn’t exist, if it did exist and was advantageous to the Left they would do it anyways.
And that’s what the Republicans don’t understand, I think.
But then again, as I have said before, I’m just a white “racist” “homophobe” “misogynist” Conservative, what do I know.
And I’m a terrible Dancer. 🙂

 

Fear is Hope 2012

FEAR IS HOPE

Because they are constantly talking about hope. But all they do is spread fear, anger, envy, and other negative emotions.

So Fear must therefore be Hope.

“He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”-Orwell.

And since the liberals view of the past decade is one of total evil and you should fear that evil coming back, and you should have hope for a brighter, more vibrant America under their rule than letting that evil back in, Fear is Hope.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”-Orwell

And there can’t be more deceit going on now than in any recent memory.

“It’s still fear versus hope; the past versus the future,” Obama said from Cleveland, Ohio Sept 8th, “It’s still a choice between sliding backward and moving forward. That’s what this election is about. That’s the
choice you’ll face in November.”

Mind you, that was September 2010. Sounds like now doesn’t it! 🙂
The same tune. The same Pied Piper.The same Rats.

Hope lays in the Democrats and only the Democrats. We will save you!

FEAR IS HOPE

War is Peace

Freedom is Slavery

Ignorance is Strength

I wrote this almost 2 years ago now. It’s still true.
https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/09/10/the-4th-precept/

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

In another sign of the ongoing jobs recession, fully 44 states saw their unemployment rates climb in July, according to state-level data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

As a result, more than three years after the economic recovery officially started under President Obama, 10 states still have jobless rates of 9% or higher. (IBD)

The national unemployment rate has been over 8% for nearly 4 years straight.

But confront a liberal and all they’ll say is “well he’s created 4 million jobs” and that’s it. That’s all you’ll get.

Deception and misdirection is all they want to give and all you’ll get.

This doesn’t even keep up with the population growth and the retiring of baby boomers that started 2 years ago.

There are now 305 million Americans (it was 250 in 1990). In just 12 years there is projected to be 352 million. And how many millions will have retired and expect Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security to be their own personal bank account?

But the Left will never tell you that.

But if you disagree with them you must be a rich-loving, poor-hating SOB!

In times of of universal deceit the truth is revolutionary. 🙂

FEAR IS HOPE

“Spreading the Wealth” by Stanley Kurtz

“Re-elect him and you’ll see that he is after the pocketbooks of a whole lot more than just 1% of us,” he warned in the book. “His real target is America’s middle class, suburbanites in particular.”

Added Kurtz, a senior fellow at the Ethics & Public Policy Center: “Many suburban voters now planning to support him will find their incomes and their children’s schools the targets of his redistributive schemes in a second term. The 1% slogan is a sham. If your income is in the top 50%, Obama is after you.”

Citing recent White House policy meetings with radical community organizers, Kurtz warns that Obama is saving his most jarring initiatives for a second term, when he no longer has to court the middle class.

They’ll see “concerted moves to force regional tax-base sharing on the states,” he said, “and federal pressure to equalize urban and suburban school funding.”

Kurtz, an expert on Obama’s community-organizing days, says the president is following the playbook of his philosophical mentor, Saul Alinsky.

The socialist Alinsky wrote in “Rules for Radicals” that the best way to revolutionize society is to convince the middle class you are on its side. That requires talking and dressing like that group of Americans while issuing bland slogans about “hope” and “change.”

“Tactics must begin with the experience of the middle class, accepting their aversion to rudeness, vulgarity and conflict,” Alinsky said. This will anesthetize middle America “prior to the social surgery to come.”

“Start them off easy,” he said, “don’t scare them off.”

Alinsky and his disciples believe the suburbs create “structural racism” and “economic segregation.”

The goal is to abolish them by pushing urban poor into the suburbs through a combination of discrimination lawsuits and regulations while redistributing suburban wealth to the cities through “regional equity” programs.

Alinsky’s followers believe the middle class is racist and greedy. This notion, Kurtz notes, is what drew Obama to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s church and its attacks on the “the pursuit of middleclassness.”

Kurtz says Obama’s stealth plan to abolish the suburbs includes:

• Forcing bedroom communities to build subsidized housing units under the threat of HUD lawsuits.

• Forcing regional tax-redistribution plans on the states by conditioning receipt of federal funding on such “regional equity plans,” which are now being formulated under the administration’s Sustainable Communities Initiative.

• Using the carrot of federal funds to usurp state and local control of schools.

• Forcing public schools to adopt politicized curricula and lower education standards, which are now being formulated under the administration’s Common Core Initiative.

The president’s talk about defending and helping the middle class is essentially a smoke screen. Behind the scenes, he and his Alinsky pals are scheming to redistribute the wealth of the suburban middle class. (IBD)

FEAR IS HOPE

And CHANGE is only good if their is no change, in leadership.

When he becomes free to do whatever he wants because he no longer has to pander to anyone. He can just do it. The Executive Order Fiat President who is more “flexible” because he is not Chained by re-election.

Now if that doesn’t scare you, you’re a Liberal.

That’s real FEAR.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Putting the *Me* in Mea Culpa

Back in early 2009, President-elect Barack Obama was asked on “Meet the Press” how quickly he could create jobs. Oh, very fast, he said. He’d already consulted with a gaggle of governors, and “all of them have projects that are shovel-ready.” When Obama revealed the members of his energy team, he explained that they were part of his effort to get started on “shovel-ready projects all across the country.” When he unveiled his education secretary, he assured everyone that he was going to get started “helping states and local governments with shovel-ready projects.”

In interviews, job summits and press conferences, it was shovel-ready this, shovel-ready that. Search the White House website for the term “shovel-ready” and you’ll drown in press releases about all the shovels ready to shove shovel-ready projects into the 21st century, where no shovel is left behind.

Only now it turns out that the president was shoveling something all right when he was talking about shovel-ready jobs — a whole pile of steaming something. (Jonah Goldberg)

In the magazine article, Mr. Obama reflects on his presidency, admitting that he let himself look too much like “the same old tax-and-spend Democrat,” realized too late that “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects” and perhaps should have “let the Republicans insist on the tax cuts” in the stimulus.

http://www.ihatethemedia.com/obama-no-shovel-ready-jobs-krauthammer-pounces

“Well, that is quite an admission. You know, a year and a half and half a trillion dollars later he says these things that I talked about endlessly don’t exist (“shovel ready jobs”). It’s not actually surprising that he doesn’t know what a shovel ready project is. Having never worked in the private sector he wouldn’t be sure what a project is and there isn’t a lot of shoveling at Harvard Law School.” So I can understand that this was one of the greatest “Oops” in American history. And it’s going to be hard for a democrat when you show one tape against another. They’re goint to say, “So you supported a trillion dollars offered by a president who didn’t even know that this stuff that this stuff is not going to happen?”– Charles Krauthammer

And somehow now, as president, things are messy and they don’t always work as planned and people are mad at us,” Mr. Obama said. (New York Times)

DOH!
It’s not that Obama was lying when he said all that stuff. It’s just that he didn’t know what he was talking about. All it took was nearly a trillion dollars in stimulus money and 20-plus months of on-the-job training for him to discover that he was talking nonsense.
But does he really mean it?
Hell No. it’s just a cynical political ploy to garner sympathy and evoke fake pathos.
How do I know, well…

When the Republicans and the American people thump him, well that just means you’ll have to kiss his ass even more.

In an hour-long interview with the Times’s White House correspondent, Peter Baker, Mr. Obama predicted that his political rivals would either be chastened by falling short of their electoral goals (complete takeover of both House and Senate) or burdened with the new responsibility that comes from achieving them.

“It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, they feel more responsible, either because they didn’t do as well as they anticipated, and so the strategy of just saying no to everything and sitting on the sidelines and throwing bombs didn’t work for them,” Mr. Obama said. “Or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals and work with me in a serious way.”

Essentially, it comes down to: Remember all the things I said repeatedly on the campaign trail and then as President, well, I guess I didn’t know what the hell I was talking about and I should have been more understanding of Republicans, so don’t vote my party out of office because we are totally incompetent and tone deaf. I’m sorry.

Where’s my barf bag?

“Given how much stuff was coming at us,” Obama explains, “we probably spent much more time trying to get the policy right than trying to get the politics right. There is probably a perverse pride in my administration — and I take responsibility for this; this was blowing from the top — that we were going to do the right thing, even if short-term it was unpopular. And I think anybody who’s occupied this office has to remember that success is determined by an intersection in policy and politics and that you can’t be neglecting of marketing and PR and public opinion.” (New York Times)

So that’s why you were on TV every 5 minutes during the Health care debate and had town halls and press conferences, meet and greets, and now backyard meetings and arena-sized multi-media events, because you weren’t doing enough PR.

Barf bag Alert!

This is an old progressive lament: Our product is perfect, we just didn’t sell it convincingly to the rubes.

I’m sorry you’re too stupid and unenlightened to understand how fantastic I am and how fantastic our Socialist Utopia is.

We don’t want to work with you Mr. President. WE WANT TO STOP YOU!

PERIOD!

But you’re too narcissistic to even see that!

The mea culpa that is more about ME than culpa. 🙂

“Historically, when you look at how America has evolved, typically we make progress on race relations in fits and starts,” President Obama said at a town hall event with young Americans.

The “casted” MTV special that is.

He then suggested that the recession has played a part in driving racial antagonism while he has been in office.

Yeah, Democrats and Liberals calling everyone who disagrees with them a racist at the drop of any hat has nothing to do with it! 🙂

Opposition to the “first black President” must be racist. But that has nothing to do with the rise in racial tensions.

“Often times misunderstandings and antagonisms surface most strongly when times are tough. And that’s not surprising,” Mr. Obama said, arguing that Americans are less worried when things are going well.

How would he know, it’s only gotten worse under his watch.

He added that anxiety over not being able to pay bills – or having lost a job or a home – sometimes “organizes itself around kind of a tribal attitude, and issues of race become more prominent.”

So is that why Democrats, especially Southern Democrats, were against freeing the slaves or Civil Rights or Women’s Sufferage?

No.

But it sounds good. It’s complete diversionary crap. But I sounds good.

If everyone was wonderful and we all lived in the Socialist Utopia that’s in his head there would be no strife.

Kumbuya!

“We’ve got a little bit of everybody in this country,” the president said, arguing that “our strength comes from unity, not division.”

So that’s why I’ve spent the last 2 years dividing people in to “rich” and “poor”, “black”, “white”, “latino” , “Main Street”, Wall Street”, Tea Partiers and Government Union Thugs, Socialists and Capitalists, haves and have nots, the insured and the uninsured, the legal and the illegal (sorry, undocumented).

I want to unite people behind dividing and conquering them.

Orwell would be proud of you my son.

As would your soul brother, Saul Alinsky.

But don’t worry, you’re just a racist if you disagree. 🙂

Veteran Democratic operative Pat Caddell is unloading on the White House, saying he’s had enough with the president whose “hypocrisy” on campaign finance “is just mind-blowing.”

President Obama has made a point while campaigning to call out conservative-leaning groups for hurting the integrity of elections by not voluntarily disclosing donors. Caddell says Obama has no room to talk.

“My problem with Obama started the day he blew up public financing of presidential campaigns,” Caddell said in an interview with The Daily Caller. “He’s the man whose done the most to destroy whatever integrity there was in campaign financing.”

Obama declined public funding of his presidential campaign in 2008.

His entire campaign, some $750 Billion dollars was funded by “private” donations. 🙂

People like Foreign socialist Billionaire and his moveon.org and other tentacles had nothing to do with it.

Caddell, who has worked for a number of presidential campaigns, including Joe Biden’s in 1988, said making outside money an election issue is a risky strategy for the Democrats. “You’re 21 days out from an election and this is what you’ve got? That’s it? Nothing about jobs or the economy?”

It won’t be pretty for his party, Caddell says. “Come the morning of November 2, they’re going to have a cold shower. It’s going to be an Arctic temperature.”

Caddell also took a swing at Obama’s inner circle.

“These are naive idiots who’ve come out of academia and have never done anything real in their lives, and they are actually in power,” he said. “These are the people we never let in the room when we had serious business to do. Now they’re running the country.”

And they will say or do anything to keep it.

And use anyone to keep as much of it as possible.

First Lady Michelle Obama reportedly violated Illinois election laws by encouraging voters to support President Obama at a polling place in Chicago Thursday morning.

Election laws in Illinois prohibit anyone from engaging in “any political discussion within any polling place,” or “within 100 feet of any polling place.”

The first lady was reportedly speaking with other voters in a polling place and urged them to keep President Obama’s agenda going.

“Technical violation, perhaps. But what are mere technical violations of voting laws to the Obama administration!” said Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch, a conservative, non-partisan, public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption.

Illinois law has a broad-ban on any person engaging in political discussion within the polling place.

“Even if her conversations didn’t constitute electioneering, they almost certainly violated the broader Sec. 17-29 ban on engaging in ‘any political discussion within any polling place,’” said Charlie Spies, an election attorney with Clark Hill, PLC. (Drudge)

But don’t expect anyone on the Democrat side to care. Hell, they don’t care if you stand outside the polling place with truncheons and yell racial hatred as long as you’re black and a Democrat. So why would this bother them?
After all, it’s all about them. And him, Obama, specifically.
Obama likes to win, too, of course. But he is so ideological, so deeply marinated in leftism (he picked up the false accusation about the Chamber of Commerce, for example, from a left-wing website), that asking him to compromise with Republicans may well cause a system crash. Though he now acknowledges that “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects,” he continues to see his presidency in such empyrean terms (and his opponents as so lacking in good faith) that compromise seems remote.–Mona Charen
Maybe it’s unfair for people to think Obama is just another tax-and-spend Democrat. After all, some tax-and-spend Democrats are actually competent at it.-Jonah Goldberg
Or maybe it’s not. After all, he puts the Me in Mea Culpa!
Political Cartoon by Jerry Holbert

Recipe for Control

I took up cooking, one, because I found I really enjoy it, but also because it’s better for me to control my own food rather than trust it to a heart attack in a box (have you read the fat & sodium contents on some of those pre-prepared meals!).

But the difference between my approach and the First Lady’s Food Police cudgel approach is I’m not preaching and I’m not trying to control other people.

She is. Just like her husband.

I often wonder who’s the more elitist, her or her husband.

“Even if we give parents all the information they need and improve school meals and build brand new supermarkets on every corner, none of that matters if when families step into a restaurant, they can’t make a healthy choice,” Mrs. Obama told them.

So we have to control you at every turn so you won’t be tempted! 😦

So, instead of speaking to parents about moderation, the first lady wants to micromanage menus, making french fries a special order item at fast-food outlets and apples the default side order of choice for kids. Butter and cream must be cut, and whole wheat pasta must replace white.

Harmless advocacy? Perhaps. But Mrs. Obama’s speeches at political rallies and conventions suggests it’s probably more. The gears of government seem to be turning to her cause.

The Department of Health and Human Services on Tuesday announced a $31 million program to combat obesity (and smoking) in eight states. It comes with a plan to go coercive: “Use price to discourage consumption of tobacco and to benefit consumption of healthy food/drinks,” the press release reads. As in price controls?

The coincidences pile up as community organizers tied quite closely to the Obama campaign, including the National Council of La Raza and the NAACP, joined the cause. To aid the effort, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation chipped in a $2 million grant.

Fascinating associates don’t you think? La Raza, a racist hispanic group and the NAACP who calls Tea Partiers racists. Fascinating…

Then there’s the anti-McDonald’s TV ad campaign just launched by the Physicians Committee for Responsibility, another pressure group with a vegetarian and animal-rights agenda. In true Alinsky style, they’ve picked a target, personalized it and laid all the problems of obesity on one fast-food operator.

The advert shows a woman weeping over the body of a man in a morgue, with the man still holding a half-eaten hamburger. Toward the end of the advert, the McDonald’s logo appears along with the tag-line “I was lovin’ it”. The commercial then urges watchers to “High cholesterol, high blood pressure, heart attacks. Tonight, make it vegetarian”.

Then you get Michael Moore who hadn’t been getting any attention lately spouting off that McDonald’s has killed more people than terrorists have.

What’s galling about all this is that Mrs. Obama’s anti-obesity campaign — like the policies pushed by her husband — presumes government has all the answers. In reality, it doesn’t.

Bu they think it does, as long as they are in control of it, that is. The Insufferably Superior Left strikes again!

Diets are a personal choice with different impacts on different people. Some children stay fit eating all the fast food they like; others can’t handle a donut. Some effective low-carbohydrate diets don’t restrict cream and butter at all, but minimize fruit. Go figure.

Micromanaging restaurant menus will only drive consumers to the junk food section at the grocery to get the goodies they crave. It won’t end childhood obesity, the causes of which are far more complex and numerous than trips to the Golden Arches.

But then you just drive the junk food purveyors out of business then and TA DA!   Instant Health! And you have Big Brother and Big Mommy to thank for it! 🙂

Like any solution imposed by big government, Mrs. Obama’s will harm business, limit choice and politicize the personal — a recipe for failure. (IBD)

You have to assume the Insufferably Superior Left actually cares. I know I don’t.

After all, her husband is frequent photographed (to look less like the elite he is) eating very unhealthy foods and he admits to being…a SMOKER!

Don’t do as I do, do as I say!

But Michelle can’t clean up her husband, oh no, she has to crusade against evil fat and salt to save you all from yourselves!

The Empress has no clothes.

She said it’s also important to change these national eating habits because they end up costing billions in additional healthcare costs.

And they want to take over your Health Care from birth to death. Hmmmm…Fascinating… 🙂

“I’m not asking any of you to make drastic changes to every single one of your recipes or to totally change the way you do business,” she said.

Not Yet, at least. 🙂

After all, when Liberals start preaching about it “being for the children” watch out!! (since they consider anyone who disagrees with them as “children” anyhow).

So how long before we “recommend” to a private business what they can serve and just force them to serve what we think is best for you?

After all, restaurants that serve crap, close. That’s business. But what if that’s all they are allowed to serve??

While suggestions that eateries serve a side of apples instead of French fries as the default side dish likely won’t go anywhere, there is another way to serve kids fewer calories. Just make the portions smaller.

Smaller portions mean less cost for the restaurant, and can help kids slim down. Charge the same, serve less food. Talk about a win-win! (Entrepeneur.com)
Exactly. The portion sizes today are about 1/3 larger than say 50 years ago.
If you can teach people to eat less, not just control what they eat, then you can lose weight!
After all, you have to burn more calories than you take in to do it.
And I fail but not as often as I used to and I have cleaned up my diet. So a lot of it is   also because of lack of proper regular exercise to on this middle-aged frame. But that’s another story…
But I don’t want to control you.
I trust with proper education and not liberal hysterics and Alinsky scare tactics that you are capable of make reasonable decisions and understand and accept the consequences of your actions.
But I also know that that part is nearly impossible in today’s liberal entitlement and evade responsibility for everything environment.
That’s what has to change. Not the menu.
“The delusion is that we all make free choices,”- Anti-soda crusader Harold Goldstein
* Obesity lawsuit instigator John “Sue the Bastards” Banzhaf lashes out: “All these platitudes about, ‘people should eat less,’ ‘responsibility,’ all this crap!”

* Marion Nestle, queen of the food scolds, thinks that “balance, moderation and exercise” have no practical importance. “I don’t support that,” she says.

* Discussing “The Politics of Food,” Skip Spitzer of the radical Pesticide Action Network maintains that “the idea of personal responsibility is a cultural construct.”

* PETA medical “expert” Neal Barnard tells tales of food addiction, arguing that “it’s high time we stopped blaming ourselves for over-eating.”

* Kelly “Big Brother” Brownell advocates “a more militant attitude about the toxic food environment, like we have about tobacco… [smoking] became so serious that society overlooked the intrusion on individual rights for the greater social good.” He also suggests that human beings have no more control over their food choices than animals in a cage.

* Margo Wootan, one of the top killjoys at the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), implores: “We have got to move beyond personal responsibility.” And when the World Health Organization added a single, understated sentence referencing the “exercise of individual responsibility” to its anti-obesity strategy, CSPI raged: “Obesity is not merely a matter of individual responsibility. Such suggestions are naive and simplistic.”


Here’s how noted food critic Robert Shoffner describes their philosophy: “People are children and have to be protected by Big Brother or Big Nanny from the awful free-market predators … That’s what drives these people — a desire for control of other people’s lives.” (consumerfreedom.com)
So they aren’t the Insufferably Superior are they? 🙂
You are just children who must be led to do what is best for you.
Just like the fact that the fabulously beautiful planet Bethselamin is now so worried about the cumulative erosion by ten billion visiting tourists a year that any net imbalance between the amount you eat and the amount you excrete whilst on the planet is surgically removed from your bodyweight when you leave: so every time you go to the lavatory it is vitally important to get a receipt. (Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy) 🙂

John Stossel: For what it’s worth, here is some of the research we dug up to prepare my Michelle Obama discussion:

In his article “Egg on their Faces,” Steve Malanga points out that “Government dietary advice often proves disastrous.”

Starting in the 1970s… the American Heart Association advised people to reduce drastically their consumption of eggs as part of a goal to limit total cholesterol intake to 300 milligrams a day (a single egg can have 250 milligrams). The recommendation, seconded by government and other public-health groups, prompted a sharp drop in the consumption of eggs, a food that nutritionists praise as low in calories and high in nutrients. In 2000, the AHA revised its restrictions on eggs to one a day (from a onetime low of three a week)… To what purpose? A 2004 article in The Journal of Nutrition that looked at worldwide studies of egg consumption noted that the current restrictions on eating eggs are “unwarranted for the majority of people and are not supported by scientific data.”

Furthermore:

As a recent review of the latest research in Scientific American pointed out, ever since the first set of federal guidelines appeared in 1980, Americans heard that they had to reduce their intake of saturated fat by cutting back on meat and dairy products and replacing them with carbohydrates. Americans dutifully complied. Since then, obesity has increased sharply, and the progress that the country has made against heart disease has largely come from medical breakthroughs like statin drugs, which lower cholesterol, and more effective medications to control blood pressure.

Malanga also notes that new FDA guidelines recommend a maximum of 1500 milligrams of salt daily (down from 2300).  One hypertension expert observed  that the government’s salt war is a giant uncontrolled experiment with the public’s health.

Here are a few more reasons why government shouldn’t tell us what to eat:

We’re living longer than ever! 80 yrs today vs. 57 yrs  80 yrs ago

A CDC study found that more people die every year from being underweight than overweight!  And that moderately overweight people live longer than those at normal weight.

Government was once excited about BMI index. (body-mass index) Gov Mike Huckabee had all Arkansas kids tested!  But BMI is a lousy measure of health.  According to BMI: Tom Cruise and Arnold Schwarzenegger are obese; GWBush and George Clooney are “overweight”

Calorie counts on menu boards don’t work: people STILL don’t take in fewer calories! A study at McDonald’s , Burger King, Wendy’s, and Kentucky Fried Chicken found that people ordered MORE calories after the labeling law went into effect.

What’s junk food?  Chicago’s new candy tax defines sweets that contain flour as “food” – w/o flour as “candy.”  (Hershey bar? Candy. But Kit Kats, Twix, Twizzlers –are “food”) O.j. and apple juice? More calories than Coke! (97 v 120/cup)

“Protect the children?”  Children are the responsibility of their parents. When the state assumes the role of parent, it makes children of all of us.

It’s a good sign that America has food nannies – means were so rich that these are the things we’re worried about!

The food police haven’t jailed anyone yet, but who knows 20 years down the road?  MeMe Roth suggests annual obesity screenings at school; serving soft drinks to only those over 18; child abuse laws for parents with obese kids; taxes on soda and sweetened drinks.

If the government is allowed to dictate our diet, what’s next? Do they start deciding who we’ll marry, where we’ll work?

Thomas Jefferson said “A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have.”

Cartoon

Stop Me Before I Lie Again!

A Democrat advocacy group that was essential to the passage of ObamaCare has come out with a new Powerpoint presentation on how to sell ObamaCare, aka sell a 5-gallon jug of water to a drowning man.

And the most interesting revelation: They Lied!

Shocking though that may seem, it seems that in this presentation on the last page of “don’t”s they don’t wanna anyone to talk about the cost savings, deficit reduction, and the lower premiums that was there mantra for 15 months as they crammed it down everyone’s throat in the most partisan vote in memory.

It seems, they might have ‘misspoke’ 🙂

The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House’s first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed. “Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy,” says one slide.

When you see this first panel, think Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals, Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people. The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.

It’s hard to overstate how important the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)—which makes the official judgments on how much bills cost and save—is in Washington. “I consider CBO God around here,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, ranking Republican on the Finance Committee, recently said during the Health Care Debate.(Newsweek– our “islamophobic” fear mongers)

I wonder if he feels the same way after yesterday’s report that showed what the deficit spending has done to the economy? 🙂

“We think the numbers are now pretty well set from CBO,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said. “We think it will post the largest deficit reduction of any bill that we’ve adopted in the Congress since 1993.”

CBO told lawmakers that the health package would cost $940 billion over the next decade, reducing the deficit by $130 billion. It will reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion in the second decade of the plan’s implementation, according to those who have seen the score.

“We are absolutely giddy” about the score, Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said during an interview on Fox News on Thursday. About the deficit-reduction figures, he added, “This is great news for the American people.”(The Hill)

So without further adieu…

Key White House allies are dramatically shifting their attempts to defend health care legislation, abandoning claims that it will reduce costs and deficit and instead stressing a promise to “improve it.”

The messaging shift was circulated this afternoon on a conference call and PowerPoint presentation organized by Families USA — one of the central groups in the push for the initial legislation. The call was led by a staffer for the Herndon Alliance, which includes leading labor groups and other health care allies. It was based on polling from three top Democratic pollsters: John Anzalone, Celinda Lake and Stan Greenberg.

The confidential presentation, available in full here and provided to POLITICO by a source on the call, suggests that Democrats are acknowledging the failure of their predictions that the health care legislation would grow more popular after its passage, as its benefits became clear and rhetoric cooled. Instead, the presentation is designed to win over a skeptical public, and to defend the legislation — and in particular the individual mandate — from a push for repeal.

The presentation concedes that groups typically supportive of Democratic causes — people under 40, non-college-educated women and Hispanic voters — have not been won over by the plan. Indeed, it stresses repeatedly that many are unaware that the legislation has passed, an astonishing shortcoming in the White House’s all-out communications effort.

“Straightforward ‘policy’ defenses fail to [move] voters’ opinions about the law,” says one slide.  “Women in particular are concerned that health care law will mean less provider availability — scarcity [is] an issue.”

The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House’s first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed.

“Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy,” says one slide.

The presentation’s final page of “Don’ts” counsels against claiming “the law will reduce costs and deficit.”

The presentation advises, instead, sales pitches that play on personal narratives and promises to change the legislation.

“People can be moved from initial skepticism and support for repeal of the law to favorable feelings and resisting repeal,” it says.  “Use personal stories — coupled with clear, simple descriptions of how the law benefits people at the individual level — to convey critical benefits of reform.”

In other words, get ready for more grandma has to use someone else’s dentures stories!  Get out the hankies, it’s America’s Most Outrageous Sob Stories Season 2!.

Appeals to emotions, not logic.

Hmmm, the exact opposite of the Ground Zero Mosque where the supporters are totally devoid and deaf to emotions. Curiouser and Curiouser.. 🙂

Could it be manipulative?  Nahh…. 🙂

The presentation also counsels against the kind of grand claims of change that accompanied the legislation’s passage.

“Keep claims small and credible; don’t overpromise or ‘spin’ what the law delivers,” it says, suggesting supporters say, “The law is not perfect, but it does good things and helps many people. Now we’ll work [to] improve it.”

The “free” Miracle Cure is just snake oil after all. But don’t tell the customer who had it force down their throat that. 🙂

The Herndon Alliance, which presented the research, is a low-profile group that coordinated liberal messaging in favor of the public option in health care. Its “partners” include health care legislation’s heavyweight supporters: AARP, AFL-CIO, SEIU, Health Care for America Now, MoveOn and the National Council of La Raza, among many others.

Let’s see, A Seniors advocacy group that has it’s own Health Insurance arm, Government Unions who have been getting most of the bailouts, Liberal advocacy group funded by a Billionaire Socialist, “The Race” (La Raza) a racist hatemongers group of Latinos who believe in (amongst other things) giving parts of Arizona and New Mexico back to Mexico and are as Open Borders as it gets.

Interesting grouping… 🙂

The presentation cites three private research projects by top Democratic pollsters: eight focus groups by Lake; Anzalone’s 1,000-person national survey; and an online survey of 2,000 people by Greenberg’s firm.

“If we are to preserve the gains made by the law and build on this foundation, the American public must understand what the law means for them,” says Herndon’s website. “We must overcome fear and mistrust, and we must once again use our collective voice to connect with the public on the values we share as Americans.” (Ben Smith-Politico)

Water anyone? 🙂

“We thought the best thing to do now was to remind people why they personally wanted reform in the first place.”–Spokesman for Families USA.

Wanted it? It was running at 66% against when it was passed and that hasn’t improved one  bit since.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% of U.S. Likely Voters favor repeal of the health care bill. That’s down from 59% a week ago, but support for repeal has ranged from 52% to 60%since the law was passed by Congress in March.

I guess follows my new rule that if 60+% of the people are against it, the Democrats are for it and you should be too! 🙂  (Health Care, Ground Zero Mosque, Deficit Spending, Continued Bailouts…et al)

A recent Government Accountability Report (GAO), finding that each job ‘created’ by the stimulus bill costs an average of $194,213.

But, fear not! The Government is here to save you…money! 🙂

Just over 70 days. I can see November from my house… 🙂

We The People

It has often been a theme in my blog for this nearly first year about the dishonesty of this administration, the Orwellian Tactics, and the Alinsky maneuvers. How the dripping contempt for the ‘little people’ from the political Elite Class has boiled over and how the Ministry of Truth (The Mainstream Media) is both a partner, a sucker, and a toadie for it all.

How the Left like to define everything in their own terms and you aren’t allowed to disagree with them.

Leaving you and me, the average citizen, hung out to dry.

Now Thomas Sowell, a evil abomination that liberals don’t want to exist – a black Conservative- a great piece today.

‘We the people” are the central concern of the Constitution, as well as its opening words, since it is a Constitution for a self-governing nation. But “we the people” are treated as an obstacle to circumvent by the current administration.

One way of circumventing the people is to rush legislation through Congress so fast that no one knows what is buried in it. Did you know that the so-called health care reform bill contained a provision creating a tax on people who buy and sell gold coins?

You might debate whether that tax is a good or a bad idea. But the whole point of burying it in legislation about medical insurance is to make sure “we the people” don’t even know about it, much less have a chance to debate it, before it becomes law.

Did you know that the financial reform bill that’s been similarly rushed through Congress, too fast for anyone to read, has a provision about “inclusion” of women and minorities? Pretty words like “inclusion” mean ugly realities like quotas. But that too isn’t something “we the people” are to be allowed to debate, because it too was sneaked through.

Not since the Norman conquerors of England published their laws in French, for an English-speaking nation, centuries ago, has there been such contempt for the people’s right to know what laws were being imposed on them.

Yet another ploy is to pass laws worded in vague generalities, leaving it up to the federal bureaucracies to issue specific regulations based on those laws. “We the people” can’t vote on bureaucrats. And, since it takes time for all the bureaucratic rules to be formulated and then put into practice, we won’t know what either the rules or their effects are prior to this fall’s elections when we vote for (or against) those who passed these clever laws.

The biggest circumvention of “we the people” was of course the so-called “health care reform” bill. This bill was passed with the proviso that it would not really take effect until after the 2012 presidential elections. Between now and then, the Obama administration can tell us in glowing words how wonderful this bill is, what good things it will do for us, and how it has rescued us from the evil insurance companies, among its many other glories.

But we won’t really know what the actual effects of this bill are until after the next presidential elections — which is to say, after it is too late. Quite simply, we are being played for fools.

Much has been made of the fact that families making less than $250,000 a year will not see their taxes raised. Of course they won’t see it, because what they see could affect how they vote. But when huge tax increases are put on electric utility companies, the people will see electricity bills go up. When huge taxes are put on other businesses as well, they will see the prices of the things those businesses sell go up.

If you are not in that “rich” category, you will not see your own taxes go up. But you will be paying someone else’s higher taxes, unless of course you can do without electricity and other products of heavily taxed businesses. If you don’t see this, so much the better for the administration politically.

This country has been changed in a more profound way by corrupting its fundamental values. The Obama administration has begun bribing people with the promise of getting their medical care and other benefits paid for by other people, so long as those other people can be called “the rich.” Incidentally, most of those who are called “the rich” are nowhere close to being rich.

A couple making $125,000 a year each are not rich, even though together they reach that magic $250,000 income level. In most cases, they haven’t been making $125,000 a year all their working lives. Far more often, they have reached this level after decades of working their way up from lower incomes — and now the government steps in to grab the reward they have earned over the years.

There was a time when most Americans would have resented the suggestion that they wanted someone else to pay their bills. But now, envy and resentment have been cultivated to the point where even people who contribute nothing to society feel that they have a right to a “fair share” of what others have produced.

The most dangerous corruption is a corruption of a nation’s soul. That is what this administration is doing.

I would add in the socialist corruption of the Education process so that even if they can’t destroy you they can destroy the future and the little darling brains full of mush will never know because they will never tell them.

It starts in grade school where you just don’t mention certain things, events and concepts and moves on through college life. So that by the end of 16 years of “education” you’re effectively a mindless idiot willing do what the government says because “it’s fair” and “it’s sensitive”.

And you wouldn’t want to be “unfair” and “insensitive” now would you? 🙂

A central goal of these programs is to uproot “internalized oppression,” a crucial concept in the diversity education planning documents of most universities. Like the Leninists’ notion of “false consciousness,” from which it ultimately is derived, it identifies as a major barrier to progressive change the fact that the victims of oppression have internalized the very values and ways of thinking by which society oppresses them. What could workers possibly know, compared to intellectuals, about what workers truly should want? What could students possibly know, compared to those creating programs for offices of student life and residence, about what students truly should feel? Any desire for assimilation or for individualism reflects the imprint of white America’s strategy for racial hegemony.

Planning for New Student Week at Northwestern University, a member of the Cultural Diversity Project Committee explained to the Weekly Northwestern Review in 1989 that the committee’s goal was “changing the world, or at least the way [undergraduates] perceive it.” In 1993, Ana Maria Garcia, assistant dean of Haverford College, proudly told the Philadelphia Inquirer of official freshman dormitory programs there, which divided students into two groups: happy, unselfish Alphas and grim, acquisitive Betas. For Garcia, the exercise was wonderfully successful: “Students in both groups said the game made them feel excluded, confused, awkward, and foolish,” which, for Garcia, accomplished the purpose of Haverford’s program: “to raise student awareness of racial and ethnic diversity.”

In the early 1990s, Bryn Mawr College shared its mandatory “Building Pluralism” program with any school that requested it. Bryn Mawr probed the most private experiences of every first-year student: difference and discomfort; racial, ethnic, and class experiences; sexual orientation; religious beliefs. By the end of this “orientation,” students were devising “individual and collective action plans” for “breaking free” of “the cycle of oppression” and for achieving “new meaning” as “change agents.” Although the public relations savvy of universities has changed since the early 1990s, these programs proliferate apace.

The darkest nightmare of the literature on power is George Orwell’s 1984, where there is not even an interior space of privacy and self. Winston Smith faces the ultimate and consistent logic of the argument that everything is political, and he can only dream of “a time when there were still privacy, love, and friendship, and when members of a family stood by one another without needing to know the reason.”(reason.com)

Let’s take that a step farther. The liberal left says that you are “insensitive” to muslims if you object to the mosque being built next to Ground Zero.

But you also “insensitive” to Latinos if you want the border secured. That’s “racial profiling”. You’re a “racist”.

But yet, if you’re a devout Christian who doesn’t believe in Gay marriage, because of your religion, You’re an insensitive, homophobic bigot!

So you’re insensitive to the Muslim religion if you object, but if you object based on your Christian religion you’re also insensitive.

And if you tell the proponents of the mosque that building it there is “insensitive” they will shoot back that you’re stereotyping all Muslims and that the Constitution protects there right to build it there.

So they can tell you you’re “insensitive” but you can’t tell THEM they are “insensitive” because they are your Insufferably Moral Superiors and you can’t even begin to judge them.

Orwell couldn’t do much better than that. You’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.

O’Brien’s re-education of Winston in 1984 went to the heart of such invasiveness. “We are not content with negative obedience…. When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will.” The Party wanted not to destroy the heretic but to “capture his inner mind.” Where others were content to command “Thou shalt not” or “Thou shalt,” O’Brien explains, “Our command is ‘Thou art.'” To reach that end requires “learning… understanding [and] acceptance,” and the realization that one has no control even over one’s inner soul.

The school must become a therapeutic and political agent of progressive change. For your own good. But especially, before you figure out you’ve been had.

And the liberal media is there to reinforce it.

Look at how they frame the Ground Zero Mosque issue, for instance.

It’s all about Constitutional Right to worship as they please. The fact that this is a perversion of the First Amendment aside, it’s a clever little Alinsky tactic. Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

So you wouldn’t want to go against The Constitution now would you? 🙂

The fact that that isn’t even the real issue isn’t even the point. It’s a tactic. They don’t care about the Constitutionality of it. They know that’s irrelevant.

But they also know they can off-put you by pushing it. Just like when they call you a “racist” when you object to illegal immigration.

And if that’s the only argument you hear, then that’s they only argument you know.

If the free speech and religious freedoms protected in First Amendment are suddenly so sacrosanct, why is it that Obama and his left-wing allies continuously push for a return of the fairness doctrine and for getting religion (except islam) out of schools and everywhere else??

And if the Constitution is so all important to Liberals all of the sudden why do they continuously push for gun bans (aka The Second Amendment)?

And where in the Constitution does a Health Care Mandate come from? And what other Mandates can they come up with if they think there is??

And then you get the counter. It’s not the Imam and the Mosque next to Ground Zero that is the problem, it’s YOU who object to it, you’re the problem.

Speaker Pelosi on a radio show: “There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded,” she said. “How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we’ve been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City.”

Calls to investigate the funding for those proposing the $100 million “Cordoba House” have fallen on deaf ears, though, as New York’s Mayor Mike Bloomberg has described such an investigation as “un-American.”(Washington Times)

The only thing the majority of American opposed to this haven’t been called yet is…. RACIST! 🙂

But I’m sure it’s coming. It’s always coming…

And have you noticed, the proposed memorial to the victims of 9/11 hasn’t been finished 10 years later?

And a Greek Orthodox church crushed by the twin towers falling can’t get the zoning and building permits to rebuild?

Funny that. 🙂

And the final word today goes to former Obama Communication toadie Anita Dunn on MSDNC when challenged by Pat Buchanan on “tolerance”,“Anita, let me ask you about this word tolerance. I mean, what about tolerance for the views of the thousands of families of those who died on 9/11, the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who are saying, ‘Please, you have a right to move the mosque there but please don’t do it. It doesn’t belong there,’ and the vast majority of Americans who say the same thing?” Buchanan said.

“They have a right to build a mosque, but for heavens’ sakes given the fact that the terrorists were Islamic, it was crucial to their identity and their mission, please don’t put an Islamic mosque just two blocks from where this happened. What about tolerance for the vast majority of Americans and their opinions?” he said.

Dunn responded: “Well, you know, I have to ask, it’s two blocks … It’s a center that is supposed to be about promoting interfaith, and really reaching out, which in many ways is I think what President Bush back in those horrible days of 2001, really tried to promote.”

“And how many blocks is ok? Is nine blocks okay? Is 10? I don’t know where you go with this argument,” Dunn said.

“Morning Joe” co-host Mika Brzezinski ended the segment with a non-sequitur.

“And Anita, they have, like, other things that a lot of people have issues with, like peep shows. So, I mean, I think you bring up a really good point,” Brzezinski said.

Last impression: it’s about peep shows, not “sensitivity”.

Doing Orwell proud. 🙂

What You’d Expect

Brewer said after the June 3 meeting that Obama had assured her that the majority of the 1,200 troops would go to Arizona, the state with the most illegal border-crossings.

PHOENIX – Federal officials told Arizona’s attorney general and a congresswoman Monday that 524 of the 1,200 National Guard troops headed to the U.S.-Mexico border will be deployed in the state by August or September.

Last I check, unless this is Fuzzy Liberal math, 524 is not a majority of 1,200.

We get more than anyone else. So I guess that’s a majority, in the political sense.

And you know that’s the only way that matters to this President.

But sense they will be paper pushers and checkpoint watchers they aren’t any better than former Gov. Napalitano’s election year political ploy gag.

I would venture to guess that he probably got the idea from her. 🙂

In a news release Monday, after the announcement of how many of the 1,200 would be coming to Arizona, McCain, who is up for re-election, said while he appreciates the president’s move, “this is simply not enough.”

From first-hand knowledge, he said the 524 sent to Arizona is not sufficient to protect the state’s 370-mile border, nor ensure the safety of its citizens, McCain said.

So maybe we could spread them out every 7/10 of a mile with a rope! 🙂

And why is California getting 224 of them, they love and protect Illegals, why do you need enforcement there? 🙂

It’s poor ploy to begin with.

But it’s what I would expect. 🙂

************************

You thought the 2008 Elections were vicious, partisan bloodbaths. Just you wait. You haven’t seen anything yet.

The Democrats are so desperate, they are actively soliciting it.

And the Ministry of Truth will be airing it 24/7 I’m sure.

After all, the ends justifies the means.

And facts mean next to nothing.

Dubbed “The Accountability Project,” the site, which is being emailed to the DNC’s massive email list on Tuesday, will serve as a digital library for Democratic officials both state-based and in Washington, D.C. Users are given instructions on how to film a campaign, upload the video, submit copies of mailers or attack ads, record robocalls and place that audio on the web. An official with the DNC will monitor the submissions in addition to cataloging the content. It will be largely left to interested parties — reporters, ostensibly, included — to sort through the information for the more newsworthy or inflammatory bits.

“We really do want to take advantage of crowdsourcing,” said Daly. “The idea of this is to provide a forum where people who know the issue, the folks who are on the ground in Iowa, can dig through information in the system that someone else in Des Moines has filmed.”

The Accountability Project is not the DNC’s first crowd-sourcing venture. But the direct encouragement for users to assume the role of unofficial candidate “tracker” represents a far more intense level engagement by ordinary citizens. Already, the presence of videographers at various political functions has produced its share of fireworks for Democrats and Republicans alike. Several weeks ago, video of Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-N.C.) aggressively tussling with college students videoing him forced Etheridge to issue an embarrassing apology. Similar incidents have occurred on campaign trails this election cycle in which reporters have been videoed being knocked over by aides to candidates.

Daily insists that the DNC is not encouraging aggressive tactics. Indeed, the new website seems practically written by the committee’s legal team, with strict instructions for those videoing events not to misrepresent who they are, disrupt the event, attempt to get into restricted or unauthorized areas, or even ask questions.

“We are definitely not looking to be combative or to encourage people to do that in any way,” she said. “There is no wink-wink, nod-nod about that. We are explicitly telling people that if you are asked to leave an event in a private location you should absolutely do that… we are really just looking to record what is naturally happening out there.”

Uh huh, sure, yeah, whatever...

After the stories of SEIU Union Thugs trying to get Tea-parties do something violent or get someone on tape saying something salacious (which they already did try) why wouldn’t they just invent them. It’s not like the Liberal media will care.

“I think that every candidate expects that they are being recorded and every campaign staffer would remind them of that pretty regularly,” said Shauna Daly, research director at the DNC who is overseeing the new project. “Candidates should expect to be held accountable for what they say. If you’re not comfortable with what you’re saying, then you probably shouldn’t be saying it at all.”

We want that “gotcha” moment or at least one we can edit together or insinuate for talking points to be run 24/7 for weeks or months.

But not Liberals, of  course. That’s just partisan politics and is to be look down upon.

We won’t bother with issues.

“Hope and Change”, ah forget it!

Doomsday Bombs on standby!

Alinsky Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

Alinsky Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”

So you though 2008 was the king of all sleaze, well, The Democrats at least aim to make that look like the holiest of years in comparison.

And it’s all a massive diversion.

And that is definitely what I’d expect. 🙂

Here’s Your “Hope and Change”

But first, see this video by Gov. Brewer on the Obama Administration response to her meeting with them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=remz27VJjH4

President Obama at the G20, where the European Socialists told him to piss off about more spending.

President Obama on controlling the debt: “Somehow people say, why are you doing that, I’m not sure that’s good politics. I’m doing it because I said I was going to do it and I think it’s the right thing to do. People should learn that lesson about me because next year when I start presenting some very difficult choices to the country, I hope some of these folks who are hollering about deficits and debt step-up because I’m calling their bluff. We’ll see how much of that, how much of the political arguments that they’re making right now are real and how much of it was just politics.”

So Hope and Change is now Fear & Threat. 🙂

“Yes He Can”

But what’s really telling also is the statement that I’m doing it because I said I would. And he did say he would.

But the Mainstream Media/Ministry of Truth shouted down anyone who dared to challenge him on it in the campaign.

You were a “racist” a “moron”, an “idiot”, etc.

Now, he’s run up the debt to the point of countrywide bankruptcy and now just wait, in 6 months, the hard work begins!

OOOOOHHHH!!! Scary!

Likely by then he’ll have a Republican Congress that he claim it all on.

But that’s next year.

He still has to pass Cap & Trade and Amnesty if he can before that.

The government already owns Health Care, slowly but surely, that starts accelerating next year too.

As do all the new tax increase, which, what do you bet the Liberals and the Media will blame that on the Republicans.

I’m Mr. Tough Guy! 🙂

Alinsky Rules for Radicals Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

He’s well aware of the political price and he wants the Republicans to take the blame for it.

And he wants your anger at the Democrats to make it so.

Perverse isn’t it?

Which means we do it in spades and then we pass the tax cuts, the pro-growth measures and it works and then He can try and run on it’s success in 2012 but the Democrats will be left out in the cold. It’s not like their leftist base will be smart enough to “get it”.

They’ve been waiting generations for this guy.

So he’s going to make “tough decisions” next year. What about the last 18th months?

He’s going to wait 2 years to make “tough decisions”??

I Guess 3 Stimulus, 18 months of Unemployment spending, Taking over GM,Chrysler,AIG,Banks, Health Care, and now Wall Street and Private Businesses was the easy part. 🙂

Making you pay for it, that’s the “tough decision”.

But since it’s likely to be a Republican Congress that will have to pull the trigger, it will be their fault.

It was their fault he had to everything he has done. So trying to undue it must therefore be their fault too!! 🙂

because if they were hard choices why doesn’t he make them now?

Oh, right this Congress wouldn’t dare.

Alinsky Rules for Radicals Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

The Ministry of Truth will surely pound them them 24/7 so hard it will be the only thing they talk about for the next 2 years.

The 2012 campaign continues. (It never stopped).

But all those who want wanted “Hope & Change”, got “Despair and Socialist Change”.

Now you get “Fear and Change”.

Obama has proposed freezing spending on an array of domestic programs for the next three years and has named a special commission to recommend ways to curb spiraling debt and deficits. The panel is to report back by December 1. Obama will review the recommendations and decide how to go forward sometime early next year.

So when the “commission” recommends massive tax hikes and crushing regulations his hands will be clean and he’ll just do what they advised.

But it won’t come out until AFTER the election.

And this was the stated reason for the Democrats not passing a Budget.

“We’ve got to look at a tax system that is messy and unfair in a whole range of ways,” Obama said. (reuters)

Aka, screw the rich.

After all nearly 50% of the people don’t pay any taxes, so he has to hit the ones who do even harder.

“A strong and durable recovery also requires countries not having an undue advantage,” he said. “As I told (Chinese) President Hu Jintao yesterday, the United States welcomes China’s decision to allow its currency to appreciate in response to market forces. We will be watching very closely in the months ahead.”

Everyone is equal. None is better than anyone else.

Sound familiar?

Leaders of 20 major industrial and developing countries generally sided with cutting spending and raising taxes, despite warnings from President Barack Obama that too much austerity too quickly could choke off the global recovery.

“Serious challenges remain,” they cautioned in a closing statement. “While growth is returning, the recovery is uneven and fragile, unemployment in many countries remains at unacceptable levels, and the social impact of the crisis is still widely felt,” according to the document from the Group of 20 major industrial and developing nations.

Obama told a news conference he was satisfied with the outcome, saying he recognized that countries had to proceed at their own pace in either emphasizing growth or budget austerity.

“We can’t all rush to the exits at the same time,” Obama said after three days of economic summitry.

Boy, don’t you wish you could show him the exit sooner! 🙂

You Can Fool People with Spin

Government these days isn’t about making the hard choices. It’s about making the choice that will sell, either to “your base” (thus ignoring everyone else) or by spin (which is inevitably deceitful) because it will benefit you or one of your “sides” interests.

They write 2000+ bills they won’t read. But expect everyone to follow.

They can’t be bothered to read SB1070, at a minimalist 16 pages.

Much easier to just play on people fears, anxiety,biases, and divide and conquer.

And when that doesn’t work, just lie.

Then there’s the politician favorite phrase these days, “I misspoke”.

No, we have it on tape or audio.

But they “misspoke”.

Then you get stuff like this:

President Barack Obama, fresh from a win on a sweeping overhaul of Wall Street regulations, on Saturday urged Congress to take up his proposal for a $90 billion, 10-year tax on banks as the next step in reform.

Obama wants to slap a 0.15 percent tax on the liabilities of the biggest U.S. financial institutions to recoup the costs to taxpayers of the financial bailout.

“We need to impose a fee on the banks that were the biggest beneficiaries of taxpayer assistance at the height of our financial crisis — so we can recover every dime of taxpayer money,” Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address.

He does realize that a tax on business is passed onto the consumer right?

He doesn’t care. It sounds good.

It plays to his anti-capitalist base and the “wall street” anger that has been ginned up.

The fact that Congress in the 1990’s set up the roots of this problem and the Government agency in charge of monitoring them were too busy with Porn is not a matter for discussion.

And one of the biggest players in this whole mess, Fannie and Freddie were and are  ignored should be a sign.

Alinsky, Rules for Radicals:
Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”

Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself.

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it.

Daniel Foster at the conservative National Review Online argues that the bill is filled with unnecessary or useless measures.

“There is much in the bill that has nothing to do with ‘Wall Street’ or the root causes of the crisis (i.e. debit card and interchange fee rules),” Foster writes. “There is little in it that will ‘reform’ too big to fail or change the incentives for the kind of behavior that led to the crisis (implicit subsidies and bailout authority galore); and it was a ‘compromise’ mostly between Democrats.”

Then you have VP Joe Biden, a one man gaffe machine:
VP Biden ran into an ice cream shot owner (in his shop) who aked him to lower the taxes and he called the guy a “smartass”

And it gets better:
Vice President Joe Biden gave a stark assessment of the economy Friday, telling an audience of supporters, “there’s no possibility to restore 8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession.”

Appearing at a fundraiser with Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) in Milwaukee, the vice president remarked that by the time he and President Obama took office in 2008, the gross domestic product had shrunk and hundreds of thousands of jobs had been lost.

“We inherited a godawful mess,” he said, adding there was “no way to regenerate $3 trillion that was lost. Not misplaced, lost.” (CBS)

Andrew Langer, The Daily Caller:

Ultimately, with election victory comes the responsibility of governance. That responsibility requires grappling with the excruciating problem of making tough choices. This is something all elected officials face at some time or another, and it is the caveat for anyone interested in pursuing a political career. Problems ensue when political leaders abdicate their responsibilities—and a case can be made that such abdication is an abuse of the public trust. And when it comes to domestic policy, there is no more important issue than the creation of a government’s annual budget.

For the past three years, there has been a disturbing trend of federal legislators essentially punting their responsibilities—whether it comes to oversight of federal agencies, understanding the constitutional implications of legislation, or, at its most basic, actually reading legislation being voted upon. This seemingly fundamental misunderstanding of the role of legislators in our republic has resulted in an unprecedented outpouring of public ire, from Tea Parties to very public “dressing downs” of congressmen at Town Hall meetings.

Congress should have gotten the message, yet as proof they are deaf to their constituencies, leaders in the House have recently done—or not done—something stunning. Congressional leaders have decided that they are unable to even propose, let alone pass, a federal budget this year.

They have ostensibly done this while they await the decision of President Obama’s “Deficit Commission,” a convenient fiction created to give cowardly Democrats the “cover” necessary for a tax increase following the 2010 elections. It is not their fault, they will argue when they eventually do propose a budget. They were forced to do this because of the recommendations of the commission.

It is an excuse that doesn’t hold water. Congress has the responsibility for the budget, which means that the majority party has the responsibility for getting it prepared and shepherded through the system and passed. It is, in fact, statutorily mandated. But without any consequences, the law has about as much real power as a Las Vegas illusionist: it’s great theatre, but it really doesn’t do what it claims.

The problem is that more and more government entities (including state and local governments) are shifting these powers to unelected commissions. While some might call it mere “punting”—moving the power to some other group of individuals—it’s more accurately a form of political surrender; the functional equivalent of throwing in the towel because, well, the job is just too darn hard, and, in an election cycle, these guys want the title but they don’t want the responsibilities to go along with it.

Spending and size of government are the two top issues going into this fall election, with healthcare reform playing a role in both. Voters not only are fed up with out-of-control spending, they’re genuinely fearful of the potential economic instability runaway spending creates. Controlling that spending is infinitely more complicated when government officials refuse to release a budget detailing just how that money is being spent. It was, interestingly enough, the continued secrecy of national budgets that brought Gorbachev to power as the Soviet Union’s last premier—and opening up those budgets to greater scrutiny one of the hallmarks of his Perestroika program. How ironic, then, that more than two decades later, America is moving in that direction—an entirely wrong direction—when it comes to budgets.

Americans are tired of cowardly politicians. They are tired of being lied to, of having polls say one thing and do quite the opposite. They are hungry for real leaders—leaders who mean what they say and say what they mean. Leaders who are willing to make the tough choices, like Gov. Chris Christie in New Jersey.

Whether it’s trying to shift responsibility or surrendering to the difficulties of governance, either way the result is the same: Americans’ government grows larger without anyone exercising fiscal restraint. Political leaders raise taxes to try and pay for their inability to control spending. Overall we all suffer. Unfortunately, in this case, waiting until January 2011 might just be too late.

  • Entitlements lead to Tax Increases The deficit will reach a stunning $1.5 trillion this year. Even after the recession ends, trillion-dollar deficits will persist, causing the national debt to double by 2020.
  • Excessive spending—not low revenues—accounts for 92% of deficits by 2014 and 100% by 2017.
  • Solutions that “split the difference” between tax hikes and spending cuts doesn’t really address the source of the problem: spending.
  • Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest costs will surge by nearly $2 trillion by 2020. By comparison, the cost of extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts is 85% less at $404 billion.

Tax Increases Are Not the Solution

  • Raising federal income taxes to pay for entitlement spending would require rates to double by 2050 and continue to rise thereafter.
  • Balancing the budget with tax increases alone would increase the tax burden from an average of 18% of the economy to 30% by 2055.
  • Layering on a value added tax (VAT)—a new national sales tax—would create a huge drag on the economy and family budgets.
  • A VAT would cause the price of everything to rise by 15–20%. By 2019, 44 cents of every dollar would go to the federal government, compared to 15 cents today.

Tax Hikes Have Harmful Economic Consequences

  • Tax increases take money from families and businesses, lowering savings and investment and killing jobs. This is especially harmful in the current economic climate.
  • Future generations—who can’t yet vote—will be stuck paying the higher taxes and inheriting lower standards of living that go with it.
  • Any new federal income taxes would be on top of state and local taxes, such as income, property, excise, fuel, and sales taxes.
  • A VAT would become a cash cow for Congress to fund new spending and open the door for continued, stealthy rate increases.
  • Twenty of 29 developed economies with a VAT have increased rates since passage. Denmark leads, having increased their VAT from 15 to 25% since it was enacted.

Congress has been mismanaging taxpayer dollars for decades. Can Washington really be trusted to use new revenues to close the deficit gap, or would they just spend the money on new programs? (heritage.org)

I would say no.

When you can just “misspeak” or “The previous administration…” or “the party of no” or just demonize someone else, why bother.

It is much easier to spend than to be responsible.

After all, it’s not the politician’s money.

It’s yours.

And you’ll always be there for them so why should they worry. 🙂

Getting in Touch with your Inner Banana

I will explain the title in due course.  So bear with me. there’s a bit of a set up needed.

Timothy “Tax Cheat” Geithner:  US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has told the BBC that the world “cannot depend as much on the US as it did in the past”.

He said that other major economies would have to grow more for the global economy to prosper.

We are now declare The United States Not to be a Super Power and a World Leader, so piss off!

Yes, that’s the demoralizing sound of the White House spreading more malaise.

Welcome to Carter Malaise II: The Intentional Sequel.

In other words, don’t expect the engine that has been the driver for the world economy for over a century to keep up the pace.

This fits with President Obama’s conviction that the U.S. is no more extraordinary than any other country.

We’re nothing special. We are just another country of many. Nothing to see here, move along…

Everyone is equal and no one is better than anyone else.

“I believe we must each start by setting out plans for getting our national finances under control,” New UK Prime Minister David Cameron.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was tossed out this week BY HIS OWN LABOR PARTY.

He was replaced by his deputy Julia Gillard, who became the story of the day by becoming Australia’s first woman prime minister.

It was a bad fall for the man dubbed Australia’s Barack Obama.

Like the latter, the youthful Rudd initiated costly health care, home weatherization, entitlement, and global warming pork barrel projects. In the process, he blew out the Australian budget.

When the time came to pay the bill, he effectively committed political suicide by calling for a 40% tax on Aussie mining companies.

Those firms form the backbone of Australia’s dynamic economy, accounting for half of its exports. As Rudd imagined that it was he who kept Australia out of financial crisis, the reality was it was private firms like these that created the value and jobs for Australians.

When news of Rudd’s tax hikes suggested a bid to expropriate companies’ profits, the stock market took a beating.

To pay for his own bloated government programs, Rudd claimed — as his union supporters did — that he only wanted companies to pay their “fair share.” Unions themselves added to the fantasy by claiming these taxes would create jobs. Rudd echoed that, absurdly claiming the tax would be good for the economy.

“It is important to pay emphasis on the independent modeling of Treasury who’s put all the factors together and projects this industry will grow by 6.5% over five to 10 years,” Rudd told incredulous mining executives from BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Fortescue last May as stocks fell. “As a result of (this 40% tax) we will see a better and more dynamic mining industry in the future.” (IBD)

Beginning to sound familiar??

The Full on Socialist German State:

German leader Angela Merkel believes that the massive spending President Obama is advocating is not right for her country to undertake. Merkel, sounding and parroting the familiar refrain of Conservative Republicans, is a proponent, at this juncture, of curtailing spending and sees merit in the German engaging in more savings. President Obama on the hand wants the major economies like that of Germany (ranked number 4) to emulate the profligate spending him and the U.S. lawmakers – at least the Democrats – have contributed to the world money supply. President Obama also wants Germany to curtail its forays into exports and focus it fiscal policies on consumer spending so as to spur economic growth.

Chancellor Merkel may not be operating on her own accord concerning the fiscal policies that she is currently championing like any astute politician, Merkel may be listening to her people’s voice on this matter. Much of the German people did not support the bailout (110 billion Euros) provided for Greece and (750 billion for the European safety net).

//

This posture by the German people of disagreeing on their version of bailouts mirrors the angst felt by the Tea Partiers in America.

So the Socialists have had enough of full-on socialism, and what does Obama want?

Full on Socialism.

You have to wonder why European Socialists are worried about debt and spending and Obama is not.

Add in Timothy “We are no longer a Super Power” Geithner’s comments and you start to see where I’m going with this.

I hope. 🙂

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble has added his voice to the growing discussion about the United States’ recession spending spree.  In a response to President Obama’s call for further international recession spending, Schäuble stated “governments should not become addicted to borrowing as a quick fix to stimulate demand. Deficit spending cannot become a permanent state of affairs.”

As if there were any doubt about the United States’ spending addiction, Heritage budget expert Brian Riedl explains, “the annual federal budget deficit is projected to reach 8.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2020—more than three times the historical average.”

This means that if the US wanted to balance the budget by 2020, one-third of all spending would need to be eliminated or taxes would need to increase by 50 percent.

The Congressional Budget Office has just released its assessment of the administration’s budget outlook. The numbers are shocking. Under the president’s policies the federal deficit will exceed $700bn (€520bn, £467bn) in every year over the next decade. The sea of red ink will more than double the national debt to more than $20,000bn. The upshot is that in 2020, the deficit is projected to be $1,200bn, of which more than $900bn is borrowing to pay interest on previous debt. It is a sorry state of affairs.

So Obama and The Democrats want Financial “reform”.

They want to punish Wall Street!  Those evil, corrupt Capitalist Bastards!

But just like the Health Care “reform” that was more about stealth tactics to eventually kill off the private industry and have you dependent on the government, this too is not about Finances and Wall Street and just another polarized Alinsky tactic.

The upshot: no downgrade in our status as a AAA  Credit nation until interest equals 14 per cent of revenues. (and when it is downgraded the cost of the 13+ Trillion dollar debt goes up!)

Let’s party ‘til 2014 because in the Obama administration budget, D-Day (Downgrade Day) is 2015 when the magic number reaches 14.8 per cent. Moreover, the plan is not merely to flirt with modest deterioration in creditworthiness. In 2020, the ratio reaches 20.1 per cent. The US is on track for a junk-bond bonanza.

Just after 2014 when all the Health Care taxes come into full force and by then private health plans will likely be near extinction.

Coincidence?

I think not.

It’s just another takeover, but in the 2000+ plus throw the frog in cold water and then boil him slowly to death kind of way these Democrats seem to prefer.

Hell, they don’t even READ their own damn bills!

And it’s brought to you by Barney Frank and the retiring Chris Dodd, the guys who created the Mortgage mess!!

So the fox is going to save the chickens in the chicken coop!

Some Highlights

The Power to Unwind:

The FDIC would have the authority to liquidate failing firms while the Treasury Department fronts the money to do so. There would also be a repayment plan so that taxpayers are guaranteed to get the money back (and where does the government get the money??? You’re looking at his computer!).

So if the government “deems” you failing, you get taken over and sold off.

Gee, that can’t be abused at all can it! 😦
Financial Stability Oversight Council:

The council would monitor systemic risk across the entire financial system and make recommendations to the Federal Reserve to alleviate that risk. The ten-member council would include the heads of the federal financial agencies.

Corporate America’s Sith Overload. What do you bet they will be political appointees?

Just like the Oil Spill Investigation commission that has a bunch of left wing environmentalists and not one Engineer or Oil Businessperson!

They would never use any of those Chicago tactics on them, now would they… 😦

The government also gets to decide what is a “financial” firm. Does GM, which makes loans, fall into that category? How about Wal-Mart, which issues its own credit cards?

In effect, this lets the government seize and dismantle the assets of almost any company — and then force others to pay for it.
Fannie/Freddie:

Republicans biggest beef with the whole bill is that it does nothing to address the problems, and sustainability, of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

For instance: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were in arguably at the heart of the financial crisis, and which have already cost U.S. taxpayers $146 billion (with hundreds of billions more on the way), aren’t addressed in this bill at all.

The major reason for the collapse in the first place gets ignored!

Wonder Why?

Oh, that’s right, it’s government owned, heavily in debt, and guaranteed to be bailed out! (by you of course!)

Just Like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security!

No problems there! 🙂

No Resolution Fund:

The House wanted to create a $150 billion fund to pay for any future bailouts. The fund would be paid for by the banks. This provision was gutted. Conferees agreed that this could only be created after a massive collapse. This is the fund that Republicans successfully painted as a permanent bailout fund when Democrats in the Senate tried to include a similar, but only $50 billion, fund.

And the Republicans were right. Can you say, slush fund!

Any bank that runs into trouble can still walk up to Uncle Sam’s borrowing window and, hand outstretched, ask for money. And if the bank is politically connected or very large, it will get it.

The bill also creates a new agency inside the Federal Reserve that will have extensive power over consumer lenders. Hold the applause, because likely new limits on checking account fees and interest on credit cards will mean less access to credit, not more.

So you have less credit available, you have new regulations and new taxes, an Oversight committe that can swoop in and shut you down, and Health care cost are going to skyrocket under ObamaCare.

Sounds like a great business climate to me. Sign me up. 🙂

US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has told the BBC that the world “cannot depend as much on the US as it did in the past”.

Because the Government is going to intentionally, “for your protection” get in the way of business even more now than before.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The economic recovery won’t be catching fire any time soon.

Businesses and governments are likely to reduce spending in the second half of the year. Consumers, who drive most economic growth, aren’t expected to take up the slack.

The Commerce Department said Friday that the economy grew at an annual rate of 2.7 percent in the first quarter, offering its third and final estimate for the period. It was slower than initially thought because consumers spent less and imports rose faster that previously calculated.

Economists anticipate even slower growth ahead as companies bring their stockpiles more in line with sales. Factory output has climbed this year. But it was driven more by businesses replenishing their warehouses after the recession and less by consumer demand.

“The economy is growing, but still at a disappointingly slow pace,” said Zach Pandl, an economist at Nomura Securities. Take away businesses restocking their inventories and “you still have a lukewarm recovery,” he said.

Other factors could hold back growth. Federal government stimulus spending is expected to fade. The European debt crisis could slow U.S. exports and world trade. And state and local governments are likely to rein in spending and raise taxes as they struggle to close budget gaps.

“This is still the weakest and longest economic recovery in U.S. postwar history,” said Paul Dales, U.S. economist with Capital Economics.

High unemployment and tight credit have kept consumers from ramping up their spending as in past recoveries. The housing industry has played a big role after previous recessions. But this time it is slumping and subtracting from economic growth.

Most economists expect the unemployment rate, currently at 9.7 percent, to remain above 9 percent through the end of the year.

The economy has grown for three consecutive quarters after shrinking for four straight during the recession — the longest contraction since World War II.

And Stimulus III is on the way. After all, the previous ones were a roaring success!! So let’s do it again! and again! and again!!

Another part of the bill, and one that’s gotten little attention, makes changes to the amount of capital banks must keep to back up their loans. Banks eventually will be forced to raise more capital, or to reduce their lending. It also gives the government oversight over the $600 trillion derivatives market, without telling us what the rules will be. That, no doubt, will be left to bureaucrats. (IBD)

And they do a bang up job of it, always.

Add in that the Government has taken over Banks, Car Companies,Insurance Companies, and now wants to micromanage the financial sector.

So they want to decide who lives and who dies (Health Care)

Who is employed, by who whom and how that company operates. And if they don’t like it, they will swoop in “for your own protection” and save you from the evil capitalist exploiters.

Unions, especially Government Unions get special perks, deals and exemptions.

They are actively trying to destroy the Oil Industry (the moratorium) so they can take that over because “it’s too big and too important fail”. But if we help it fail, that’s ok.

Medicare and Medicaid  and Social Security are bankrupt. Fannie and Freddie are a bottomless pit.

The Congress wants an Internet “kill switch” for cyber-terrorists (terrorists being Right-wingers according to Homeland Security Secretary Napalitano last year)

Taxes are going up in 2011 by large amounts.

New taxes from ObamaCare start in 2011.

Unemployment may permanently be around 10% some economist are saying if everything remains as is.

50% of the people don’t even pay taxes.

The only sector of jobs that’s growing is the Public, government sector.

They want “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” aka Amnesty. And will not settle for less.

They are going to sue Arizona for wanting to protect itself.

That’s the Government’s job! 🙂

And if you don’t like the fact that they aren’t and don’t care to, tough bovine fecal matter!

We are the Power. Not You!

So they want to control your Energy, you Job, your Boss, your security, your Medical Care, Your Health, your retirement, and your how you make money.

So what does this all mean?

It means we have a President who willfully and with ideological malice wants to downgrade America to not only  ‘just another country’ but a banana 2nd or third tier one to boot. Nothing special.

What our country needs today is an inspirational leader, one who gets what makes the U.S. unique and who’ll boldly lead the nation out of its slide toward despair as he invites the world to climb with us.

What we have is a Banana Republic Dictator Wannabe.

He wants to throw the American People (the frog) in the cold water and boil them to death slowly.

To take over your life completely.

He want’s to “know whose ass to kick”.

Yours.

So he’s in touch with his Inner Banana (Dictator that is!). 🙂