Hail Armageddon

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

(Charles Krauthammer) “The worst-case scenario for us,” a leading anti-budget-cuts lobbyist told The Post, “is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens.”

Think about that. Worst case? That a government drowning in debt should cut back by 2.2 percent — and the country survives. That a government now borrowing 35 cents of every dollar it spends reduces that borrowing by two cents “and nothing bad really happens.” Oh, the humanity!

A normal citizen might think this a good thing. For reactionary liberalism, however, whatever sum our ever-inflating government happens to spend today (now double what Bill Clinton spent in his last year) is the Platonic ideal — the reduction of which, however minuscule, is a national calamity.

Or damn well should be. Otherwise, people might get the idea that we can shrink government and live on.

To a liberal the horror of you not needing them or not needing them more and more is a their worst nightmare. You have to be dependent on them, for everything, including your thoughts. That’s just the way their universe works.

You can’t possibly survive without their “benevolence”, their “fairness” and their “justice”!

And cutting a few days of overspending is like a mortal wound to these guys.

Remember, they are the drug dealers (money) who depend on you being addicted to them.  But they are also Drug addicts who need a bigger and bigger hit to get that buzz of importance and power they crave.

The Obama administration has every incentive to make the sky fall, lest we suffer that terrible calamity — cuts the nation survives. Are they threatening to pare back consultants, conferences, travel and other nonessential fluff? Hardly. It shall be air-traffic control. Meat inspection. Weather forecasting.

On the local level it’s always, Cops, and Firefighters. It’s an all trick.

Then in Phoenix, they pass a Food Tax to create more Firefighters and Cops and don’t do it and now they have a fight to keep or else…Guess what? 🙂

In Education, they never talk about cutting the Administrators and Bureaucrats. The people who SHOULD be cut.

Nope, it’s all about FEAR.

“Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.”

― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War

A 2011 Government Accountability Office report gave a sampling of the vastness of what could be cut, consolidated and rationalized in Washington: 44 overlapping job training programs, 18 for nutrition assistance, 82 (!) on teacher quality, 56 dealing with financial literacy, more than 20 for homelessness, etc. Total annual cost: $100 billion-$200 billion, about two to five times the entire domestic sequester.

Are these on the chopping block? No sir. It’s firemen first. That’s the phrase coined in 1976 by legendary Washington Monthly editor Charlie Peters to describe the way government functionaries beat back budget cuts. Dare suggest a nick in the city budget, and the mayor immediately shuts down the firehouse. The DMV back office, stacked with nepotistic incompetents, remains intact. Shrink it and no one would notice. Sell the firetruck — the people scream and the city council falls silent about any future cuts.

After all, the sequester is just one-half of 1 percent of GDP. It amounts to 1.4 cents on the dollar of nondefense spending, 2 cents overall.

Because of this year’s payroll tax increase, millions of American workers have had to tighten their belts by precisely 2 percent. They found a way. Washington, spending $3.8 trillion, cannot? If so, we might as well declare bankruptcy now and save the attorneys’ fees.

The problem with sequestration, of course, is that the cuts are across the board and do not allow money to move between accounts. It’s dumb because it doesn’t discriminate.

Fine. Then change the law. That’s why we have a Congress. Discriminate. Prioritize. That’s why we have budgets. Except that the Democratic Senate hasn’t passed one in four years. (1,402 days) And the White House, which proposed the sequester in the first place, had 18 months to establish rational priorities among accounts — and did nothing.

When the GOP House passed an alternative that cut where the real money is — entitlement spending — President Obama threatened a veto. Meaning, he would have insisted that the sequester go into effect — the very same sequester he now tells us will bring on Armageddon.

Good grief. The entire sequester would have reduced last year’s deficit from $1.33 trillion to $1.24 trillion. A fraction of a fraction. Nonetheless, insists Obama, such a cut is intolerable. It has to be “balanced” — i.e., largely replaced — by yet more taxes.

Which demonstrates that, for Obama, this is not about deficit reduction, which interests him not at all. The purpose is purely political: to complete his Election Day victory by breaking the Republican opposition.

At the fiscal cliff, Obama broke — and split — the Republicans on taxes. With the sequester, he intends to break them on spending. Make the cuts as painful as possible, and watch the Republicans come crawling for a “balanced” (i.e., tax-hiking) deal.

In the past two years, House Republicans stopped cold Obama’s left-liberal agenda. Break them now, and the road is open to resume enactment of the expansive, entitlement-state liberalism that Obama proclaimed in his second inaugural address.

But he cannot win if “nothing bad really happens.” Indeed, he’d look both foolish and cynical for having cried wolf.

Obama’s incentive to deliberately make the most painful and socially disruptive cuts possible (say, oh, releasing illegal immigrants from prison) is enormous. And alarming.

Which was over a thousand BEFORE the Sequester not 300 as claimed. It was a just an excuse to do what THEY wanted to do all along anyhow.

Hail Armageddon.

When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
Thomas Jefferson

And Obama says he’s “Not a Dictator”. 🙂
It’s just his way or Armageddon!
Vote for Armageddon! 🙂
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 

 

 

The Iceberg of Truth

From 1954 through 2012, the federal government shelled out a total of almost $72 trillion on all spending, combined. Over the same period, it collected revenues of under $56 trillion from all sources. The $16 trillion difference is today’s federal debt.

But this simple math hides the fact that the dollar in your pocket today doesn’t buy what the dollar in your grandfather’s pocket bought years ago. There is a sleight-of-hand to Washington’s method of dealing with long-term debt. Like every shell game, those who play will lose to those who make the rules.

And make no mistake, we are all playing by Washington’s rules.

See for yourself: Inflation Calculator

$1 in 1954 now cost $8.56.

Just since Obama, it’s $1.07

And that 7% “tax” ,if you will, hits the poor just as much as anyone else. Just don’t try to explain that (as I have) to the low-information, unenlightened narcissistic “general public” who don’t understand even this most basic of concepts.

The Debt in 1954: $271,259,599,108.46

By 2009 it was $10,000,000,000,000

The Debt Now:  $16,442,474,000,000.00

In 1960, the federal government spent $1.6 billion more than it collected in taxes. Given the deficits we run up these days, $1.6 billion seems almost laughable. Today, Washington blows through that much money in the length of time it takes to sit through a screening of “The Hobbit.”

In 1960, though, you could buy six times more stuff for a dollar than you can buy today. That makes 1960’s $1.6 billion deficit equivalent to a $10 billion deficit today.

Which Congress blows through in 2 days!

So why is our money worth so much less, and why does it matter? After all, wages keep pace with inflation over time, so it’s a wash, right? Well … no, it isn’t. A cost of living wage hike protects the money you earn this year from this year’s inflation. It does nothing to protect money you earned last year and saved.

With inflation, the government pays back the number of dollars it borrowed, not the value of the dollars it borrowed. Inflation makes the dollars the government pays back worth less than the dollars it borrowed.

It’s like my borrowing your car for a year. Sure, I give you the car back at the end of the year, but because of mileage and wear-and-tear, the car I give back is less valuable than the car I borrowed. Inflation is to the dollar what mileage and wear-and-tear is to the car.

The Politicians Know

Were it not for inflation, the $16 trillion that the government owes would be more than $22 trillion. Where did the $6 trillion difference go? It came out of people’s pockets. The same inflation that reduces the value of the dollars the government owes also reduces the value of the dollars you own — your savings, the equity in your house, your retirement fund.

Sure, individual prices rise and fall over time, but that is not inflation. Inflation is the devaluing of existing dollars by the printing of more dollars — something politicians euphemistically call, “quantitative easing” and “lowering interest rates.”

And boy does Obama LOVE to do that!

Washington’s debt has gotten so far out of control that there are no politically viable cuts to make, nor enough rich people to tax in order to balance the budget.

The only thing left is for the government to print money to pay its bills. This is why the Federal Reserve has decided to keep long-term interest rates near 0% for the foreseeable future, and why observant people know that, unless Washington gets serious about cutting spending, we’re going to be in for some serious inflation.

Nonexistent interest rates and significant inflation are the only things that will allow the government to continue spending money it does not have. And the more irresponsible the government is with spending, the more inflation will erode away our savings. This is a matter of simple economics.

Unfortunately, Washington’s fiscal problem has grown so large that the answer now goes beyond simple economics. We must return government to its appropriate role as a referee in the marketplace, not a player. If we don’t do this, the laws of mathematics and the forces of economics will do it for us — and they won’t be gentle.

The Truth will hurt and hurt bad one day.

The sad thing is that the politicians all know as much. They just care more about the next election than they care about America’s long-term economic health. (IBD)

The drug addicts aren’t going to cut themselves off and they don’t want the wrath of those they’ve addicted vented on them either.

And the people who elected them are largely clueless narcissists who just want whatever they can take from others to be given to them because that’s “fair” and don’t really care what the consequences are.

Personal responsibility and personal self-reliance are archaic, quaint notions of the past.

So we’re the Titanic and the Iceberg of Truth is out there, it’s just a matter of when not if we hit it unless all the drug addicts do something they don’t want to do.

TRUTH!

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

The New America

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

John Stossel: The Obama administration now proposes to spend millions more on handouts, despite ample evidence of their perverse effects.

I would argue that that is exactly WHY HE IS DOING IT and he knows exactly why he’s doing it. As usual, it’s political, not economical.

The more dependents, the more votes for more dependents, the more addicts for the never-ending hamster wheel to the promised land.

Shaun Donovan, secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, says, “The single most important thing HUD does is provide rental assistance to America’s most vulnerable families — and the Obama administration is proposing bold steps to meet their needs.” They always propose “bold steps.”

In this case, HUD wants to spend millions more to renew Section 8 housing vouchers that help poor people pay rent.

Isn’t it curious 🙂 that Section 8 housing just happens to be named similar to : The term Section 8 refers to a category of discharge from the United States military when judged mentally unfit for duty.  (It’s what Klinger was trying for for 11 years on M*A*S*H).

Coincidence? I doubt it. 🙂

The Section 8 program ballooned during the ’90s to “solve” a previous government failure: crime-ridden public housing. Rent vouchers allow the feds to disperse tenants from failed projects into private residencies. There, poor people would learn good habits from middle-class people.

It was a reasonable idea. But, as always, there were unintended consequences.

“On paper, Section 8 seems like it should be successful,” says Donald Gobin, a Section 8 landlord in New Hampshire. “But unless tenants have some unusual fire in their belly, the program hinders upward mobility.”

Goo, because then the low-information drug addicted voter votes to keep the gravy train going. That’s good for the politician. And what’s good for the politician MUST be good for all of us because they “care” and it’s only “fair”.

Gobin complains that his tenants are allowed to use Section 8 subsides for an unlimited amount of time. There is no work requirement. Recipients can become comfortably dependent on government assistance.

Isn’t that the goal? 🙂

In Gobin’s over 30 years of renting to Section 8 tenants, he has seen only one break free of the program. Most recipients stay on Section 8 their entire lives. They use it as a permanent crutch.

Government’s rules kill the incentive to succeed.

But who cares, they vote for the politicians who best kisses their ass. Success and struggle are over-rated when you can get others to do it for you. 🙂

Section 8 handouts are meant to be generous enough that tenants may afford a home defined by HUD as decent, safe and sanitary. In its wisdom, the bureaucracy has ruled that “decent, safe and sanitary” may require subsidies as high as $2,200 per month. But because of that, Section 8 tenants often get to live in nicer places than those who pay their own way.

Well, isn’t that “fair”?

True, the worst rent I ever had was $1,200 a month in very nice neighborhood (allegedly I had 2 roommates to share the burden with at the time but I guess they thought I was the government and I had to do all on my own–that didn’t last).

They deserve it right, because it’s only “fair”. 🙂

Kevin Spaulding is an MIT graduate in Boston who works long hours as an engineer, and struggles to cover his rent and student loans. Yet all around him, he says, he sees people who don’t work but live better than he does.

“It doesn’t seem right,” he says. “I work very hard but can only afford a lower-end apartment. There are nonworking people on my street who live in better places than I do because they are on Section 8.”

But if you complain about it, you’re just a mean old capitalist who just wants them to be homeless! You cad!

It’s not “fair”! 🙂

Spaulding understands why his neighbors don’t look for jobs. The subsidies are attractive — they cover 70 to 100 percent of rent and utilities. If Section 8 recipients accumulate money or start to make more, they lose their subsidy.
 “Is there a real incentive for the tenants to go to work? No!” says Gobin. “They have a relatively nice house and do not have to pay for it.”

Then you have your Obama Phone, Your Obama Internet, Your Obama Food Stamps, Your Obama Welfare Check. Why would you ruin a good thing like that with something as hard and mean as a JOB!!  <<shudder in terror>>

That’s ridiculous. Besides, the world owes me . Why? Just Because the politicians I voted for said so! 🙂

Once people are reliant on Section 8 assistance, many do everything in their power to keep it. Some game the system by working under the table so that they do not lose the subsidy. One of Gobin’s lifetime Section 8 tenants started a cooking website. She made considerable money from it, so she went to great lengths to hide the site from her case manager, running it under a different name.

Now see, that’s capitalism! Gaming the system, everyone does it. Especially “rich” people so why shouldn’t I do it. It benefits me, and that’s all that matters.

It’s a lot easier than the alternative.

“Here’s a lady that could definitely work. She actually showed me how to get benefits and play the system,” says Gobin.

Just like “rich” people, right? But with less struggle and less discrimination. 🙂

Although Section 8 adds to our debt while encouraging people to stay dependent, it isn’t going away. HUD says it will continue to “make quality housing possible for every American.”

Because that’s “fair” and you don’t wanna be mean and see all these people homeless now do you? 🙂
Despite $20 billion spent on the program last year, demand for more rental assistance remains strong. There is a long waitlist to receive Section 8 housing in every state. In New York City alone, 120,000 families wait.

Some are truly needy, but many recipients of income transfers are far from poor.

America will soon be $17 trillion in debt, and our biggest federal expense is income transfers. They are justified on the grounds that some of that helps the needy. But we don’t help the needy by encouraging dependency.

Government grows. Dependency grows.

And that’s Exactly why they do it in the first place. That’s a good thing for everyone involved in the incestuous relationship.

It’s just not good for everyone else.

Screw You!  I got mine and YOU get to pay for it! that’s the New American Motto.

In case you thought there was no risk of your taxes going up again, think again. Washington isn’t done with you yet.

Democrats, led by President Barack Obama, want lawmakers to consider a fresh set of tax increases in the next several weeks when they discuss whether to cut spending. 

Think about that for a moment. While they are discussing cutting spending (which they won’t do) they want more tax increases.

But much of what Obama is talking about is raising tax revenue without actually raising tax rates. In Washington-speak, lawmakers will try to collect more tax money by closing tax loopholes, perhaps limiting popular tax deductions and to some degree changing the way citizens pay into the popular Medicare and Social Security programs. (mcclatchydc).

The Tax that isn’t a tax so they can say it’s not a tax per se.

Sounds like Gaming the System. Just like the Section 8 housing.

Funny how that happened…

After all the “fiscal cliff” deal is expected  to raise about $600 billion over 10 years. That’s 60 Billion a year. At the current rate of over-spending that pays for 12 days!

What a Deal! Stick it to “the rich” for virtually nothing and then come back for more!

And if you’re denied just complain, again, that you’re opponent is a “rich” loving asshole!

Funny how that happened… 🙂

According to the CBO, deficits in just the first three months of this fiscal year already add up to $293 billion.

Which means that, despite Obama’s massive tax hikes, deficits will likely top $1 trillion for the fifth year in a row, and Obama will have added $7.5 trillion to the nation’s debt since taking office.

The problem isn’t just that the country is borrowing too much.

It’s that Washington is spending too much on programs that increase dependency on government. (IBD)

But that’s why they ARE doing it. The incestuous drug-addicts are killing everyone else but they don’t care because it benefits them NOW.
And after all, that’s all that matters. What benefits ME, right here, right now. Screw everyone and everything else!

A new Heritage Foundation study finds that the number of people getting federal benefit checks — through Medicare, Social Security, food stamps, subsidized housing, tuition aid or countless other entitlement programs — has shot up 62% since 1988.

That’s more than twice the rate of population growth.

As a result, more than four in 10 Americans are dependent on the federal government for financial help of one sort or another.

And they Vote!

Welcome to the Have-Not Drug Addicts and their “fair” political fellow drug addicts running the asylum.

All you suckers out there slogging along working hard trying to make something of yourself, keep doing it, because grandma needs a new flat screen, SUCKER! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 

Re-runs,Pimps,and Rice Puppets

Overall, the ranks of America’s poor edged up last year to a high of 49.7 million, based on the new census measure.

So let’s vote for Barack “Santa Claus” Obama who’ll take from the rich and give to the poor. Oh, wait, that’s Robin Hood…

But really, he just wants to take from the rich to give to his rich and make the poor dependent on him so that they will vote for his cronies because it’s in their narcissistic drug addicted interest.

Not Robin Hood. Just a common Pimp.

And it ignores reality. But then again, if you’re an ignorant narcissist who cares about reality. What’s in it for me?

Now for the re-run. Heard this all before? Answer: Yes

“As I’ve said before, I’m open to compromise (bwah hahahahahahahaha) and I’m open to new ideas  (bwah hahahahahahahaha). And I’ve been encouraged over the past week to hear Republican after Republican agree  (with me) for the need for more revenue from the wealthiest Americans as part of our arithmetic if we’re going to be serious about reducing the deficit because when it comes to taxes, there are two pathways available. (yeah, cutting spending to my $$ drug addled moronic masses would be a bad idea).

Option one (aka the only one), if Congress fails to act by the end of this year, everybody’s taxes will automatically go up, including the 98 percent of Americans who make less than $250,000 a year and the 97 percent of small businesses who earn less than $250,000 a year. That doesn’t make sense. Our economy can’t afford that right now. Certainly no middle-class family can afford that right now. (NYT)

And it will be the Republicans fault. Oh, and it’s still Bush’s fault for the spending.

Heard it all before? Yep, for the last 4 years. And what happened. He got bored and did what the hell he wanted to and blamed the Republicans for “obstructing” him.

Why would now be any different?  I wouldn’t.

And now Obama is floating having Benghazi Liar face puppet Susan Rice as Secretary of State.

Now that’s a screw you move.

She famously lied her ass off on Different Sunday Talk Shows about Benghazi 5 days after they already knew the actual truth. So she’s either incompetent ,out of touch with reality, or such a complete Toddie that she a virtual puppet.

None of which makes her qualified for the job in reality. But perfect for Obama.

But it’s not like Obama cares. It’s his crony. She deflected the blame away from him long enough for the ignorant masses, too busy watching “Dancing with the Stars” , to re-elect him that he has to give her her reward.

Obama:“I don’t think there’s any debate in this country that when you have four Americans killed, that’s a problem, and we’ve got to get to the bottom of it and there needs to be accountability (Just not from him and his toddies who lied their asses off). We’ve got to bring those who carried it out to justice. They won’t get any debate from me on that,” Obama said sternly.

“But when they go after the U.N. ambassador, apparently because they think she’s an easy target, then they’ve got a problem with me.”

“But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation, is outrageous.”

By the time she was on those shows she and the administration knew with absolute certainty that everything she said on those show was complete and absolute bullshit!

Yeah, the whole WE were lying up our asses and doing the bullshit shuffle doesn’t matter. But you pick on my crony and there will be hell to pay!

That reflects badly on ME. And as we all know it is all about HIM!

“My judgment at this time is that four Americans were killed, and the information that our U.N. ambassador conveyed was clearly false,” McCain, R-Ariz., the top GOP senator on the Armed Services Committee, told reporters at a Capitol Hill news conference. “There was overwhelming evidence that it was completely false. And she should have known what the situation and circumstances were and not tell the world on all Sunday morning talk shows.”

But that was part of  array of flack that was deployed to obscure Benghazi until Obama got re-elected.

Now they have the Petraeus to distract the ignorant masses with something they see on Reality TV.

Oh, and Israel and Iran and Syria are about to go to war…Enjoy.

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 

Gotta Love Mindlessness

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Vice President Joe Biden said Congress should pass the $450-billion American Jobs Act even if the economy were growing at 8 percent and unemployment were as low as 3 percent.

“Look, we should be doing all of this stuff even if we were growing by 8 percent, even if there was a 3 percent unemployment rate in America,” Biden said at an event on Thursday to promote the legislation. “We need better roads, we need better bridges, we need safer streets.”

So even if we were growing we’d need to do exactly the same thing we are doing now!

Wow! the liberal instinct is mindless.

May 2010: Biden- “We have new ideas about how to spend government money wisely.”

“I might add, I’m very proud to say, that’s there’s been virtually no – knock on wood – virtually no fraud associated with the $787 billion program overall,”

You can always count on Uncle Joe… 🙂

“We want to make it clear to the American people, notwithstanding the fact that the economy is growing and even if the economy were raging at 6 or 8 percent a quarter and the growth of the GDP, that’s not the measure we’re going to use when our term ends as to whether or not we think we were successful,”

Sound familiar? (Look at the quote at the top then wonder more about mindlessness of liberalism).

Take-home pay, adjusted for prices, fell 0.3 percent in August, the third decrease in five months, and personal income dropped for the first time in two years, the Commerce Department reported last week. The declines followed news from the Census Bureau that median household income <http://topics.bloomberg.com/household-income/> in 2010 fell to $49,445, the lowest in more than a decade, and the poverty rate jumped to 15.1 percent, a 17-year high. 

Muhtar Kent, Coke’s chief executive, said “in many respects” it was easier doing business in China, which he likened to a well-managed company. “You have a one-stop shop in terms of the Chinese foreign investment agency and local governments are fighting for investment with each other,” he told the Financial Times.

Mr Kent also pointed to Brazil as an example of an emerging economy that is making itself attractive to investment in ways that the US once did.

“They’re learning very fast, these countries,” he said. “In the west, we’re forgetting what really worked 20 years ago. In China and other markets around the world, you see the kind of attention to detail about how business works and how business creates employment.”

Kent also took on Washington head on.

“When a country is in trouble, you can’t have a polarized political process,” he said. “There’s too much comfort. We need more needles to stick in politicians.” (NPR)

FYI: Since this was NPR, all the commentators trashed Coke instead of noticing what he actually said. More mindless liberal attacks.

So when Communist China is more business-friendly than the US, do you think we have a problem?

Nope. It’s all Wall Street’s fault!

Or the Banks, Like Bank of America and their Debit-Card Fees. Problem is, The Dodd-Frank Bill passed by the Democrats CAUSED the problem by restricting fees Banks can charge for transactions so they came up with another one!

But don’t expect the liberals to understand the causal relationship.

The liberals just want you run Bank of America into the ground instead. (Not noticing that other banks are also subject to Dodd-Frank so they will be forced to do it also). That will improve the jobs situation!

I guess they are no longer “too big to fail”. 🙂

And the Fact that Sen. Durbin is so mad at Bank of America for blaming him it proves he did it. But it was for “right” reasons and “for your benefit”.

Enjoy.

“That is an illegitimate charge in a country that has life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in its founding documents,” Nancy Pelosi says about Republican use of “class warfare.”

Gotta love Nancy. Really, you have to, or else! 🙂

Keith Olbermann, host of “Countdown” on Current TV: “Figuratively, where does it (Occupy Wall Street) go from here, do you think? Based upon your experience and what you’ve seen in your three trips down there.”

<Millionaire> Michael Moore: “I think that, not only is this going to continue, these cities that you mentioned. This is what is so wonderful about this. There really isn’t anything driving this other than what Wall Street has done and what those who are in charge of our economy have done. They weren’t just happy enough with multi-billions, they wanted tens of hundreds of billions, maybe even trillions, so –“

Olbermann: “Kleptomania.”

Moore: “They’re kleptomaniacs, is what they are. They’re out of control. I think there is some sort of sociopathic illness and they know what us to life in a kleptocracy. Where the kleptomaniacs run the show. This is going to spread. I said this last week, I said it two weeks ago when I first spoke with you. And the mainstream media was trying to pooh-pooh this, ‘oh it’s just a feud down there, don’t worry.’ Well what happened Saturday, not just here, but as you said in Boston, LA, in Chicago and elsewhere.”

Moore calls on President Obama to give another speech and to call upon his Justice Department to investigate the bankers and give them a perp walk.

But the same people in the Justice Department ,behind Fast & Furious, nothing about this real problem. They want to abolish the ATF instead, that way they can bury all bodies…gotta love mindless partisanship.

Really, you have to love it…or else. Just ask a liberal.

Occupy Wall Street and the tea party
Can you spot the difference??
MEDICARE
Remember that ObamaCare was going to cut $500 Billion and then double counted it as savings but if you try and reform it the Democrat Fear Patrols go ballistic.
Well…
Medicare is subsidizing drug abuse by thousands of beneficiaries who shop around for doctors and fill prescriptions for huge quantities of painkillers and other narcotics far exceeding what any patient could safely use, Congressional investigators say in a new report.

“Our analysis found that about 170,000 Medicare beneficiaries received prescriptions from five or more medical practitioners” for 14 types of drugs that are frequently abused, said Gregory D. Kutz, director of forensic audits and special investigations at the accounting office.

The medications were obtained through Part D of Medicare (Signed By President Bush-by the way but don’t tell the Democrats), which provides coverage for prescription drugs. The drugs most commonly abused by Medicare beneficiaries included powerful prescription painkillers like oxycodones and hydrocodone products. Oxycodones include OxyContin and Percocet.

In one case described in the report, a Medicare beneficiary in Georgia received a 150-day supply of oxycodone in just 27 days by obtaining seven prescriptions from four doctors. Over the course of a year, the woman received prescriptions for a total of 3,655 oxycodone pills (a 1,679-day supply) from 58 different prescribers, and she filled them at more than 40 pharmacies.

In another case, a California man received prescriptions for a total of 1,397 fentanyl patches and pills (a 1,758-day supply) from 21 different prescribers in a year. In a third case, a Texas beneficiary received prescriptions for a total of 4,574 hydrocodone pills (a 994-day supply) from 25 different doctors. (NY Times)

But if you want to reform Medicare you just want Seniors to die! (according to the Left).

But at least Drug Addicts are on the government dole funded by taxpayers. We fund the biggest drug addicts of all already–Congress!
And the Mindless Zombies continue ever onward…Must Spend! Must Control!…
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler


Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel


Welcome to Armageddon

Welcome to Armageddon Day, Aug 2nd. 🙂

“Any doubts that this country has an insular, inept, and cataclysmically dysfunctional political class were erased long ago, but it bears repeating that only in certain elite precincts could any of the debt ‘deals’ discussed over the last month be seen as anything but a juvenile, cosmetic solution to a real and titanic problem. That problem isn’t going away simply because the political crisis may be pushed (the president hopes) beyond the 2012 election…

“Members of the political class pat themselves on their backs for coming up with a deal that is ‘the best deal they could get.’ The dominant media coo about the statesmanship and sobriety that supposedly pulled the nation from the economic brink, permitting us all to return to our mundane pursuits. But the spending will increase and the liabilities will mount. The day of fiscal reckoning will continue to approach.”

Under the latest “deal,” we are told, federal spending will be cut approximately $2.7 trillion. That’s false. We’re going to pretend to cut $2.7 trillion, which is somehow meant to be a greater achievement than pretending to cut $1.5 trillion, but not as great as pretending to cut $4 trillion, which is what the rating agencies would prefer. In reality (that benighted realm that exists outside the District of Columbia), spending will increase by about $6,000,000,000,000. (Peter Kirsanow).

It’s a Political Solution, NOT an economic one. Which is all Washington and their attendant monetary drug addicts and co-dependent partisans understand.

But it’s only math. It’s not like Democrats actually understand it or the Republican really want to fix it. Money is blood Washington and they aren’t going to slit their wrists, just ours. But we’ll feel good doing it, at least they hope so.

“The first part of this agreement will cut about $1 trillion in spending over the next 10 years….The result would be the lowest level of annual domestic spending since Dwight Eisenhower was president.”

Do you smell a new Democrat Talking Point? 🙂

The Weekly Standard apparently has more people that understand both math and history:

Under Eisenhower, non-defense spending averaged 7.5 percent of GDP. In the pre-Obama era, the all-time record for non-defense spending was 17.7 percent of GDP, set 20 years ago (in 1991) under the first President Bush. This year, under Obama, the tally for non-defense spending will be an estimated 20.2 percent of GDP, and under the proposed debt-ceiling agreement, non-defense spending would eclipse the pre-Obama record every single year for the foreseeable future. (Meanwhile, defense spending has dropped markedly as a percentage of total federal spending and will soon drop far more.)

So perhaps what Obama meant to say was, “Under this agreement, domestic spending will remain higher throughout the next decade than it ever was before I took office, easily doubling domestic spending during the Eisenhower administration — even as a percentage of GDP.”

Well, if they could do math and history at the White House, that is. (townhall.com)

By the way, even if Obama meant discretionary spending, he’d still be wrong:

But We still have our Dear leader. The one who was very close to just raising the Debt Ceiling because, He personally, felt like it. His idea of a take charge attitude is not lead, but to dictate.

Last week, when President Barack Obama spoke to the National Council of La Raza (“The Race”), he said something that should alarm every American. He confessed that he’d like to “bypass Congress and change the laws” on his own. He added, “Believe me; the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you.”

He doesn’t need to promise us. We believe him, because we’ve been watching his rogue behavior since the moment he entered office.

Way back in February 2010, even The New York Times unveiled his modus operandi, in its report “Obama Making Plans to Use Executive Power.” It summarized, “With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.”

Obama’s unauthorized war in Libya was just one more wayward decision in a long line of executive-power-run-amok choices, taken despite the fact that top Pentagon lawyers considered his unilateral Libyan invasion to be illegal “hostilities.” And according to congressional testimony, his own lawyers in the Office of Legal Counsel were asked to soft-pedal their views so as to curb any further violation allegations.

What alarms me is that these perversions of power are coming from not only the highest office in the land but also Obama’s advisers and team (including his lawyers). In his speech to the National Council of La Raza, the president also explained that he was taking his cues from others: “I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own.”

Of course, Obama knew that to do so at the outset of the debt debates would have ensured his political downfall. On the other hand, swooping down in the last hour on Capitol Hill from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. with his Democratic majority in the Senate to save the economy from hopeless partisan gridlock would surely put him on the front page of Savior Daily!

Speaking of the press, what’s equally tragic is that the Obama-mania media are jumping on the executive-power runaway express. Just this past Thursday, CNN’s website ran an article by Jack Balkin, a constitutional law expert at Yale, titled “3 ways Obama could bypass Congress.” (Do you think CNN would have extended the same clemency from Congress to former President George W. Bush?)

As The New York Times reported at the beginning of last year, Obama’s exploits to bypass Congress are intended to “advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.” We now can add America’s border problems to those, as Obama also elaborated last week that the temptation to bypass Congress includes “not just immigration reform.” No wonder the crowd began to chant “Yes, we can!” (Tragically, it seems that too many citizens want a (SET ITAL) Fuhrer (END ITAL) more than they do a president.)

Do we really want a power-hungry rogue president who continually is tempted to bypass Congress? Will we continue to allow unilateral power to our president to follow his own political whims and desires? Do we want a supreme leader who constantly seeks ways to justify dodging our bicameral government — the very checks and balances of our republic? When he avoids Congress, is he not also trampling on the Constitution and its mandates for separation of powers and teamwork among our three branches of government?

Has the president forgotten his oath of office, “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”?

Mr. President, I strongly suggest you meditate upon the legal genius of Joseph Story, a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1811 to 1845 (appointed by President James Madison). Justice Story wrote: “The duty imposed upon (the president) to take care, that the laws be faithfully executed, follows out the strong injunctions of his oath of office, that he will ‘preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.’ The great object of the executive department is to accomplish this purpose.”

Wow, how Justice Story’s words fly in the face of President Obama’s thoughts about bypassing Congress.

No wonder Thomas Jefferson passionately proclaimed: “I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution … taking from the federal government the power of borrowing.”

God, lead Obama not into doing-things-on-his-own temptation. (Chuck Norris)

But when you have drug addicts running the show, what else would you expect but a solution that says methadone is a good first step! 😦

Wait and See Jobs

The American people didn’t send us here to wage symbolic battles or win symbolic victories.  They would much rather have the comfort of knowing that when they open their first paycheck on January of 2011, it won’t be smaller than it was before, all because Washington decided they preferred to have a fight and failed to act.

Make no mistake:  Allowing taxes to go up on all Americans would have raised taxes by $3,000 for a typical American family. And that could cost our economy well over a million jobs.–Obama Dec 6, 2010 from Whitehouse.gov.

So what’s changed in 7 months?

Why is creating jobs so hard for business these days?

Think of it this way. When an employer hires a full-time worker, the employer thinks of the relationship as long term. During an initial training and learning period, the employer probably pays out more in wages and benefits than the company gets back in production. But over a longer period, the hope is to turn that around and make a profit.

When employers hire new employees, then, they are making a gamble. They are betting that over time, the economics of the relationship will pan out.

The problem in the current economy is that hiring new workers and committing to new production has become extremely risky. As the JCA folks explain, an employer who hires workers today has no idea what the company’s future labor costs will be. Or its building and facility costs. Or its cost of capital. Or its taxes.

What’s causing all this uncertainty? You guessed it. Nobody knows what is going to happen in Washington, D.C.

Take the cost of labor. The Affordable Care Act (what some people call ObamaCare) is designed to force employers to provide full-time employees with comprehensive health insurance in less than three years. While the goal may be admirable, the consequences are not. Although no one knows how much this extra burden will cost, estimates are that the required family coverage will reach $15,000 a year or more — the equivalent of an additional $6 an hour minimum wage.

Employers could decide to drop their health insurance altogether; and if they do so they must pay a fine of $2,000 per employee per year. Yet if a lot of employers do this (and apparently a lot of them are thinking about it), don’t you think the federal government will respond by making the fine a lot higher?

Then there is the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). After the aircraft maker Boeing spent $1 billion building a new plant and hiring 1,000 workers in South Carolina, the agency brought a halt to the whole thing, calling it an unfair labor practice. Boeing’s sin? South Carolina is a right-to-work state. The company should have built the plant in Seattle, where it would be required to use union labor.

There is more bad news. The NLRB is considering rule changes that would make it much easier to unionize workers. Would you like to see employers across the country facing the same kind of turmoil state governments are now facing in dealing with public sector unions? Most employers don’t relish that idea either.

Under the Obama presidency, the NLRB has made a radical change of direction. Some would say it is much more pro-labor, but this is a misnomer. What the agency is dedicated to is not labor, but making labor more costly.

As for capital investments such as new buildings and new equipment, here again there is considerable regulatory uncertainty. It should come as no surprise that the Obama administration is overly friendly to environmental groups who see carbon dioxide emissions as pollution. Yet every act of production emits carbon dioxide. You even emit it when you exhale.

As for the cost of financial capital, what is going to happen is anybody’s guess. When the Bush tax cuts finally do expire, the tax on capital gains will increase by a third and the tax on dividends will more than double. The administration has made no secret that it would like to accelerate these tax increases and make them even higher.

Bottom line: even if there were no Republican opposition in Washington, we would be in trouble. The Obama administration is profoundly anti-labor. It thinks it is pro-labor, of course. But that is because it is so naïve about economics that it doesn’t understand that when you make hiring more costly there will be less hiring.

But there are Republicans in Washington, and (ironically) their presence in some ways adds to uncertainty. While the two parties are battling, who knows what the outcome will be? No one can.

So the best strategy from a business perspective is to sit on cash, delay the employment of labor and capital and wait to see what happens next. (John C. Goodman)

After all, if you’re deemed “rich” or a “fat cat” that is also a politically incorrect one then you’re just waiting for the hammer to fall.

Is the risk worth the reward?

Basic human nature says no.

And with Class Warfare in full bloom and anti-business Democrats on the warpath for Obama’s Re-Coronation why bother.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez