Government Advice

You know with Liberals Government is God. And God is the only one who should be giving the masses advice. After all, the Government wants to take over your retirement anyhow. See Guaranteed Retirement Accounts. We all know the Government is far better at managing our own money than we are. Social Security proved that, right?

The Government only has your best interests at heart, right? They are compassionate and fair, unlike evil capitalists… right? 🙂

Popular financial radio show host Dave Ramsey caused a firestorm on Twitter last week when he weighed in against the “fiduciary rule”—the controversial pending Department of Labor regulation that would impose new restrictions on a vast swath of financial professionals who handle IRAs and 401(k) accounts. Yet, Ramsey was only echoing concerns about the costs of the rule already expressed by Members of Congress from both parties.

Ramsey Tweeted, “this Obama rule will kill the Middle Class and below ability to access personal advice.” A war of Tweets then broke out between opponents of the rule, and supporters, the latter of which includes fee-based investment advisers expected to benefit from the new costs the rule will shower on their broker competitors.

Fittingly, even before Ramsey came out against the rule, one of his critics called for using the rule against Ramsey, supposedly for providing advice said critic deemed harmful to savers. In an October article in LifeHealthPro, an online trade journal for insurance agents and financial advisers, Michael Markey, an insurance agent and owner of Legacy Financial Network, called for Ramsey to “be regulated and to be held accountable” by the government for the opinions he gives to listeners. Markey hailed the Labor Department rule as ushering a new era in which “entertainers like Dave Ramsey can no longer evade the pursuit of regulatory oversight.”

Isn’t self-interest and greed wonderful. Now, like people who disagree with the Global Warming crowd, called childishly “deniers”, now if you’re giving financial advice for free you’re an “entertainer”. So let’s get the Government involved, that’s “fair”.

Mind you we have a Fee-based Investment adviser here in Phoenix who has weekly radio show. So is he an “entertainer” too?

Experts both for and against the rule I have talked to agree its broad reach could extend to financial media personalities who offer tips to individual audience members, a group that includes not just Ramsey but TV hosts like Suze Orman and Jim Cramer, as well as many other broadcasters who opine on business and investment matters. They would be ensnared by the rule’s broad redefinition of a vast swath of financial professionals as “fiduciaries” and its mandate that these “fiduciaries” only serve the “best interest” of IRA and 401(k) holders.

Again, the Government doesn’t understand the difference  (Between Fiduciary and Non-Fiduciary) and doesn’t care because it’s what THEY want, for what ever narcissist jackass reason. Remember, Government is your friend. You trust them….:)

The main focus of the Labor Department rule has been its likely effects on brokers and their customers.The rule creates a presumption against brokers taking third-party commissions from mutual funds they sell to savers.

Their evil narcissistic prey-oriented capitalists? Just like Government. 🙂

Because of this, savers who currently pay only a small commission on the execution of an order may have to pay a much larger fee based on a percentage of their assets, which would drive some brokers to simply stop serving middle-income investors.

Government “care” in action.

As I note in a new report for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, similar restrictions in Great Britain have caused a “guidance gap” in which brokers have largely stopped serving brokers with assets less than £150,000 ($240,000).

Only “evil” rich people should get advice on how to make more money out of their money. Everyone else should just depend on Mama Government and Big Brother for their daily bread.

But the potential chilling effect of this rule on free financial discussion in the media is even more frightening. Kent Mason, a partner at the law firm Davis & Harman who has testified before Congress on the ill effects of the fiduciary rule, strongly disagrees with Markey that Ramsey and others should be shut up. But, worryingly, he says Markey is mostly right in his interpretation of the fiduciary rule’s ability to muzzle financial personalities.

“Under the proposed regulation, investment advice from a radio host to a caller regarding the caller’s own investment issues would appear to be fiduciary advice if the advice addresses specific investments,” Mason said in an email. It doesn’t matter that Ramsey and other hosts aren’t compensated by listeners, he adds, as the DOL rule explicitly covers those who give investment advice and receive compensation “from any source.” Mason agrees with Markey that the compensation Ramsey receives from radio stations that carry his show and from book sales are enough to define Ramsey as a “fiduciary” under the rule.

Though the rule does contain an exemption for “recommendations made to the general public,” this wouldn’t protect Ramsey and other radio and television personalities if they gave specific answers to callers or audience members, argue both Mason and Markey. Similarly, Mason adds, while the main part of investment seminars would be exempt, “if during the seminar, someone from the audience asks a question about his or her situation and the speaker answers the question with respect to specific investments, that answer would be fiduciary advice.”

Such limits on financial discussion may seem to violate the First Amendment on its face. But a lawsuit against such restrictions would not be a slam dunk, as this is largely uncharted legal territory. Courts have tread lightly on financial regulation that may harm free speech. In Lowe v. SEC, 472 U.S. 181 (1985), the Supreme Court did strike down a ban by the Securities and Exchange Commission on an investment newsletter published by a convicted felon. But the opinion did not touch upon constitutional issues, as the Court ruled that the law itself – different from the Employee Retirement Income Security Act that governs the Labor Department – applied only to person-to-person, rather than general, advice.

To my knowledge, there has never been a federal court ruling on whether restrictions on financial advice offered to individuals in a public forum would violate the First Amendment. In any event, even if this aspect of the rule were eventually ruled unconstitutional, it may take years before such cases wind their way through the courts, and the free flow of financial discussion would be chilled until such a ruling occurs.

All the more reason for the Labor Department to withdraw the fiduciary rule as written. If it does not do so, Congress must perform its fiduciary duty to the American people and throw out this regulation that is definitely not in savers’ “best interest.” (John Berlau, Forbes).

But it’s The Governments and the it’s “supporters” “Best Interest”. 🙂

WE ARE FROM THE GOVERNMENT ARE WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU

https://purchases.moneymappress.com/MMRSS499NUTIME/PMMRS1EC/index.htm?pageNumber=2

fish1

 

 

 

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

 

Dr Frankenstein, I Presume…

You wonder why the President and The Democrat Congress who are tanking in the polls don’t do more to stimulate jobs and the economy and why they have been so completely focused on Health Care (for 15 months) and now only mention it in glowing terms even though the majority of American hated it before and still hate it now.

Notice, the controversial Andy Griffith add they pulled right after it came out is now on practically every commercial break (at least that I see). Hmmm…

Financial Reform where businesses are saddled with massive new regulations and new Health Care mandates that choke off jobs.

The looming Tax Increases of 1/1/11 that the Democrats aren’t jazzed about doing anything about and left town without bothering to do anything or even pass a budget.

Fixing the domestic economy and jobs bores the crap out them.

Global warming, which is a fraud to begin with, excites them though.

See http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/04/environmentalists-stay-mostly-quiet-about-violent-climate-change-advertisement/ but be warned it is VERY graphic- it depicts a classroom where 2 students who don’t agree with the teachers and their classmates global warming agenda and are blown up IN CLASS in VERY Graphic details and that’s just the start of this should-be-in-a -horror movie not an advertisement holier-than-thou pronouncement from on high. It goes on for almost 4 Minutes of people timidly agreeing with the voice of authority and if you don’t you get blown up in VERY graphic  detail. “No pressure” as the ad repeats then blows someone up. Even Gillian Anderson (from the X-Files) at the end who says her contribution was to do the voice over at the end is blown up!

The group that created it thought it was funny and wanted to make people laugh. Blowing up children & co-workers, is funny. Blowing up people who oppose you is funny.

When no one did, they apologized (not really):

“Many people found the resulting film extremely funny, but unfortunately some didn’t and we sincerely apologise to anybody we have offended,” said 10:10, the British group who created the ad.
Franny Armstrong, 10:10 founder, was more direct and unapologetic in justifying the video’s graphic explosion scene: “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change.”

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid.

Obama has hinted at this new legislative strategy while promising to press forward on climate change and energy, immigration and the Guantanamo Bay prison.

“One of my top priorities next year is to have an energy policy that begins to address all facets of our overreliance on fossil fuels. We may end up having to do it in chunks, as opposed to some sort of comprehensive omnibus legislation. But we’re going to stay on this,” he said in a recent interview with Rolling Stone.

Notice the word jobs, nor economy, were in there? Does he ever talk about them, except for five minutes at the beginning of something then totally forget about them. Many times working actively against them.

In June, the EPA issued a proposal that would force industrial, commercial and institutional boilers and heaters to use “maximum achievable control technology” to reduce harmful emissions that erode air quality and pose a public health risk.

But the Inhofe report — written by the Senate Environment and Public Works minority staff titled and titled “EPA’s Anti-Industrial Policy: Threatening Jobs and America’s Manufacturing Base,” — found that the proposed rule, known as “Boiler MACT,” could put nearly 800,000 jobs at risk over requirements on commercial and industrial boilers, cement plans and ozone standards.

“Reducing emissions of mercury, hydrogen chloride and other hazardous air pollutants from commercial and industrial boilers is good policy,” the report reads. “But the manner in which EPA set standards to reduce those emissions is impracticable and costly.”

You’ll have cleaner air and water. You’ll have no job and you’ll be living in a hippie Neo-Version of a Pre–Industrial age. But you’ll have cleaner air (that will be fouled by Nations not stupid enough to do this during a global financial crisis).

That’s because the proposed standards are so stringent that not even the best performing sources can meet them, according to the Industrial Energy Consumers of America, (IECA), an industry group that represents companies with 750,000 employees and $800 billion in sales and is cited in the report.

The IECA is “enormously concerned that the high costs of this proposed rule will leave companies no recourse but to shut down the entire facility, not just the boiler,” the report reads.

“We’re going to stay on this because it is good for our economy, it’s good for our national security and, ultimately, it’s good for our environment,” the president is quoted saying in the Rolling Stone magazine interview. (FOX)

This would be the same EPA that declares Carbon Dioxide (what you breathe out) as a hazard to human life! So that too has to be regulated to death.

So why is this President and this Congress so obsessed with these things, even with the prospect of losing the House and the Senate?

Why are they so unconcerned about what the American People want.

Simple. They don’t care. It’s about their vision FOR America.

They don’t want to fix it. They want to change it. Completely.

To suite them and their vastly superior vision.

That end justifies the means. And their lip service boredom with jobs shows they have no desire to care about that other than to stave off the people from evil incarnate TV (aka FOX).

They don’t care. It doesn’t matter to them.

When you’re Dr. Frankenstein, and your building your monster, who cares about the rampaging villagers!

They are just dumb, radical, un-progressive, backward-thinking, morons!! 🙂

Sound familiar?

“Astroturf” Speaker Pelosi called the Tea party. But the real “astroturf” (faked paid for or bused in ‘protesters’) was the “One Nation” ‘rally’ last weekend which was the hardcore of hardcore socialists puny demonstration.

But yet, the media loved it. Because most of the media is all-in for the change.

The AFL-CIO Now blog noted: “One month before the elections, thousands of union members are joining with community activists, students, entertainers, civil and human rights leaders and progressive politicians to march for jobs, justice and education for all Americans. Unions are sponsoring some 1,400 buses from around the country to come to the march.

“We need to fundamentally restructure our economy and re-establish popular control over the private corporations which have distorted our economy and hijacked our government,” AFL_CIO President Richard Trumka said recently.

The People Republic of…China? Iran?North Korea? America!

Fixing the economy and the nation isn’t on their agenda either.

It’s not “fair”. 🙂

And if you disagree with them you’re a hateful, fearmongering bigot!

HARRY BELAFONTE (at the “One Nation Rally”): Perhaps the greatest threat of all is the undermining of our Constitution and the systematic attack against the inalienable rights of the citizens of this nation, rights that are guaranteed by our Constitution. At the vanguard of this insidious attack is the Tea Party. This band of misguided citizens is moving perilously close to achieving villainous ends.

“Ah, the Tea Party, the nativist bed-wetters who somehow control our national dialogue. Yes, I call them the Pee Party, Jay, because they’re always peeing in their pants about something. They’re just, they’re afraid of a mosque being built in New York. They’re afraid of guns. You know, they think Obama, who like every other pussy Democrat has never said a single word about gun control, but they are very sure that he and his Negro army are coming after their guns. You know what? If you think that he’s coming after your guns, you need to get out of your chat room and have your house tested for lead. He’s not coming after your guns or your Bible or your fishing pole or your chewing tobacco.”–BILL MAHER

So the next time you wonder why the polls are dropping and the people are getting angerier and the Democrats just shine you on, you’ll know why.

They don’t care.

As long as their end is achieved the means mean nothing.

The end of America as you know it and the beginning of Amerika as they want it to be.

If you don’t like it, well you’re a racist, a moron, and stupid and should either be locked away  or made politically and economically impotent,  for our protection or just blown up.

NO PRESSURE. 🙂

Come Hell or High Water

The Congress that took the last week of July until Sept 13 off has now left Washington for all-out-war campaigning after working an exhaustive 17 days since late July and won’t be back until after they have had their heads chopped off by the American people.

Poor babies.

They left town without the House passing a budget for the first time since 1974. The 4th time the Senate has done it since 1974.

So the government that started a new fiscal year today with resolutions.

I bet your household budget works the same way. You just fake it. right? 🙂

They also left town without dealing with the Tax Increases coming on 1/1/11. They were too chicken. So they split town to save their own asses rather than tell you, your employer, or any potential employers if they were going to get hit with the largest Tax Increase in American History (for real).

Failure to extend the Bush tax cuts will also mean a reinstatement of the marriage penalty that makes some married couples pay higher taxes filing jointly than they would if they were single and filing individual returns. It will mean cutting in half the child tax credit from $1,000 to $500. It will increase tax rates on dividends from a maximum of 15 percent to 39.6 percent, which affects seniors who depend on dividends to supplement their Social Security and pensions. And it will raise the top capital gains tax rate from 15 percent to 20 percent, stifling business investment.

It will also raise taxes anyone who pays taxes. Regardless of income.

The President repeatedly says he want to raise taxes on the rich as a class warfare tactic, but in all these months has he actually proposed an actual bill for it?

Or was he hoping Pelosi or Reid would do it for him? Be the good Lieutenants and get all the troops in line to set up for the firing squad one more time?

But the fact remains it was all talk and no action. Much like the Congress since the passage of the business buzzsaw killing Financial Reform bill the Democrats have done nothing useful since (not that they did it before to be fair).

And who is to blame for the President not proposing and the Democrats not disposing of this part of the agenda, The Republicans. 🙂

The Minority party is at fault for the President not even sending a bill containing his Tax proposals to the House and the House not willing to come up with the bill and vote on it.

It’s all those damn Republicans fault! 😦

HUH??

Now that’s a “transparent” “drain the swamp” “most ethical congress” “responsible”, “post-partisan” government isn’t it?

The real problem was there were enough Democrats  who were willing to join Republicans on an across-the-board extension of the Bush tax cuts that it made the Reid-Pelosi position of raising taxes on some higher earners untenable, so no tax bill moved forward.

But that was the Republicans fault too. 🙂

Members of Congress have now returned home to try to save their own jobs, never mind helping the millions of Americans who have lost theirs. “When we come back this fall, the election will be over,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told the Washington Post. “I hope that it also means that Republicans will finally be able to put the American people ahead of their short-term political interests and ambitions.”

Now that’s responsible government.  and very “post-partisan”. 🙂

So it’s time to get your Lame Duck Poisoning Prevention Shot.

The New Roman Empire is being invaded by a hoard of Barbarians are the gate. So it’s time to prep the wells for poisoning and to raze the crops and poison the soil.

What Reid and his counterpart in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, are hoping is that Democrats who lose their seats in the election will be willing to pass legislation in a lame duck session that they know the voting public doesn’t support. In Reid’s logic, they will be free to vote their liberal ideology. And it won’t matter because they will have already lost their jobs. But it is precisely this kind of arrogance that has Democrats in such poor shape heading into the mid-term elections. (Linda Chavez)

Some say you have to admire our “rock star” (in his own mind and the media’s) President for sticking to his ideology as he is 200% in campaign mode, 2008 campaign mode, that he doesn’t care about moving to the center. He wants to move even farther LEFT. Hoping to spike turnout amongst those who were fainting in his presence 2 years ago.

Now their fainting from working so hard. But that doesn’t matter. And once again, it’s supposed to be how he says it, not what he says.

Let’s party like it’s 2008!

The perception that he’s The Anointed One is supposed to trump the reality of the last 21 months.

A couple of back-to-back statements by President Obama at a town hall rally in Des Moines, Iowa, tell us all we need to know about his economic philosophy and that we aren’t going to climb out of his recession and begin to slow the growth of the national debt as long as he’s calling the shots.

Voters, he said, tell him to “cut government spending.” But “most spending is for veterans, for education, for defense. … Finding $700 billion is not easy.”

Yet a few minutes earlier, in response to criticism over illegal immigrants getting health care in the United States, he had said, “It is very important that we have compassion as part of our national character.” (How about compassion for future generations of Americans?)

Does anyone see the disconnect here? If Obama believes our national character is deficient unless we expand the welfare state to illegal immigrants, then how could he ever preside over a balanced budget?

His wildly inaccurate statement about where the money is spent is equally revealing. For fiscal year 2010, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and other sources, benefits for veterans constituted about 3.5 percent of the budget; education expenditures were 3 percent; and defense and security totaled about 20 percent.

Even worse than these errors is his defeatist statement that “finding $700 billion is not easy.”

Well, of course it’s not easy if you have no desire to trim the size, functions and intrusiveness of government.

Didn’t he just say again the other day that he is “committed to fiscal responsibility”? Hasn’t he incessantly argued that President George W. Bush is the one who ran up these outlandish deficits?

We all know what a distortion and exercise in scapegoatery that is. President Bush fulfilled his promise to cut the deficit in half by 2006. In fiscal year 2007, the deficit was $161 billion. Hard to believe, isn’t it?

That’s just three years ago, and Obama says it’s nearly impossible to trim much? Even the final Bush year, which Obama continues to blame for all “this mess” and which Obama has used to establish his new deficit base line, was not actually the alleged $1.3 trillion, but closer to $800 billion when TARP repayments are factored in.

Assuming Obama even wants to bring down the deficit, his economic philosophy precludes him from advancing policies likeliest to do it. You cannot make much headway on the deficit in a period of recession, and his policies are leading us toward a double-dip recession.

Indeed, the dirty reality is that Keynesian policy works as a double whammy against fiscal sanity. It involves government’s spending money it doesn’t have, which, by definition, increases the deficit and debt. And it also increases the deficit by smothering the private sector and deterring real economic growth. There is no appreciable “multiplier effect” from monies that are spent by government fiat, as opposed to those spent in response to true market forces, including real consumer demand — as opposed to government  command.

We saw the devastating impact of reckless Keynesian policies during the Great Depression, and we’re witnessing them again today. As long as Obama is married to his redistributionist profligacy, we cannot reduce the deficit. And it’s even worse when you consider that Obama wants to raise taxes on the primary generators of economic growth, small businesses, during a slow economic period.

With his signature audacity, Obama told town hall attendees their taxes haven’t gone up in his administration. Puleeze! Obamacare, anyone — for starters? He also said Republicans haven’t been honest with voters about what needs to be done to revive the economy. “We can’t pretend that there are shortcuts,” he said.

Sorry, but he’s the one being dishonest. The Bush years saw robust economic growth until the last year of Bush’s second term. The policies that led to the subprime collapse, the recession and the skyrocketing deficit in his final year were brought upon mostly by liberal Democrats hellbent on demonstrating their “compassion” for people by insisting on loans to people who couldn’t repay them and cynically resisting President Bush’s efforts to rein in Fannie and Freddie.

President Reagan didn’t continue to blame Jimmy Carter for his malaise-ridden economy during his term. He didn’t implement policies that didn’t work after promising they would and then whine that it would “take 10 years to get out of this mess because it took us 10 years to get into this mess.” He passed tax cuts that launched an unprecedented period of peacetime growth — and not at the expense of federal revenues, as has been falsely alleged.

I don’t expect President Obama to come clean with the American people or to ever accept responsibility for his disastrous policies, much less to voluntarily change course, but it’s gratifying to see that people, including some of his supporters, are finally onto him. (David Limbaugh)

And if you were expecting the Media to do their job, of journalism. Forget it. The Propaganda ministers for Obama are in full damage control, but unlike 2008, people are less inclined to believe their spin.

But it’s all they have and if they say it often enough people will believe their lies.

Gallup: Distrust in Media Hits New High and Three Times as Many See Media as ‘Too Liberal’ Over ‘Too Conservative’
They are too busy kissing up to Rep. Alan Grayson’s so-blatant-it’s-a-supernova misrepresentation attack ad, Obama’a 2008 “glory days” (they actually use that term repeatedly) and the manipulation by the far left of a Maid of California Gubernatorial Candidate Meg Whitman who was an illegal alien (she was fired last year for this by Whitman) and now is being paraded around the media with a prepared speech and lots of crying in the most cynical of acts.
And the Liberal media eats it up and regurgitates it.
So don’t expect anything from them expect spin.
I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.” — Gov. Mike Huckabee in 2009.

Doubt me:
Watch ABC’s World News Runs White House Produced Pro-ObamaCare Video as ‘News’: http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=hdkUkUQueu

CNN urging liberals to promote the “Amazing Achievements” of the liberals: http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=hdkUSUZunz
Matt Lauer (Today Show) urging the President to be more forceful about attacking the Republicans: http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=hdkUSUqG6U
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
All aboard the Democrats Unsinkable Ship of Keynesian Economic  State, The Titanic!
And don’t forget to destroy the land behind you.
If they can’t have it, no one can!
Film at 11.

Press 1 For Secure the Elites Press 2 for Pandering

Remember this beauty, it’s 80 Miles from the Border.

The Democrats, and specifically Harry Reid have decided to bring the issue back up, but in an underhanded manner that is a cynical political ploy.

Put simply, Harry Reid has attached the DREAM Act (Amnesty) to a Defense Bill so you can vote against the troops or vote for Amnesty. The so-called “Blue dog” Democrats won’t vote for it. The Republicans certainly won’t. So it’s just red meat thrown to the troops as “Hope”.

HOPE IS FEAR

And the cynical ply doesn’t stop there.

Oh no, why would it.

No, this is a blatant attempt to energize a demoralized base to turn out at the polls to save themselves from a taxpayer revolt.

It’s all about them.

“We need to get out the message that it’s now really dangerous to re-empower the Republican Party,” said one Democratic strategist who has spoken with White House advisers but requested anonymity to discuss private strategy talks.

Late Sunday night, White House advisers denied that a national ad campaign was being planned. “There’s been no discussion of such a thing at the White House” or the Democratic National Committee, said David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser.(NYT)

Which means they are have produced the ads and are just waiting for that last minute all-out Nuclear Armageddon strike. 🙂

The more people they can get out to the polls to vote against the anger wave headed their way, the better.

So let’s throw a “hope” out. A “hope” that has no real hope of actually passing. But we can stir up the Hornet’s nest  and try obscure what we’ve done to destroy this country.

And besides, if you disagree, you’re a racist! 🙂

After all, the Democrats main strategy seems to be, Want More Bush? or Want these kooks and extremists (aka Tea Party) to takeover??

They can’t and won’t run on their own “accomplishments” because none of them are positive.

Heath Care: The Majority still favors repeal. Despite the campaigns to “explain it better” so you’ll love have the government deciding whether you live or die.

Debt: It was George Bush’s Fault that the 10 Trillion Deficit is now over 14.

Financial reform: It was Bush’s Fault that they’ve stiffeled business and burdened them with choking regulations and made uncertainty the only certainty.

It  was the Democrats fault for the Subprime-Meltdown because they got the ball rolling that eventually turned into the mountain. But you won’t hear that from them either.

And does anyone seriously think that the sequel to the 1980’s Anti-Reagan movie “Wall Street” is anything other propaganda?? I mean really…

Stimulus: A miserable failure. A Trillion dollars that “saved or created” jobs that either didn’t need saving (because they were saving Union Pensions instead) or they cost $2 million per jobs (as in LA).

Vice President Joe Biden on Friday cited one in which the New York City Department of Transportation is spending $175 million to renovate bridges and a parking lot, putting all of 120 people to work. That’s $1.46 million per job. Another job on Biden’s list, a highway project in Ohio, has created 300 jobs and costs $138 million — $460,000 per worker.

When the Democrats are in charge, the rich just get richer. Wait — isn’t that what we’re supposed to say about Republicans?

Not so when federal stimulus funds are being spent.

Washington has taken trickle-down economics to a whole new level of inefficiency. Those closest — literally — to the seat of federal power get the most. By the time the funds make their long journey to paychecks for people doing productive work, there’s not a whole lot left. (IBD)

But don’t worry, there’s always hope. 🙂

Taxes: they are going up on 1/1/11 and The Democrats are ideologically incapable of stopping it. It’s like staring into mouth of hell for Democrats to raise taxes on anyone but “the rich” which the Bush tax Cuts WILL do and they are hypnotized by it. So they just conveniently forget about it and go for class warfare instead.

Then there are all the taxes associated with their “Reforms”, Aka health Care and Financial that they won’t talk about.

Jobs: Well, the President’s “focus” has been a bit lazy. And when his economic team promised if you spend a Trillion dollars on the stimulus the maximum unemployment will be is 8% (That person has now left the team).

It’s nearly 10% and has been for the better part of a year and now many pundits and economists are talking about a permanent underclass and permanent structural unemployment.

So Mission accomplished there! 🙂

You have plenty of people completely dependent on your largess and will do whatever you want them to do and think whatever you want them to.

And that were the illegals come in again.

They are apart of that underclass. And they have to stay there to be manipulated. So keep dangling the carrot!

And just like the NAACP, Hispanics have plenty of organizations that “speak form them” that are only interested in their own self-interest of self-perpetuation of their own power and self-importance.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell says illegal immigrants do essential work in the U.S. and he has firsthand knowledge of that — because they fix his house.

Powell, a moderate Republican, urged his party Sunday to support immigration generally because it is “what’s keeping this country’s lifeblood moving forward.”

In an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he said a path to legal status should be offered to illegal immigrants because they “are doing things we need done in this country.”

He added: “They’re all over my house, doing things whenever I call for repairs, and I’m sure you’ve seen them at your house. We’ve got to find a way to bring these people out of the darkness and give them some kind of status.”

Powell did not say whether he has hired illegal immigrants directly or they showed up with contractors.

They do Gen. Powell’s house so they must be ok! Let’s just give them all Amnesty! 🙂

So what about the Legal American Construction Worker?

Oh, he’s on the unemployment line looking for a job ,for the past 2 years.

The unemployment rate for the construction industry edged down to 17 percent in August.

Who cares about him. Because if you’re against illegal aliens taking his job, you’re a racist! 🙂

“While we may have a handful of nominees out of the mainstream, the American people have come to the conclusion this administration and this Congress are out of the mainstream,” said John Weaver, a Republican consultant.(NYT)

The elites are better than you, remember. You should trust people who are smarter,better educated, slicker than oil itself, after all. 🙂

And besides, if you disagree you’re a racist and/or a bigot! 🙂

Or even better, An EXTREMIST!  (not that they aren’t, by the way-just ignore the socialist behind the curtain).

So Press 1 for Elitism

Press 2 for Pandering

Press 3 for Creative Lying

Press 4 for Out-and-Out Bold faced Lies

Press 5 For Class Warfare

Press 6 For Ministry Truth/mainstream Media Spin

Press 7 to VOTE THE BUMS OUT!

7 has always been a lucky number. 🙂

Political Cartoon by Chip Bok

Transparent Steal

No that title was not meant to say “steel”.

I have maintained all along that Obama is very transparent, in his radical socialist ways and the Ministry of Truth is very transparent. If you’re willing to look at it from the jaundiced eye of a cynic.

But the illusion of transparency at least is no more. But it will be transparent that the media won’t talk about it. So I will, along with sources.

President Obama has abolished the position in his White House dedicated to transparency and shunted those duties into the portfolio of a partisan ex-lobbyist who is openly antagonistic to the notion of disclosure by government and politicians.

Obama transferred “ethics czar” Norm Eisen to the Czech Republic to serve as U.S. ambassador. Some of Eisen’s duties will be handed to Domestic Policy Council member Steven Croley, but most of them, it appears, will shift over to the already-full docket of White House Counsel Bob Bauer ( his previous job as the president’s personal lawyer, as well as counsel to the Democratic National Committee).

With Mr. Eisen headed to Europe as an ambassador, his move from the White House “is the biggest lobbying success we’ve had all year,” Tony Podesta, one of the most influential lobbyists in Washington, said with a laugh.(NYT)

Bauer is renowned as a “lawyer’s lawyer” and a legal expert. His resume, however, reads more “partisan advocate” than “good-government crusader.” Bauer came to the White House from the law firm Perkins Coie, where he represented John Kerry in 2004 and Obama during his campaign.

Bauer has served as the top lawyer for the Democratic National Committee, which is the most prolific fundraising entity in the country. Then-Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., the caricature of a cutthroat Chicago political fixer, hired Bauer to represent the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. In the White House, Bauer is tight with Emanuel, having defended Emanuel’s offer of a job to Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., whom Emanuel wanted out of the Senate race.

Another Bauer client was New Jersey Sen. Robert “Torch” Torricelli back in 2001. When one Torricelli donor admitted he had reimbursed employees for their contributions to the Torch — thus circumventing contribution limits — Bauer explained, “All candidates ask their supporters to help raise money from friends, family members and professional associates.”

Bauer’s own words — gathered by the diligent folks at the Sunlight Foundation — show disdain for openness and far greater belief in the good intentions of those in power than of those trying to check the powerful. In December 2006, when the Federal Election Commission proposed more precise disclosure requirements for parties, Bauer took aim at the practice of muckraking enabled by such disclosure.

On his blog, Bauer derided the notion “that politicians and parties are pictured as forever trying to get away with something,” saying this was an idea for which “there is a market, its product cheaply manufactured and cheaply sold.” In other words — we keep too close an eye on our leaders.

In August 2006 Bauer blogged, “disclosure is a mostly unquestioned virtue deserving to be questioned.” This is the man the White House has put in charge of making this the most open White House ever.

Most telling might have been Bauer’s statements about proposed regulations of 527 organizations: “If it’s not done with 527 activity as we have seen, it will be done in other ways,” he told the Senate rules committee.

“There are other directions, to be sure, that people are actively considering as we speak. Without tipping my hand or those of others who are professionally creative, the money will find an outlet.”

This perfectly captures the Obama White House’s attitude toward disclosure. Sure, the administration publish the names of all White House visitors, but, as the New York Times reported a few weeks back, White House folks just meet their lobbyists at Caribou Coffee across the street. Sure, they restrict the work of ex-lobbyists in the administration, but lobbyists who de-list aren’t questioned.

And we’ve seen just a few of the e-mails former Google lobbyist, now Obama tech policy guru, Andrew McLaughlin traded with current Google lobbyists using his Gmail account, but who knows what else the White House whiz kids are doing to avoid the Presidential Records Act — Facebook messages? Twitter direct messages?

Did I mention Bauer was a lobbyist? At Perkins Coie, Bauer lobbied on behalf of America Votes Inc., a Democratic 527 funded by the likes of the AFL-CIO and ACORN.

As with his other reformer rhetoric, Obama’s transparency is mostly smoke and mirrors. (Washington Examiner)

I would argue he is very transparent in his disdain for anyone who isn’t the Harvard elitist liberal socialist that and his apparatchiks are. He’s so open about it that it’s nearly invisible. 🙂

And he gets all the help he needs from his socialist friends in the media.

When the open-government activist group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) sued the Bush administration to get the records of White House visitors from Secret Service logs, media outlets practically fell over themselves to join the effort.  Newspapers like the Washington Post and USA Today and wire services like AP and Reuters filed amicus briefs with the court, and the Obama administration eventually agreed to start releasing the records.  Now, however, the same news organizations have discovered a new sense of privacy when it comes to their attendance in an off-the-record event with Barack Obama:

White House reporters are keeping quiet about an off-the-record lunch today with President Obama — even those at news organizations who’ve advocated in the past for the White House to release the names of visitors.

And guess who filed briefs supporting that argument? Virtually every newspaper that covers the White House.

Through July 20, Ms. Kumar counted 36 press conferences since Mr. Obama took office. That compares with the same number for the second President Bush, 66 for President Clinton and 54 for the elder President Bush the same amount of time into their presidencies.

But that leaves out some context.  Obama was holding press conferences every week or two in his first months in office, which is why he got to 35 by the end of July 2009, when it became clear that Obama was a gaffe machine when off of the Teleprompter.  Since then, he’s held a grand total of one, and it doesn’t look like the White House has any more planned after the late May Gulf spill presser.

When media outlets participate in off-the-record events, they give Obama a chance to spin coverage without doing so on the record.  It wouldn’t be a problem if Obama made himself regularly available in an open Q&A setting to the press corps, which complained when Obama’s predecessor would go a couple of months between pressers.  With the White House butting up Obama and keeping him off the record, participation in the luncheon is really just enabling the silence.  If media outlets felt so strongly about transparency as to demand the White House visitor logs, the least they can do is to acknowledge their own roles in letting this President off the hook for accountability and transparency. (hot air.com)

Just reinforces the fact that he is not a public servant, he is a public parent. This is the mommy-state way of saying, “Do as I say, not as I do.” (comment on hot air.com).

Well, they are the Insufferably Superior Left,after all. And remember if you agree with them you are intelligent, tolerant and well mannered.

If you disagree with them you are barking mad loonie who foams at the mouth and has the IQ of a dead light bulb. You’re “stupid”, “racist”,”ignorant” a “moron”, etc. ad nauseum.

So why should anyone take a raving loonie seriously? 🙂

In fact, according to a March 2010 Associated Press analysis of FOIA responses at 17 major agencies, 466,872 FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) denials were issued during the Obama administration’s first year in office – a 50 percent increase over the previous year.

In addition to denying more FOIA requests, Obama has refused to call for an audit of the secret Federal Reserve Bank and rescinded Bush-era disclosure requirements for labor union leaders –† the same union bosses who provided over $100 million (and nearly half a million volunteers) for Obama and Democratic Congressional candidates in 2008.

The hypocrisy on transparency doesn’t end there, though.

As part of the draconian new financial regulations Obama and his Congressional allies are imposing on the private sector, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is now virtually exempt from FOIA law.† Under a little-known provision of the new law, the SEC would not have to release any information derived from “surveillance, risk assessments, or other regulatory and oversight activities” – a purposefully broad definition that encompasses virtually everything the SEC does.

You know the SEC, the ones who were too busy wanting porn 24/7 to watch either Wall Street or Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to care. And now, by law they don’t have to care. More Porn for the SEC, please….

“It allows the SEC to block the public’s access to virtually all SEC records,” former agency attorney turned whistleblower Gary Aguirre told FOX News. “It permits the SEC to promulgate its own rules and regulations regarding the disclosure of records without getting the approval of the Office of Management and Budget, which typically applies to all federal agencies.”

In fact, within days of the new law being signed, the SEC was already turning down FOIA requests from media outlets citing the new exemption.

But don’t worry, Big Brother will not lie to you… 🙂

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind (if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong. (1984)

It’s transparent in it’s complete lack of transparency or even it’s appearance therein. 🙂

doublethink is the act of simultaneously accepting as correct two mutually contradictory beliefs.

To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which canceled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself — that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink..    ”
“     The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them….To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.

I said earlier that the decadence of our language is probably curable. Those who deny this would argue, if they produced an argument at all, that language merely reflects existing social conditions, and that we cannot influence its development by any direct tinkering with words or constructions.–George Orwell

The basic idea behind Newspeak is to remove all shades of meaning from language, leaving simple dichotomies (pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, goodthink and crimethink) which reinforce the total dominance of the State.

How could you have a slogan like “freedom is slavery” when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness. (1984)

The phrase “two plus two equals five” (“2 + 2 = 5“) is a slogan used in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four as an example of an obviously false dogma one must believe, similar to other obviously false slogans by the Party in Nineteen Eighty-Four. It is contrasted with the phrase “two plus two makes four”, the obvious – but politically inexpedient – truth. Orwell’s protagonist, Winston Smith, uses the phrase to wonder if the State might declare “two plus two equals five” as a fact; he ponders whether, if everybody believes in it, does that make it true? Smith writes, “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”

Now that’s transparent and on MSNBC,CBS,NBC,ABC,CNN,Their websites, The Huffington Post, The New York Times, et al. that 2+2=5. Now you just have to believe it. 🙂

It’s so transparent it’s nearly invisible. 🙂

I Told You So :)

I, like many others who read the health care bills, unlike the mainstream Media, which did it’s best to hide and deny what was going to happen, have now been shown the light of our truth.

But I’m sure the Ministry of Truth will do it’s best to diminish, dismiss and deny it even now.

That is that Mandatory Health Insurance is a TAX.

Shocking revelation, I know… 🙂

On poor people no less!!

CBS Sept 2009: President Barack Obama says requiring people to get health insurance and fining them if they don’t would not amount to a backhanded tax increase. “I absolutely reject that notion,” the president said.

“My critics say everything is a tax increase,” Mr. Obama said on “This Week.” “For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.”

ABC: The—for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore . . .” In other words, like parents talking to their children, this levy—don’t call it a tax—is for your own good.

Mr. Stephanopoulos: “But you reject that it’s a tax increase?”

Mr. Obama: “I absolutely reject that notion.”

President Obama said in his not quite State of the Union address that Americans earning less than $250,000 would pay “not one dime” in new taxes.

Well, it’s time to reveal Lie #4,362. The Big Whopper.

The one all of us “racist” “teabagger” “idiots” and “terrorist” warned you about.

WASHINGTON — When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”

And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.

Under the legislation signed by President Obama in March, most Americans will have to maintain “minimum essential coverage” starting in 2014. Many people will be eligible for federal subsidies to help them pay premiums.

In a brief defending the law, the Justice Department says the requirement for people to carry insurance or pay the penalty is “a valid exercise” of Congress’s power to impose taxes.

Congress can use its taxing power “even for purposes that would exceed its powers under other provisions” of the Constitution, the department said. For more than a century, it added, the Supreme Court has held that Congress can tax activities that it could not reach by using its power to regulate commerce.

While Congress was working on the health care legislation, Mr. Obama refused to accept the argument that a mandate to buy insurance, enforced by financial penalties, was equivalent to a tax.

“For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase,” the president said last September, in a spirited exchange with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program “This Week.”

When Mr. Stephanopoulos said the penalty appeared to fit the dictionary definition of a tax, Mr. Obama replied, “I absolutely reject that notion.”

Congress anticipated a constitutional challenge to the individual mandate. Accordingly, the law includes 10 detailed findings meant to show that the mandate regulates commercial activity important to the nation’s economy. Nowhere does Congress cite its taxing power as a source of authority.

They knew they were lying. They didn’t care. Because the end justified the means.

And the Mainstream Media was either brain-dead stupid or in on the lies. Period.

Under the Constitution, Congress can exercise its taxing power to provide for the “general welfare.” It is for Congress, not courts, to decide which taxes are “conducive to the general welfare,” the Supreme Court said 73 years ago in upholding the Social Security Act.

Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director, described the tax power as an alternative source of authority.

“The Commerce Clause supplies sufficient authority for the shared-responsibility requirements in the new health reform law,” Mr. Pfeiffer said. “To the extent that there is any question of additional authority — and we don’t believe there is — it would be available through the General Welfare Clause.”

The law describes the levy on the uninsured as a “penalty” rather than a tax. The Justice Department brushes aside the distinction, saying “the statutory label” does not matter. The constitutionality of a tax law depends on “its practical operation,” not the precise form of words used to describe it, the department says, citing a long line of Supreme Court cases.

Orwell is smiling on you, Mr President and AG Holder.

Masters of Doublespeak.

Orwell on “The Party” of Big Brother: The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power.  Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites.

To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them…(Orwell, New American Library, 1981, p35)

Moreover, the department says the penalty is a tax because it will raise substantial revenue: $4 billion a year by 2017, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

In addition, the department notes, the penalty is imposed and collected under the Internal Revenue Code, and people must report it on their tax returns “as an addition to income tax liability.”

2009: What’s more, the agency is limited in the actions it can take to enforce compliance. “Congress was very careful to make sure that there was nothing too punitive in this bill,” {IRS Chief} Shulman said. “There’s no criminal sanctions for not paying this, and there’s no ability to levy a bank account or do seizures or [use] some of the other tools” available to the agency for enforcing laws.

If necessary, the IRS will levy fines against individuals who fail to purchase adequate insurance and collect them though tax return offsets. But the agency’s “first line of defense is education,” he said.

Because the penalty is a tax, the department says, no one can challenge it in court before paying it and seeking a refund.

Jack M. Balkin, a professor at Yale Law School who supports the new law, said, “The tax argument is the strongest argument for upholding” the individual-coverage requirement.

Mr. Obama “has not been honest with the American people about the nature of this bill,” Mr. Balkin said last month at a meeting of the American Constitution Society, a progressive legal organization. “This bill is a tax. Because it’s a tax, it’s completely constitutional.”

Mr. Balkin and other law professors pressed that argument in a friend-of-the-court brief filed in one of the pending cases.

Opponents contend that the “minimum coverage provision” is unconstitutional because it exceeds Congress’s power to regulate commerce.

“This is the first time that Congress has ever ordered Americans to use their own money to purchase a particular good or service,” said Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah.

In their lawsuit, Florida and other states say: “Congress is attempting to regulate and penalize Americans for choosing not to engage in economic activity. If Congress can do this much, there will be virtually no sphere of private decision-making beyond the reach of federal power.”

In reply, the administration and its allies say that a person who goes without insurance is simply choosing to pay for health care out of pocket at a later date. In the aggregate, they say, these decisions have a substantial effect on the interstate market for health care and health insurance.

In its legal briefs, the Obama administration points to a famous New Deal case, Wickard v. Filburn, in which the Supreme Court upheld a penalty imposed on an Ohio farmer who had grown a small amount of wheat, in excess of his production quota, purely for his own use.

The wheat grown by Roscoe Filburn “may be trivial by itself,” the court said, but when combined with the output of other small farmers, it significantly affected interstate commerce and could therefore be regulated by the government as part of a broad scheme regulating interstate commerce.

But it will bring prices down: Lie #4,264

The Democratic co-chair of President Obama’s fiscal commission said Wednesday that the president’s health care bill will do very little to bring down costs, contradicting claims from the White House that their sweeping legislation will dramatically impact runaway entitlement spending.

“It didn’t do a lot to address cost factors in health care. So we’ve got a lot of work to do,” said Erskine Bowles, former White House chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, speaking about the new health law, which was signed into law by Obama this past spring after a nearly year-long fight in Congress.

Esrkine Bowles is one of the two stooges who will anounce AFTER the mid-term election that all is crap and we have to have massive Tax increases in order to save us all, including likely, the VAT.

And if the republicans are in charge of at least one side or both of Congress it will be even  more there fault! 🙂

And Obama is going to, “Well, I have to do what the report says…”

It’s the ultimate Dog & Pony show.

Just keep that in mind.
Bowles, speaking at an event hosted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said that even with the passage of Obama’s legislation, health care costs are still going to “really eat us alive” unless dramatic changes are made. The commission will submit recommendations on how to fix America’s long term fiscal problems to Congress in December.

Bowles’ point will be amplified Thursday when a conservative think tank releases a paper arguing that Obama’s health plan “is not entitlement reform,” at an event intended to highlight an alternative plan for reforming health care spending that is the brainchild of Rep. Paul Ryan, Wisconsin Republican.

James C. Capretta, a former White House budget adviser on health care to President George W. Bush, will present the paper for the Galen Institute at an event on Capitol Hill with Ryan, one of the Republican Party’s rising stars, and Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a top conservative economist.

Even as many on Capitol Hill are talking about addressing Social Security spending, Capretta writes in the 19-page paper that Medicare is the real problem.

Most Democrats and Republicans agree, Capretta says, that the 30 to 35 million seniors in Medicare’s fee-for-service (FFS) insurance program are “the engine … pulling the rest of the health system down the tracks at an accelerated and dangerous rate.”

And who just got recess appointee to the job of head of Medicare, a NHS Single-payer Health Care rationing lover.
No coincidence there mind you. 🙂

Most FFS participants pay nothing out of their own pockets for health care, and hospitals and doctors are incentivized to provide them with as many services and tests as can be loosely justified.

But Capretta says in the paper that the Obama health bill is not reform because it attempts to stop price inflation and inefficient care through top-down government control rather than bottom-up consumer demand.

“When attempts have been made in the past to steer patients toward preferred physicians or hospitals, they have failed miserably because politicians and regulators find it impossible to make distinctions among hospitals and physician groups based on quality measures that can themselves be disputed,” Capretta says.

Capretta goes on to say that Paul Ryan’s plan would move Medicare recipients from defined benefits to defined contributions, in which “cost-conscious consumers choose between competing insurers and delivery systems based on price and quality.”

“Beneficiaries would get to decide which insurance plan they want to enroll in. If the premium were more than the amount they are entitled to from Medicare, then they would pay the difference. If it were less, they would keep all of the savings,” Capretta says.

“Millions of otherwise passive Medicare participants would become active, cost-conscious consumers of insurance and alternative models for securing needed medical services,” Capretta writes. “Cost cutting innovation would be rewarded, not punished as it is today.”

White House officials pointed to recent blog posts by White House budget director Peter Orszag, who said that “if implemented effectively, [Obama’s health care bill] can play an important role in moving toward a healthier fiscal future.” (Daily Caller)

Welcome Big Brother Obama and Big Mother Michelle’s New and Improved IRS:

If it seems as if the tax code was conceived by graphic artist M.C. Escher, wait until you meet the new and not improved Internal Revenue Service created by ObamaCare. What, you’re not already on a first-name basis with your local IRS agent?

National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson, who operates inside the IRS, highlighted the agency’s new mission in her annual report to Congress last week. Look out below. She notes that the IRS is already “greatly taxed”—pun intended?—”by the additional role it is playing in delivering social benefits and programs to the American public,” like tax credits for first-time homebuyers or purchasing electric cars. Yet with ObamaCare, the agency is now responsible for “the most extensive social benefit program the IRS has been asked to implement in recent history.” And without “sufficient funding” it won’t be able to discharge these new duties.

That wouldn’t be tragic, given that those new duties include audits to determine who has the insurance “as required by law” and collecting penalties from Americans who don’t. Companies that don’t sponsor health plans will also be punished. This crackdown will “involve nearly every division and function of the IRS,” Ms. Olson reports.

Well, well. Republicans argued during the health debate that the IRS would have to hire hundreds of new agents and staff to enforce ObamaCare. They were brushed off by Democrats and the press corps as if they believed the President was born on the moon. The IRS says it hasn’t figured out how much extra money and manpower it will need but admits that both numbers are greater than zero.

Ms. Olson also exposed a damaging provision that she estimates will hit some 30 million sole proprietorships and subchapter S corporations, two million farms and one million charities and other tax-exempt organizations. Prior to ObamaCare, businesses only had to tell the IRS the value of services they purchase. But starting in 2013 they will also have to report the value of goods they buy from a single vendor that total more than $600 annually—including office supplies and the like.

Democrats snuck in this obligation to narrow the mythical “tax gap” of unreported business income, but Ms. Olson says that the tracking costs for small businesses will be “disproportionate as compared with any resulting improvement in tax compliance.” Job creation, here we come . . . at least for the accountants who will attempt to comply with a vast new 1099 reporting burden.

Meanwhile, the IRS will be inundated with useless information, because without a huge upgrade its information systems won’t be able to manage and track the nanodetails.

In a Monday letter, even Democratic Senators Mark Begich (Alaska), Ben Nelson (Nebraska), Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire) and Evan Bayh (Indiana) denounce this new “burden” on small businesses and insist that the IRS use its discretion to find “better ways to structure this reporting requirement.” In other words, they want regulators to fix one problem among many that all four Senators created by voting for ObamaCare.

We never thought anyone would be nostalgic for the tax system of a few months ago, but post-ObamaCare, here we are.(WSJ)

On Friday, Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, declared that the sky is about to fall on the Medicare system. His plea to fellow Democrats to pass a $22.9-billion fix for Medicare doctors’ fees reveals the fraudulent nature of our new national health care regime.

Remember the health care issue? Well, the fiscal consequences of the socialized medicine scheme enacted by President Barack Obama and Congress just two months ago are already beginning to snowball.

Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, was one of the key architects and advocates of Obamacare. He was back on the House floor on Friday delivering an urgent plea to fellow Democrats that inadvertently—or, perhaps, unavoidably—revealed the fraudulent nature of our new national health care regime.

It was supposed to save the taxpayers money, remember? “This legislation will lower costs for families and for businesses and for the federal government, reducing our deficit by over $1 trillion in the next two decades,” Obama said when he signed the bill.

On Friday, Waxman declared that the sky is about to fall on the Medicare system. He went to the House floor to “urge” his colleagues to vote for a bill that includes $102 billion in new federal spending and would add $54 billion to the national debt over the next 10 years — $25 billion of it in the few months remaining in this fiscal year.

Why did Waxman believe this new borrowing-and-spending was necessary?

“It’s absolutely critical to do this if we are going to keep doctors in Medicare and keep the promise to Medicare beneficiaries that they will have access to physicians’ services,” said Waxman. “This provision will provide a moderate increase in physicians’ fees, 2.2 percent for the rest of the year. If we don’t act, doctors’ fees will be cut by 21 percent from where they are today. This would be unconscionable.”

It would not merely be unconscionable. If the 21-percent cut in Medicare fees for doctors—that, in fact, legally took effect on June 1 — is allowed to stand, many doctors in this country will simply stop seeing Medicare patients. They will not be able to afford it. The cost to them of serving their patients will exceed what they are paid. Their profit margin will be swept away.

To make precisely this point, 12 national surgeons’ associations—including the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery—sent House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a letter last Wednesday warning her what would happen if Medicare doctors’ fees are slashed as they are scheduled to be under current law.

“These continued payment cuts, rising practice costs and a lack of certainty going forward, make it difficult, if not impossible, for already financially challenged surgical practices to continue to treat Medicare patients,” the surgeons’ associations told Pelosi.

The letter pointed the speaker toward the results of a survey of more than 13,000 physicians done in February by the Surgical Coalition, a group of more than 20 medical associations. The survey asked these doctors what they would do if Medicare fees were slashed by the scheduled 21.2 percent.

Twenty-nine percent said they would opt out of the Medicare system entirely. Almost 69 percent said they would limit the number of appointments they would take from Medicare patients, 45.8 percent said they would start referring complex Medicare patients to other physicians, 45.3 percent said they would stop providing certain services, 43.8 percent said they would defer purchasing new medical equipment and 42.7 percent said they would cut their staff. Almost 4 percent of the doctors said they would close or sell their practices.

Why did Congress plan to slash the doctors’ Medicare fees in the first place? It didn’t. In the past, the majority in Congress has routinely enacted budget bills that fraudulently assumed that on some future date the federal government would dramatically slash the Medicare fees paid to doctors, knowing that before that date arrived the majority would pass “emergency” legislation postponing the cuts to some still-future date. The majority in Congress does this so the long-term deficits caused by their spending bills appear to be smaller than they actually are.

As originally proposed, Obamacare would have ended this practice, permanently setting Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors at the true anticipated level. But the Congressional Budget Office determined that doing so would have added $208 billion to the cost of Obamacare over 10 years, forcing the CBO to declare that Obamacare added to the deficit rather than reduced it. That would have cost Obamacare votes on the House floor and quite possibly defeated the legislation.

So the congressional leadership stripped the “doc fix” out of Obamacare and left it to another day.

Waxman went down to the floor last Friday to declare that day had come. Unfortunately, for him, the Senate had already left town for its Memorial Day vacation. So, the current fix will have to wait until it returns.

Even then, the fix only accounts for $22.9 billion of the $102 billion cost of the bill the House did pass on Friday. Most of the rest of the money is for extending unemployment benefits and special targeted tax breaks.

The $22.9 billion fix for the doctors’ fees—if passed by the Senate—would only last through September 2011. Then Congress will presumably do it all again—or let the Medicare system collapse.

And they did.

In the meantime, Obamacare is supposed to cut half a trillion in spending from elsewhere in Medicare, while Obama’s budget—not counting the $54 billion in new debt included in this bill—is expected to add $9.8 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years.

And then there’s still more on the “Financial Reform” bill related to the IRS:

“Small businesses are America’s job creators and essential to our nation’s economy,” Roberts said in prepared remarks. “Under the new healthcare law, small businesses will be hit with a costly tax reporting provision that will increase the cost of doing business at a time of economic uncertainty.”

Beginning in 2012, the law states that businesses, tax-exempt organizations, and state and local governments must submit a separate 1099 form for every business-to-business transaction totaling more than $600. The impetus behind the requirement is help the IRS better enforce the tax law by forcing companies to disclose whom they do business with.

Several organizations, including the IRS watchdog The National Taxpayer Advocate, have questioned how effective this requirement will be on enforcement.

The new mandate applies to everyday purchases, like shipping costs, supplies, even Internet and phone service. The senators argue this will overburden companies. The Taxpayer Advocate questions the IRS’ ability to handle all the documentation.

“Unless corrected, this time-wasting mandate of 1099 filings on common purchases needed to do business, will stifle economic growth and job creation while the IRS will be handed a paperwork nightmare,” Roberts said.

The senators contend the requirement will affect 40 million businesses nationwide.

“I have heard from many Kansas small businesses and farmers, already burdened with government bureaucracy, that these new reporting requirements will waste time and negatively impact their bottom-line,” Roberts said.

Abortion, anyone?

As reports are coming out that Pennsylvania is receiving $160 million from the Department of Health and Human Services to set up a new high-risk insurance pool program that will fund abortions, we are seeing, yet again, that the Obama Administration will say and do anything to pass their liberal agenda — ignoring public opinion along the way…

LIES: “You’ve heard that this is all going to mean government funding of abortion – not true. These are all fabrications.” — President Obama on August 19, 2009

D*MN LIES: “The executive order provides additional safeguards to ensure that the status quo is upheld and enforced, and that the health care legislation’s restrictions against the public funding of abortions cannot be circumvented.” — White House Statement on March 21, 2010

STATISTICS: 67 percent of Americans oppose funding abortions with public funds under the health care bill. — Quinnipiac University Poll, January 14, 2010

As pundits have commented in recent weeks, and many of us have realized, you need to watch what the President really does, not listen to what he says, as the two are often in vast contrast of one another. As you can read above, nowhere is this truer than on the issue of abortion.

Back in March, when the offer to sign an Executive Order was made, many pro-lifers questioned why the order was needed after President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and Secretary Sebelius had been saying for months that no federal dollars would be used to fund abortions. On the day of the vote, I personally spoke on the House floor about how an Executive Order has no effect of law and cannot override the clear intent of a statute, as well as on how an Executive Order is only a piece of paper. Now that we know how little the President values his word and that he is comfortable violating an Executive Order, we are only left to wonder what other secrets are lurking for us in the dark. (The Hill)

Remember, it was abortion that was the very last hurdle that Obama had to jump over to get his power over life and death.

He promised to Federally ban it.

He said Health Care Reform wasn’t tax.

The Stimulus will create 3 Million Jobs. (not “save or create”)

I said at the time he was lying.

I got called a racist so many times I could have paid off my house with the money if I got paid for it.

Saying this President is lying when his lips are moving is like saying the sun will come up tomorrow.

It’s an absolute certainty.

“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”-Orwell

Thank you, Big Brother and Big Mother and Big Sis… 😦

Anyone got a crate of Tea handy… 🙂