We are From THE Government

Government wants you to think it helps you at every turn. Every time you make a decision, a purchase, government wants to be there, looking essential.

But it’s a trick. Most government “help” creates new problems.

Students once went to private banks to get college loans. Banks, since they had their own money on the line, tried to lend only to students who were likely to succeed and then pay them back. Politicians then said, “Banks don’t lend enough, so we’ll guarantee loans or make loans ourselves! After all, college is essential for success.”

Colleges responded by raising tuition at seven times the rate of inflation. It’s a spiral in which taxpayers are forced to give money to colleges — which then charge high tuition, so students graduate deep in debt, and then politicians demand that taxpayers forgive that debt.

And since the loans are guaranteed by the government no matter what the colleges’ charge they go nuts. And the Left thinks it’s the Colleges fault. They are just taking full advantage of the government’s guarantees. They don’t have to be “careful” because the government will pay THEM back.

You, well, you’re screwed!

President Obama said, sure, just pay back 10 percent or, after 20 years, nothing! Taxpayers will pay the rest, which goes to schools that employ professors who demand more government programs. It’s a spiral that makes government bigger.

The same thing happened with housing. People once borrowed from private banks, which applied market discipline. If they thought you wanted to borrow more than you would likely repay, banks wouldn’t lend you the money.

But now government — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration — guarantee nearly every loan. That helped create the last housing bubble. After it burst, and taxpayers were charged nearly $2 billion to bail out the FHA, the politicians assured the public they would fix this to make sure it never happened again.

But they didn’t. Today, once again, more than 90 percent of home loans are backed by taxpayers, and after briefly raising down-payment requirements, the FHA will again make loans to people who make down payments of as little as 3 percent.

And another housing bubble will likely burst. But Government, especially Liberals who’s God is Government won’t see it coming or even understand why.

Their ideology says they are “doing good” so it can’t be bad, now can it?:)

A sensible solution would be to get government out of the home loan business, but even Republicans claim government support for homebuilding is needed. It isn’t. Canada has no Fannie, Freddie or FHA, and no housing bubble. In Canada, lenders and homeowners risk their own money, yet just as many people are able to buy homes.

Finally, Obamacare makes the same arrogant assumption about healthcare: Without government, people can’t afford health care and won’t make good decisions. But healthcare is bureaucratic and costly because of government.

But the sanctimonious Left will never see it that way. Government is the great equalizer to them. What it equalizes is the misery and pain. Which the Leftist then turn misery and blame other people for that too.

Government meddling is not at fault. It’s “Corporate America” that is at fault for everything.

For decades, government encouraged us to pay for health care — even routine procedures — with insurance. But insurance is designed for large, rare expenditures, like your house catching fire or a heart attack.

See Adverse Selection. Understand it, and you’ll understand why ObamaCare can NEVER make rates go down as promised.

When everything from head colds to backaches is paid for through insurance, neither the customer nor service provider pays much attention to what anything costs. I’m on Medicare now. I’m amazed that when I go to a doctor, no one even mentions price.

And if no one knows how much anything costs, no one cares. So it’s hypnotizing.

If we paid for everything that way — clothing, groceries, computers — everything would cost much more. No one would know when to shop around, when they were getting a great deal, or when to say: enough.

The more we enshrine the idea that “everyone must have health insurance,” the more big insurance companies can raise prices without worrying about customers fleeing. Forced government insurance steers everyone into a few big plans instead of letting individuals make decisions that foster competition. Hospitals and insurance companies are the ones really being helped.

President Eisenhower addressed a similar problem when he complained about a “military-industrial complex.” Today we have a broader “government-industrial complex.”

It shouldn’t surprise us when big companies start out opposing regulation but then announce that they wholeheartedly support government’s latest “reform.”

By the time legislation is passed, the major players in the industry have had a role in writing the laws, ensuring that they are guaranteed a profit.

They get there’s, and you get yours- up the ass. But you’re supposed to feel good that Government is there to protect you from the big bad Corporates who have bought off the politicians in the first place.:)

I don’t think government makes my life easier by being around me all the time. Instead, it makes it harder and harder to imagine life without government. Perhaps that was their goal. (John Stossel)

Yes, it was.

Government is GOD.

All hail, the Almighty.

Worship it.

Food Fight

Stossel in The Classroom 2014 Winner

by Madeline Peltzer, Age 15

Food Fight! Give Me Liberty, Not a Nanny

I recently spent a week at our state capitol with a conservative organization that teaches students about government, political leadership, and the value of liberty. To illustrate how a bill becomes law, each Student Representative wrote a bill to present to the mock legislature. As I read the bills assigned to my committee, I was struck by how many students proposed government solutions to issues that could have been addressed by private means. Unfortunately, many adult politicians legislate with the same mindset and seek to use their resources, powers, and position to solve problems in areas government should not be involved. When government becomes an active player in people’s affairs, it weakens families, communities, and ultimately the nation. Rather, the best role for government is when it creates a path for citizens to resolve issues themselves.

John Stossel examines food regulations and the proper role of government in his television special “Myths, Lies, and Complete Stupidity.” He gives examples of government busy-bodies who increasingly dictate Americans’ food and drink choices based on their personal agendas and makes the case that we do not need costly and ineffective government interference to help us eat wisely.

Stossel shows how New York City officials have become notorious for regulating and banning items they deem too salty or sugary or that contain trans-fat. These self-appointed nutrition czars also pressure new mothers to choose nursing over bottle-feeding by locking away hospital formula and withhold food donations to homeless shelters because officials cannot assess their salt, fat, and fiber content. Most recently, Fox News reported that New York Senator Charles Schumer is pressing the Food and Drug Administration to ban a chemical used in fast-food bread despite his admission that no link exists between the chemical and cancer and that the FDA approves of it. “In a day where cancer rates are rising,” he said, “you have to be careful.”

The food police do not contain themselves to New York. One Chicago public school banned homemade lunches because the principal says it is more nutritious for children to eat cafeteria food. Meddling lawmakers in Southern Los Angeles prohibit new fast-food chains from opening because of the area’s high obesity rate. Medical commentators in a recent issue of Nature argue that sugar is as toxic and addictive as alcohol and tobacco and call for federal regulation to control its distribution. Fellow advocates believe this is possible if enough local governments continue to enact sugar-curbing policies. The root of this high-handed mindset is summed up by New York State assemblyman Felix Ortiz in a 2012 Stossel: “I’m saving your life and lives of the people of this nation.”

Ortiz may mean well, but good intentions are not enough. Legislators must consider the unintended consequences they create every time they impose new policies. The cost of compliance is passed onto the public who get fewer choices, bureaucratic red-tape discourages entrepreneurs, and the incentive to invent and innovate is squelched. Worse, government’s coercive power to tax, regulate, ban, and license tempts them to make blanket decisions for everyone.

Even more detrimental than economic repercussions are the moral ones. Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute says when paternalistic lawmakers impose their assistance upon society, the businesses, workers, families, and religious institutions are stripped of their vitality. If citizens must look to the nanny state for direction, an unhealthy culture of dependency will develop and the qualities we love about Americans will vanish. What has traditionally made America unique is the overarching principle that people best thrive when government leaves most of the power and decisions to individuals.

That principle is well demonstrated with regard to nutrition and the abundance of resources available in the free market. Television, internet, dieticians, and bookstores teem with a world of information.

My family’s favorite resources are the best-selling handbooks Eat This, Not That!, a witty reference that utilizes photographs and information snippets to reveal a restaurant’s healthiest choices on the left page and the worst on the right. This not only equips customers to make nutritious decisions, but also holds restaurants accountable for their menus. For instance, after receiving repetitive grades of “F” from ETNT for withholding nutrition facts, Quiznos, Red Lobster, and Olive Garden disclosed their information, and it did not take a government mandate to do it. Jamba Juice discontinued a smoothie after customers complained about its inclusion on “ETNT’s Worst Foods in America” list. Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s joined forces with ETNT to create a turkey burger after many of their items landed on the “Not That!” page. The addition was so popular they added several new variations. ETNT has also published a Supermarket Survival Guide designed to make grocery shopping cheaper and healthier and Cook This, Not That! which teaches people how to prepare more nutritious, economical versions of restaurant dishes.

The free market is doing a fine job of educating and informing the public and is having a positive effect on the food industry, but in the end, “people must be free to live life as they see fit and to be responsible for the consequences of their actions,” writes Murray. “It is not the government’s job to protect people from themselves.”

This idea became obvious to me that day at the capitol as I listened to my committee debate a student’s bill. It prompted me to ask the group whether it was our job as Representatives to address this issue and potentially burden the public with an unnecessary law. Citizens could take care of this concern on their own. This line of thinking immediately resonated with everyone, and upon reflection our committee ended up vetoing every bill we read. When the other committees heard the news, they were amazed. Why had we not passed any bills? I asked myself why that was a bad thing. It should be considered an accomplishment to prevent bad legislation. My committee said no to bad bills. It is time those serving in our real government did the same.

The Freedom Report

I love Christmas lights!

They remind me of the people who voted for Obama!

They all hang together, half of them don”t work,

and the ones that do …

aren’t all that BRIGHT!

And the low voltage (aka low information) burn outs in the middle ruin it for the rest of us!:)

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

left wing loon

U.S. President Barack Obama is apparently a fan of the Emmy-winning Netflix series House of Cards.

Before a meeting with tech magnates Tuesday morning, Obama shared a lighthearted exchange about the series with Netflix CEO Reed Hastings. Obama said he wished Washington politics were as “ruthlessly efficient” as the show’s portrayal. (mashable)

But I think the Washington Post has a closer explanation for his love of it:

The ways in which Kevin Spacey — as Rep. Frank Underwood — manipulates his colleagues suggests that he is a man among boys, that they are the sheep and he the shepherd.  If Spacey was so very good about bending his colleagues to his will, why isn’t he the president? Or at least the Speaker of the House? (Frank is the House Majority Whip, the third ranking position in leadership.) There’s no question that in the actual Congress there are certain members who have savvier policy and political minds than others. But the black and white distinctions created by the show badly oversimplifies how most legislators interact.

It’s good to be the King. And oversimplification is a great Liberal trait.

‘Vote for Me, the Other Guy’s an Asshole!’  springs to mind….:)

“I cannot imagine a more ‘indiscriminate’ and ‘arbitrary invasion’ than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying it and analyzing it without judicial approval,” wrote US District Judge Richard Leon. (of the The NSA spying).

The (IN-)Justice Department has continued to argue that plaintiffs in lawsuits against the spying program lack standing because they cannot prove their records were examined. But Judge Leon suggested that the old calculus that afforded police agencies great leeway when it came to monitoring communications has clearly changed.

Suggesting that the NSA has relied on “almost-Orwellian technology,” wrote Judge Leon, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia bench. “The relationship between the police and the phone company (as imagined by the courts decades ago)…is nothing compared to the relationship that has apparently evolved over the last seven years between the government and telecom companies.”

The judge concluded, “It’s one thing to say that people expect phone companies to occasionally provide information to law enforcement; it is quite another to suggest that our citizens expect all phone companies to operate what is effectively a joint intelligence-gathering operation with the government.”

This case will continue in the courts, as will others.

Remember when Liberals were apoplectic about “warrantless wiretapping”??:)

John Stossel: This wasn’t a great year for liberty. A few disasters that government caused:

–Obamacare. It was supposed to “bend the cost curve” downward. The central planners had lots of time to perfect their scheme. For a generation, the brightest left-wing wonks focused on health care policy. The result? Soviet-style consumer service comes to America.

–Government shutdown. The real disaster was the unnecessary panic over it. Zoos would shut down, and baby pandas would starve. The media made it sound like America might not survive even slightly limited government. They were happy to echo the politicians’ claim that there’s no wasteful or stupid spending to cut.

“The cupboard is bare,” said Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “There’s no more cuts to make.”

Nothing to cut? Government spends $3.8 trillion a year!

Many Republicans are almost as eager to spend as Democrats, despite the difference in rhetoric between the two parties. About the only spending reduction Republicans accomplished in the past few years was the so-called sequester — which really happened by legal default because the two parties couldn’t reach an agreement. The sequester instituted cuts of about $85 billion a year, a mere sliver of that $3.8 trillion budget and a still smaller sliver of our $17 trillion debt.

Yet even those modest cuts will not happen now under the new congressional agreement. Because some Republicans were upset the sequester made small cuts to the military’s budget and were fearful another partial government shutdown might hurt their chances in upcoming elections, they gave up the modest spending discipline the sequester imposed. Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, said conservatives who want to keep the sequester are “ridiculous.”

The Republican behind the new agreement, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., was once called a fanatical budget-slasher who wanted to push Granny off a cliff. People talked about him reading Ayn Rand and being a cutthroat capitalist. But now, even he abandons the meager budget cuts that were already scheduled.

I suppose Republicans feel they have no choice. They face Democrats who will cut nothing . They hope to win the Senate next election and realize that spending cuts are not particularly popular with the general public.

Americans say they want less spending. But then they fight for farm subsidies, flood insurance and “economic development” schemes. Most federal spending funds Social Security, Medicare and the military. Even citizens who sound fiscally conservative, especially elderly ones, don’t want these things cut.

–This was also the year we found out just how much the federal government spies on its own citizens. I annoyed my fellow libertarians by saying the privacy I lose to data mining seems a small price to pay for surveillance against terrorism. I posted a list of a hundred other things government does that upset me more. Some people responded by calling me a “traitor” and “LINO” (libertarian in name only).

Look, libertarians, I’m constantly angry at my government for lots of things, but I just can’t get worked up about data mining. My emails fly through the air. For all I know, my political enemies already read them.

It is upsetting, though, that the National Security Agency snooping goes far beyond what the government first claimed. President Barack Obama assured us the NSA does not read our emails or listen to our phone calls. But it turns out they sometimes do.

They say they only look for terrorists, and they won’t use the records to harass and punish their critics. But why would we trust that the same big government that spends $3.8 trillion a year, raids our homes looking for drugs and regulates almost every part of our lives won’t use its snooping powers to look into things other than terrorism?

Given the truth of Thomas Jefferson’s warning — “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground” — I fear next year will be still worse for liberty.

To make it a better year, we can’t trust such a powerful government to restrain itself. We should cut back its duties to reduce its power.

But that means you have to get the drug addicts to voluntarily cut back on their drugs…:)

The Christmas Spirit…
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
A Well Deserved Award…
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Enemies List

Happy Mothers Day to all those Mothers out there who have “never worked a day” in their lives according to the Democrats.

My mother passed away in 2010. So, if your yours is still around, give her the love and respect she deserves while you still can.

Now back to the fun…

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

If you were ever remotely mean to any human being or animal in your ENTIRE LIFE and you gave big money to Romney, well Obama and his crew of gravediggers and muckrackers want to know about it so they can humiliate you.

They can’t run on their bosses record, or even his REAL ideas. So they will be looking to see if Mitt ever spit up someone’s face when he was 8 months old and now they also want YOU, Mr & Mrs Donor.

They want to humiliate and intimidate you. Facts are irrelevant. Juicy Bits that would not even make the National Enquirer , invented “facts”, and exaggerated falsehoods are the name of the game.

And like the case of the dead “bully” victim write it so if the family objects to your muckracking you can blow them off with impunity because you are the caring and  sensitive ones after all.

Make sure they know there is a price for defying Big Brother and giving money to the ENEMY OF THE STATE.

It’s the Chicago Way.

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said

Or in this case, if you bring big money to the Enemy of the State we’ll bring a Nuke and shove it up your ass!!

“Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.” — Saul Alinsky

Vote for Me, The other Guy (and all his donors) is/are an Asshole!

John Stossel: Here’s what happens when the president of the United States publicly targets a private citizen for the crime of supporting his opponent.

Frank VanderSloot is the CEO of Melaleuca Inc. The 63-year-old has run that wellness-products company for 26 years out of tiny Idaho Falls, Idaho. Last August, Mr. VanderSloot gave $1 million to Restore Our Future, the Super PAC that supports Mitt Romney.

Three weeks ago, an Obama campaign website, “Keeping GOP Honest,” (Don’t you just love the Orwellian names Liberals come up with :)) took the extraordinary step of publicly naming and assailing eight private citizens backing Mr. Romney. Titled “Behind the curtain: a brief history of Romney’s donors,” the post accused the eight of being “wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records.” Mr. VanderSloot was one of the eight, smeared particularly as being “litigious, combative and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

About a week after that post, a man named Michael Wolf contacted the Bonneville County Courthouse in Idaho Falls in search of court records regarding Mr. VanderSloot. Specifically, Mr. Wolf wanted all the documents dealing with Mr. VanderSloot’s divorces, as well as a case involving a dispute with a former Melaleuca employee.

Mr. Wolf sent a fax to the clerk’s office—which I have obtained—listing four cases he was after. He would later send a second fax, asking for three further court cases dealing with either Melaleuca or Mr. VanderSloot. Mr. Wolf listed only his name and a private cellphone number.

Some digging revealed that Mr. Wolf was, until a few months ago, a law clerk on the Democratic side of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. He’s found new work. The ID written out at the top of his faxes identified them as coming from “Glenn Simpson.” That’s the name of a former Wall Street Journal reporter who in 2009 founded a D.C. company that performs private investigative work.

The website for that company, Fusion GPS, describes itself as providing “strategic intelligence,” with expertise in areas like “politics.” That’s a polite way of saying “opposition research.”

When I called Fusion’s main number and asked to speak to Michael Wolf, a man said Mr. Wolf wasn’t in the office that day but he’d be in this coming Monday. When I reached Mr. Wolf on his private cell, he confirmed he had until recently worked at the Senate.

When I asked what his interest was in Mr. VanderSloot’s divorce records, he hesitated, then said he didn’t want to talk about that. When I asked what his relationship was with Fusion, he hesitated again and said he had “no comment.” “It’s a legal thing,” he added.

Fusion dodged my calls, so I couldn’t ask who was paying it to troll through Mr. VanderSloot’s divorce records. Mr. Simpson finally sent an email stating: “Frank VanderSloot is a figure of interest in the debate over civil rights for gay Americans. As his own record on gay issues amply demonstrates, he is a legitimate subject of public records research into his lengthy history of legal disputes.”

A look through Federal Election Commission records did not show any payments to Fusion or Mr. Wolf from political players, such as the Democratic National Committee, the Obama campaign, or liberal Super PACs. Then again, when political groups want to hire researchers, it is not uncommon to hire a less controversial third party, which then hires the researchers.

This is not the first attack on Mr. VanderSloot. While the executive has been a force in Idaho politics and has helped Mr. Romney raise money, he’s not what most would consider a national political power player. Through 2011, nearly every mention of Mr. VanderSloot appeared in Idaho or Washington state newspapers, often in reference to his business.

That changed in January, with the first Super PAC disclosures. Liberal bloggers and media have since dug into his past, dredging up long-ago Idaho controversies that touched on gay issues. His detractors have spiraled these into accusations that Mr. VanderSloot is a “gay bashing thug.” He’s become a national political focus of attention, aided by the likes of partisan Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald and MSNBC host Rachel Maddow. Bloggers have harassed his children, visiting their social media accounts and asking for interviews and information.

Mr. VanderSloot has said his attackers have misconstrued facts and made false allegations. In February he wrote a long reply, publicly stating that he has “many gay friends whom I love and respect” who should “have the same freedoms and rights as any other individual.” The Obama campaign’s response, in April, was to single out Mr. VanderSloot and repeat the slurs.

Political donations don’t come with a right to privacy, and Mr. VanderSloot might have expected a spotlight. Then again, President Obama, in the wake of the Gabby Giffords shooting, gave a national address calling for “civility” in politics. Yet rather than condemn those demeaning his opponent’s donors, Mr. Obama—the nation’s most powerful man—instead publicly named individuals, egging on the attacks. What has followed is the slimy trolling into a citizen’s private life.

Mr. VanderSloot acknowledges that “when I first learned that President Obama’s campaign had singled me out on his ‘enemies list,’ I knew it was like taping a target on my back.” But the more he’s thought it through, “the public beatings and false accusations that followed are no deterrent. These tactics will not work in America.” He’s even “contemplating a second donation.”

Still. If details about Mr. VanderSloot’s life become public, and if this hurts his business or those who work for him, Mr. Obama will bear responsibility. This is what happens when the president makes a list.

AND FOR THE REST OF YOU…

A newly discovered Air Force intelligence brief states that should fleets of unmanned drones accidentally capture surveillance footage of Americans, the data can be stored and analyzed by the Pentagon for up to 90 days.

The instruction, dated April 23, admits that the Air Force cannot legally conduct “nonconsensual surveillance” on Americans, but also states that should the drones”incidentally” capture data while conducting other missions, military intelligence has the right to study it to determine whether the subjects are legitimate targets of domestic surveillance.

“Collected imagery may incidentally include US persons or private property without consent,” the instruction states.

The Air Force can take advantage of “a period not to exceed 90 days” to use the data to assess “whether that information may be collected under the provisions of Procedure 2, DoD 5240.1-R and permanently retained under the provisions of Procedure 3, DoD 5240.1-R.” it continues.

The Pentagon directives cited authorize limited domestic spying in certain scenarios such as natural disasters, environmental cases, and monitoring activity around military bases.

Should the drones capture data on Americans, the Air Force says that it should determine whether they are, among other things, “persons or organizations reasonably believed to be engaged or about to engage, in international terrorist or international narcotics activities.”

The instruction also states that the Pentagon can disseminate the data to other intelligence and government agencies, should it see fit.

“Even though information may not be collectible, it may be retained for the length of time necessary to transfer it to another DoD entity or government agency to whose function it pertains.” the document reads.

Congress recently passed legislation paving the way for what the FAA predicts will be somewhere in the region of 30,000 drones in operation in US skies by 2020. (Infowars)

So fly the Friendly skies of Big Brother!!

Oh, and one more thing…

The top-secret US National Security Agency is not required to reveal any deal it may have with Google to help protect against cyber attacks, an appeals court ruled Friday.

The US Court of Appeals in Washington upheld a lower court decision that said the NSA need not confirm or deny any relationship with Google, because its governing statutes allow it keep such information secret.

So remember Big Brother is Watching you!:)

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Prove The Mayans Wrong

For the Record on upcoming Republican “obstructionist” ads and ads that say Republicans WANT to crush College Students over the loan rates because you surely won’t here this from the Ministry of Truth:

Republicans defied a veto threat and the House voted Friday to prevent federal loan costs from doubling for millions of college students. The vote gave the GOP a momentary election-year triumph on a bill that has become enmeshed in partisan battles over the economy, women’s issues and President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.

The measure’s 215-195 passage was largely symbolic because the package is going nowhere in the Democratic-dominated Senate. Both parties agree students’ interest costs should not rise, but they are clashing along a familiar fault line over how to cover the $6 billion tab: Republicans want spending cuts and Democrats want higher revenues.(revenues=Taxes).

Democrats wrote a version of the bill, paid for by ending subsidies for oil and gas companies.

Big Oil is, after all, Evil Incarnate.

But this whole created mess is the centerpiece of the President’s strategy to gin up young, naive, stupid people to vote for him. It can’t be over this fast. He can’t have the Republicans being given credit for it. He has so much more fear and loathing to spread!

FEAR IS HOPE!

So they obstruct them, then blame them for not passing a bill that does it there way. After all, it’s their way or the highway!

And the Republicans keep “obstructing” them on that.

Damn them.:)

Democrats trained their fire on the Republican plan to pay for the bill by abolishing a preventive health fund created by Obama’s 2010 revamping of the health care system. Democrats said that program especially helped women by allocating money for cancer screening and other initiatives and that eliminating it was only the latest GOP blow against women _ a charge Republicans hotly contested.

“Give me a break,” roared House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to rousing cheers from Republican lawmakers. “This is the latest plank in the so-called war on women, entirely created by my colleagues across the aisle for political gain.”

Democrats voted solidly earlier this year to take money from the preventive health fund to help keep doctors’ Medicare reimbursements from dropping. Obama’s own budget in February proposed cutting $4 billion from the same fund to pay for some of his priorities.

Since the early days of this year’s GOP presidential contest, Democrats have been accusing Republicans of targeting women by advocating curbs on contraceptives and other policies. Polls show women leaning heavily toward Obama and Democrats would like to stoke that margin.

In its veto message, the White House argued that “women in particular” would be helped by the prevention fund and added, “This is a politically motivated proposal and not the serious response that the problem facing America’s college students deserves.” (Townhall)

Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste!:)

2008: The Obama campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, accused the Clinton team of playing “the politics of fear” just like George W. Bush.

Burton, now the head of the Democratic super PAC, Priorities USA (one of the main backers of ObamaCare), said at the time: “When Senator Clinton voted with President Bush to authorize the war in Iraq, she made a tragically bad decision that diverted our military from the terrorists who attacked us, and allowed Osama bin Laden to escape and regenerate his terrorist network. It’s ironic that she would borrow the President’s tactics in her own campaign and invoke bin Laden to score political points. We already have a President who plays the politics of fear, and we don’t need another.

Now: We have Throwing Grandma off a cliff, race-baiting, racial division, and so much more.

FEAR IS HOPE

In a new web video titled “One Chance,” the Obama team features former President Bill Clinton praising Obama for deciding to launch the strike last year. “What path would Mitt Romney have taken?” the clip asks.

Mind you, like the “silver spoon” comments it’s all implied. He wants to led your horse to his kool-aid so you’ll drink it.

While I am not the biggest fan of Romney, I am totally against Obama and these kind of tactics are just the opening salvo in an all-out Nuclear Armageddon that the Democrats and their Liberal Media Minions will launch.

After all, all that they have worked for for 90 years is at stake. ObamaCare is potentially still at stake depending on how it goes with the Supreme Court. And if goes against them then they have to double down to win so they can pass it again!

Don’t doubt that. It’s the Holy Grail of Liberalism. They won’t give up quite so easily. All they have to do is win again, replace at least 1 conservative Justice on the Supreme Court and they are off to the Totalitarian races!

So expect nothing less than total and absolute Nuclear Annihilation.

So you pander to base fears. You pander to Hispanics big time (gotta have that Illegal alien Vote – sorry the Liberal want to ban that phrase to because it’s “inhumane” – perfect crimethink). You get the stupid and the naive to vote for you. You get as many independents as possible to stay home and not vote for anyone as you can so you can get your base+the stupid+ the naive to overwhelm the rational.

Vote for me, The Other Guy’s an Asshole!!!

And it starts with the ludicrous notion that a President presented with info to kill or capture the #1 enemy of the country would pass on it.

I think the only reason Obama went for it is because if it leaked out that he didn’t that it would be bad politiks. After all President Clinton passed on Bin Laden several times in the 1990s (but that didn’t hurt him because the liberal media covered it up and they could have for Obama but the internet is much more pervasive now than than it was and it would have leaked out somehow).

“Thanks to President Obama, bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive. You have to ask yourself, if Gov. Romney had been president, could he have used the same slogan — in reverse?” Biden said

Yeah, and The UAW thanks you Mr. Vice President. After all, that was what it was all about in the first place– Unions. The Stimulus was also about Unions.
If you aren’t in a Union (which the vast majority of people aren’t) then you don’t have compulsory “donations” to the Democrat Party as part of your salary and that has to change.
Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said Friday. “It’s now sad to see the Obama campaign seek to use an event that unified our country to once again divide us, in order to try to distract voters’ attention from the failures of his administration.”

But don’t worry, the fear campaign has only begun to ratchet up and the swagger of “I got him and you didn’t” is only just beginning.
Before it’s over the Mayans will be right.

WSJ: Try this thought experiment: You decide to donate money to Mitt Romney. You want change in the Oval Office, so you engage in your democratic right to send a check.

Several days later, President Barack Obama, the most powerful man on the planet, singles you out by name. His campaign brands you a Romney donor, shames you for “betting against America,” and accuses you of having a “less-than-reputable” record. The message from the man who controls the Justice Department (which can indict you), the SEC (which can fine you), and the IRS (which can audit you), is clear: You made a mistake donating that money.

Richard Nixon’s “enemies list” appalled the country for the simple reason that presidents hold a unique trust. Unlike senators or congressmen, presidents alone represent all Americans. Their powers—to jail, to fine, to bankrupt—are also so vast as to require restraint. Any president who targets a private citizen for his politics is de facto engaged in government intimidation and threats. This is why presidents since Nixon have carefully avoided the practice.

Save Mr. Obama, who acknowledges no rules. This past week, one of his campaign websites posted an item entitled “Behind the curtain: A brief history of Romney’s donors.” In the post, the Obama campaign named and shamed eight private citizens who had donated to his opponent. Describing the givers as all having “less-than-reputable records,” the post went on to make the extraordinary accusations that “quite a few” have also been “on the wrong side of the law” and profiting at “the expense of so many Americans.”

These are people like Paul Schorr and Sam and Jeffrey Fox, investors who the site outed for the crime of having “outsourced” jobs. T. Martin Fiorentino is scored for his work for a firm that forecloses on homes. Louis Bacon (a hedge-fund manager), Kent Burton (a “lobbyist”) and Thomas O’Malley (an energy CEO) stand accused of profiting from oil. Frank VanderSloot, the CEO of a home-products firm, is slimed as a “bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

These are wealthy individuals, to be sure, but private citizens nonetheless. Not one holds elected office. Not one is a criminal. Not one has the barest fraction of the position or the power of the U.S. leader who is publicly assaulting them.

“We don’t tolerate presidents or people of high power to do these things,” says Theodore Olson, the former U.S. solicitor general. “When you have the power of the presidency—the power of the IRS, the INS, the Justice Department, the DEA, the SEC—what you have effectively done is put these guys’ names up on ‘Wanted’ posters in government offices.” Mr. Olson knows these tactics, having demanded that the 44th president cease publicly targeting Charles and David Koch of Koch Industries, which he represents. He’s been ignored.

The real crime of the men, as the website tacitly acknowledges, is that they have given money to Mr. Romney. This fundraiser of a president has shown an acute appreciation for the power of money to win elections, and a cutthroat approach to intimidating those who might give to his opponents.

He’s targeted insurers, oil firms and Wall Street—letting it be known that those who oppose his policies might face political or legislative retribution. He lectured the Supreme Court for giving companies more free speech and (falsely) accused the Chamber of Commerce of using foreign money to bankroll U.S. elections. The White House even ginned up an executive order (yet to be released) to require companies to list political donations as a condition of bidding for government contracts. Companies could bid but lose out for donating to Republicans. Or they could quit donating to the GOP—Mr. Obama’s real aim.

The White House has couched its attacks in the language of “disclosure” and the argument that corporations should not have the same speech rights as individuals. But now, says Rory Cooper of the Heritage Foundation, “he’s doing the same at the individual level, for anyone who opposes his policies.” Any giver, at any level, risks reprisal from the president of the United States.

It’s getting worse because the money game is not going as Team Obama wants. Super PACs are helping the GOP to level the playing field against Democratic super-spenders. Prominent financial players are backing Mr. Romney. The White House’s new strategy is thus to delegitimize Mr. Romney (by attacking his donors) as it seeks to frighten others out of giving.

The Obama campaign has justified any action on the grounds that it has a right to “hold the eventual Republican nominee accountable,” but this is a dodge. Politics is rough, but a president has obligations that transcend those of a candidate. He swore an oath to protect and defend a Constitution that gives every American the right to partake in democracy, free of fear of government intimidation or disfavored treatment. If Mr. Obama isn’t going to act like a president, he bolsters the argument that he doesn’t deserve to be one.

If I can’t get you to vote for me, I can at least try to get you to not vote at all.

But if you vote for the wrong team, expect to feel my wrath if I’m re-elected for I am vengeful God!

We already have a President who plays the politics of fear, that’s why we need to get rid of him.

And the only way is to wade through an all out Nuclear Armageddon of Liberal attacks and vote him out.

Be a Proud Enemy of This State.

And prove the Mayans wrong.:)

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

No They Cant! The Sequel

John Stossel: President Obama said in his State of the Union Address that he is putting colleges on notice to lower costs. A few days later, he spoke to students at the University of Michigan, with a promise of more federal aid. Politicians claim they can make college affordable. No They Can’t!

In the last 30 years, inflation is up 160%, but tuition costs are up 750%.

It’s because colleges have no incentive to cut prices when students can get money from government. Federal aid, adjusted for inflation, increased from 32 billion in 1987, to 169 billion in 2010.

Government tells us, “Here’s the gap between what you can afford and what the college is charging, we will now make up that gap. And then the college just inches up the tuition a little bit higher,” says Naomi Riley author of The Faculty Lounges: and Other Reasons Why You Won’t Get the College Education You Paid For.

Colleges don’t use all or even most of that money in the classroom. We were stunned at the gyms and dining halls that serve lobster and sushi. Check out the University of Missouri, which is proud of its spa, rock climbing wall and “Tiger Grotto” – an elaborate pool complex.

Government creates perverse incentives. Colleges compete on prestige and luxury amenities, not their price tag. Administrators don’t worry about high tuition costs because their customers have government subsidies.

And so what if they graduate with a mountain of debt and their job prospect are sh*t. They government will take of them too. And if ObamaCare survives they can be on their parents Health Insurance until they are 26.

And they’ve been raised by the liberal socialists to believe they are entitled to be look after just because.

So who cares, the Government will take care of you. You may remember that The Obama Administration took over the  student loans because they were going bankrupt.

2010: President Obama will sign a bill today that ends a 45-year-old program under which banks and other private-sector lenders such as Sallie Mae receive a federal subsidy for making government-guaranteed college loans.

Instead, the U.S. Department of Education – which already makes roughly a third of these loans through its direct-lending program – will make 100 percent of them starting July 1.

Students who previously had to choose a private-sector lender for their guaranteed loans will now have only one choice: the government. (SFGATE)

But the newly passed legislation does nothing to address the rapidly rising cost of education–and adds to our national debt. (Forbes)

A “single payer” system, you might say.:)

And costs are up 5 times inflation because colleges only incentive is to spend more to make college look like an French Riviera resort.

Costs? Who gives a crap about costs. The Government is paying for it.

Then they graduate and reality hits them in the face.

Students who graduated from college in 2010 with student loans owed an average of $25,250, up 5 percent from the previous year, according to a report scheduled for release Thursday.

The average debt — once again the highest on record — came as the class of 2010 faced an unemployment rate for new college graduates of 9.1 percent, the highest in recent years, according to the report by the Project on Student Debt, which pointed out that unemployment rates for those without college degrees were still higher.

The median starting salary for students graduating from four-year colleges in 2009 and 2010 was $27,000, down from $30,000 for those who entered the work force in 2006 to 2008, according to a study released on Wednesday by the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University. That is a decline of 10 percent, even before taking inflation into account.

35 percent of unemployed college graduates have been without a job for a year or longer. And, the long-term unemployment rate for those 25 and older is almost the same across the board—regardless of educational level.

Sidenote: remember, most report unemployment statistics don’t count people who have given up completely looking for a job.

CNN Last week: But the competition is steep, with employers reporting that they have received nearly 33 applications for every job posting, up from 21 applications per posting last year.

Enter Occupiers. “Entitled” little skulls of  unemployed (and many cases unemployable narcissistic and anarchist) socialist mush who have had reality hit them in the face and they just want to whine about it.

New York Times: The high cost of college and the growing debt burden of student loans have become increasingly potent political issues in recent years, high on the agenda of Occupy Wall Street and related protests across the country.

And then there’s the next line of graduate-in-waiting: Teenagers

The high teen unemployment rate, which came in at 23.8% for February (2012). Their unemployment rate remains above 20% for the 40th month in a row, the first time this has happened since the government started keeping records in 1948.

And since Obama was elected the first by getting naive 20-somethings to believe in his Messianic self he has to throw bones to his peeps, especially as their support has cooled over the years because a lot of them are not college students anymore but unemployed and underemployed debtors.

So he’ll need a new crop of naive morons to vote for him.

“Student debt goes up and it doesn’t ever go down,” said Mark Kantrowitz, the publisher of Finaid.org and Fastweb.com, two Web sites that offer advice on paying for college. “We’re clearly heading in the direction of decreased college affordability. Among lower-income students, the canaries in the cage that squawk first, we’re already seeing a decline in enrollment in four-year colleges and an increase in lower-cost two-year institutions,” he said.

Mr. Kantrowitz estimated that for the class of 2011, average debt was $27,200 — or, if parent loans were included, $34,000.

This is the fifth consecutive year in which the public universities that serve most students raised their tuition at a faster rate than the far more expensive private universities. (NYT)

So that’s why Obama has proposed….<<Drum Roll>> SPENDING EVEN MORE on student loan programs!!!

Now, I know that’s a shocker!:)

So when in Debt SPEND EVEN MORE!

When the system is bleeding red ink and it’s failing SPEND EVEN MORE!

When your house is burning down throw more Napalm on the Fire that will help!!

Liberal Economics at it’s finest.

But don’t worry, It’s all the Republicans! and “the rich”‘s Fault!:)

No They Can’t! And More

http://www.scribd.com/doc/85637905/No-They-Can-t-by-John-Stossel

Politicians say “Yes, we can!” and claim they solve our problems.

When the mortgage market crashed, the President said their new law, Dodd-Frank, would create a “new financial system” so such things would never happen again.

After 9/11, Senator Tom Daschle declared “you can’t professionalize if you don’t federalize!” The Senate voted 100-0 to create the TSA to run airport security.

Politicians’ promises are endless. They say they’ll: create jobs, “make college affordable for all,” protect the disabled, give disadvantaged kids a head start, and invest in “cutting edge innovation.”

But they can’t achieve what they promise.

•Billionaire Mark Cuban and other job-creators explain why government’s rules now prevent the job creation that was once America’s hallmark.

•Dodd-Frank, instead of stopping fraud, added layers to already incomprehensible banking laws. Stossel shows how simple rules in the Cayman Islands not only stop fraud, but they also create prosperity.

•While the TSA creates long lines, misses actual terrorists, and angers passengers, screeners working for a private company at one big airport work faster, more cheerfully, and find more contraband. We show how the private company does it.

Namely, San Francisco’s Airport (the mecca of Liberalism) has Private Security and it works vastly better than the TSA.

I know the most scrutiny I got from my last Trip to Wales was actually from my stop over in Amsterdam.

Did you know that the U of Missouri is proud to have a “leisure resort” on campus? Naomi Riley, author of The Faculty Lounges: And Other Reasons Why You Won’t Get the College Education You Pay For, explains how government aid led to massive tuition hikes.

•Since the Americans with Disabilities Act took effect, fewer disabled people have been able to work.

•Lisa Snell from the Reason Foundation explains how the government’s own research found that Head Start did not help poor kids. Government’s response? Spend even more.

Government grows, despite its repeated failure.

Politicians are wrong when they say “Yes, we can”, but the fact that government can’t doesn’t mean that we can’t. Free people accomplish wonderful things. While government wastes billions on boondoggles like Solyndra, X-prize founder Peter Diamandis explains how private investors have created cars that get 100mpg, space ships, and much faster ways to clean up oil spills, all without charging taxpayers a penny.

Without big government, life can be great.

AN EXAMPLE

Everyone loves the Head Start program. Politicians across the ideological spectrum-from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to President George W. Bush-have praised the program and called it a success.

They should read the government’s own research.

The ‘Head Start Impact Study‘ was a report conducted by the federal government. It followed and compared underprivileged kids who went to Head Start, and underprivileged kids who didn’t. The study found no difference between the two groups.

Zero.

The kids who went to Head Start did better while they were in Head Start, but one year later the benefits were all gone. Not by 5th grade. Not by 3rd grade. By 1st grade, the benefits were “largely absent”.

Since President Obama has pledged over and over to “eliminate programs that don’t work”, it seems like Head Start would be a natural to get cut.

Nope.

That’s not how big government works. Even after the report came out, the Obama administration has continued to massively increase spending on Head Start by more than a billion dollars.

In my Fox News special “No They Can’t”, I talk to Congressman Keith Ellison, co-chair of the Progressive Caucus, who in spite of the evidence insists Head Start works. When I confront him on the data, he falls back on a familiar argument: we need to spend more.

Give me a break. We’ve spent 180 billion dollars already, with nothing to show for it.

The government just can’t do it.

EXAMPLE 2

That’s how much you’ll need to buy the Energy Department’s prize-winning light bulb. (You know because Thomas Edison’s Incandescent Light Bulb was deemed politically correct by the Whacko Environmentalist Left).

Last year the government announced a $10 million prize “designed to spur lighting manufacturers to develop high-quality, high-efficiency solid-state lighting products to replace the common light bulb.” The winner? A light bulb that costs $50 each.

Only in the government would they think it was “progress” worth celebrating to replace something you can buy on Amazon.com for a little more than $1 with something that costs $50.

“I don’t want to say it’s exorbitant, but if a customer is only looking at the price, they could come to that conclusion,”Home Depot worker Brad Paulsen told the Washington Post. (Fox Business)

EXAMPLE 3 FOOD POLICE:

Public health: The toxic truth about sugar

This was headline in a Nature Magazine article that basically said sugar was bad a tobacco and alcohol and need to be sold behind the counter . Anti-obesity Meme Roth says yes, to protect the interests of kids.

Ah, it’s “for the children” so you can’t possibly object now can you?

Coke is the New Cocaine. Wait, in the 19th Century it was made with cocaine…)

:)

And It’s Government to the Rescue!!!

WANT MORE

Kids who open lemonade stands are now shutdown by police. I tried to open a lemonade stand legally in NYC. That was quite an adventure. It takes 65 days to get permission from the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

With government adding 80,000 pages of rules and regulations every year, it’s no surprise that regular people break laws without even trying.

A family in Idaho can’t build a home on their land because the EPA says it’s a wetland-but it only resembles a wetland because a government drain malfunctioned and flooded it.

Ever hear of a real wetland in Idaho??

Want to start a taxi business? Too bad – it’s illegal. Illegal, that is, unless you buy a government-issued “taxi medallion” that can cost as much as a million dollars. One city has a free market for cabs – Washington, DC – but lobbyists there are pushing to regulate.
Sen. Dick Durbin reacts to the tornadoes in Dallas, Texas earlier this week. Durbin calls for more laws regulating carbon output while he sends a dire warning that we must convert to hybrid cars or lose our life. Durbin says we must spend money now to fix the problem.

“It’s your money or your life,” he said a press conference. “We are either going to dedicate ourselves to a cleaner, more livable planet and accept the initial investment necessary or we’re going to pay a heavier price in terms of loss of human life, damage and costs associated with it.” (RCP)

NEVER LET A TRAGEDY GO BY WITHOUT PUSHING THE GLOBAL WARMING AGENDA!
Now that’s “compassion” at it’s finest.
But some good news: A San Francisco judge has dismissed a proposed class-action lawsuit that sought to stop McDonald’s Corp. from using toys to market its meals to children in the Golden State. The suit had been filed in late 2010 by Monet Parham, a California mother of two, and The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.
After all, McDonald’s was and is just a Capitalist Predator out to ensnare your children in crack-addicted life of junk food and obesity!!!
<<Maniacal Laugh>>
And Finally, the ever reliable whacko, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz:
“You know, what Mitt Romney and the Republicans have been doing to themselves every single day is showing women in this country day after day that they are callously indifferent to women’s health, to the priorities of women,” DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz told MSNBC on Thursday night. Really as evidenced by their obsession with cultural issues, their obsession with making sure that women can’t have affordable access to birth control, the dismissive way that the Chairman of the Republican National Committee today chalked up women being concerned about making sure that we could have affordable access to preventive screenings like mammograms as fictional as a war on caterpillars. You know, if they’re still wondering why there’s an 18-point gender gap and President Obama is ahead of Mitt Romney by that many points, then they really — they really must believe these things that they’re saying.

“Shocking,” Wasserman Schultz added.

Wasserman Schultz also says Mitt Romney is trying to “out-right-wing” his fellow Republicans. Here’s what she had to say at

“I think Mitt Romney has been so focused on trying to out-right-wing and embrace extremism that he is really beholden and has tied himself to his support for personhood amendments, his belief that Roe versus Wade was one of the worst decisions handed down by the Supreme Court, his support for the Blunt-Rubio amendment which says that bosses get to decide for their female employees what kind of access to health care they can have. And so every day there’s another example of how out of touch the Republicans are,” Wasserman Schultz said later in the interview conducted by MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell.  (Who also ripped Romney for being…<dramatic shock sting> A MORMON! Lord have Mercy we can’t elect a nutcase from a fringe religion now would you!!!) Except an Alinsky cultist called Barack Hussein Obama that is.

“Mitt Romney wants to be President of the United States, yet he fails to recognize what’s important to women. We just want to make sure that the guy in the White House is focused on creating jobs, getting the economy turned around, and making sure that as members of the middle class and working families that we have an opportunity to be successful to not just focusing on people who already are,” she said.

So when is Obama going to do that? He’s been there since 2009…:)
“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we’ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden.” –President Ronald Reagan.
And God know these Liberals Never Let A Crisis Go to Waste!:)
Political Cartoons by Brian Farrington

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez