DIY

A recent New York Times headline read, “Raising Taxes on the Wealthiest Would Pay for Bold Plans.” The story says that by soaking the rich “the government could raise large amounts of revenue … while still allowing them to take home a majority of their income.”

Nowhere in the story, nor in the endless promises of Democratic presidential candidates, is there a single word about whether more government spending will produce the promised outcomes. We are to take this on faith, despite past performance being a good indicator of future results. Also absent is any expectation that individuals have more power than government to direct and improve their lives.

The Government in 2015 has taken in more tax money than any time in American History…but they still run a massive deficit…things have gotten worse not better.

That’s because to the left, government is much like a deity to be worshipped rather than a servant of the people. If you don’t worship at the leftist shrine, you’re labeled unsympathetic toward the poor. Republicans should respond: “We care about the poor, but unlike you, who have spent over a trillion dollars fighting poverty with little to show for it, we want the poor to become independent of government.”

What keeps most of the poor locked in poverty is propaganda from the left, which tells them they cannot succeed without government assistance, which, in turn, leads them to a series of bad choices and a state of perpetual victimhood. Look at America’s big cities, dominated by Democrats, to see how that’s working. Once we talked about people who overcame difficult circumstances; now we just sing about overcoming … someday.

 

Charles Koch and his brother David are reviled by the left because they contribute large amounts of money to Republicans. Never mind that George Soros does the same for Democrats. The normally reclusive Charles is doing interviews to promote his new book “Good Profit: How Creating Value for Others Built One of the World’s Most Successful Companies.”

Speaking with Megyn Kelly on the Fox News Channel, Charles read a letter his father sent him about his inheritance: “If you choose to let this money destroy your initiative and independence, then it will be a curse to you and my action in giving it to you will have been a mistake. I shall regret very much to have you miss the glorious feeling of accomplishment. Remember that often adversity is a blessing in disguise and is certainly the greatest character-builder.”

Where are you hearing anything like that in contemporary political discourse, especially among Democrats? It’s all about free college tuition, free health care, free everything. The United States will become a giant ATM and those evil, miserly, insensitive “millionaires and billionaires” will pay for it all because it isn’t fair that they have more money than you have.

They (the anti-Democrat) are racists,bigots, homophobes, haters,misogynists, who hate children, poor people, want to destroy the environment and above all are “greedy” and “selfish” (the last two are in quotes because they are so laughable I can’t type it straight).

Even if government confiscated all of their wealth there wouldn’t be enough to pay off the $18 trillion national debt. What happens when the money runs out; when all of the wealth of the successful is exhausted and the incentive to make money disappears with it?

The Democrats will demand more.

Where will the left turn then? Who is asking these questions? Not debate moderators, who seem more interested in getting the candidates to attack each other, as though the debates were just the latest reality shows. This is the future of the United States at stake. Could we please hear some adults conversing like adults?

The Liberal Media only wants to attack the right and throw Nerf balls at the Left.

The Agenda is The Agenda and they are the superior form of life, at least according to them.

Need a plan for success, or at least independent living?

The Democrat completely endorse not having one. That’s what government is there for, for you to be coddled and manipulated like zombies.

It isn’t new. Stop turning to government as a first resource. Get married before you have children, stay married and if things get tough seek counseling. Stay in school. Don’t take drugs. Develop good character and a sound work ethic. If a good job with a future isn’t available where you live, move to a city that offers more opportunity, or start a small business.

Why be an adult when Democrats want to be your Mommy. 🙂

In the bidding war for votes, the left is preaching a message of envy, greed and entitlement. Human history proves that message doesn’t improve a life.

But as long as itn wins elections they don’t care.

The old values worked. If you’re a millennial, ask your grandparents about them, why they worked and how we lost sight of them along the way. Since these values succeeded for previous generations, why don’t we reclaim them?

Because then you’re a “greedy”, “selfish” “uncaring” bastard!

Yeah, Bastards! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
 

Forward to The Failed Past

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

IBD:We’re told Friday’s jobs report is evidence of slow and steady progress. But it actually documents the new normal of Obama’s economy — anemic job growth, chronic long-term unemployment and falling wages.

Given how long the economy has been underperforming, even the smallest bit of good news is welcome. But the latest jobs report offers little of even that.

The 155,000 new jobs created in December weren’t enough to make a dent in unemployment. And at this pace, it will take more than two years just to reach the previous jobs peak set back in January 2008.

And while the unemployment rate of 7.8% appears to be the same as when Obama took office, it obscures the fact that millions have given up looking for jobs and so aren’t being counted as unemployed.

If you account for the unprecedented drop in labor participation under Obama, the real unemployment rate is 10.7%.

Meanwhile, the pool of long-term unemployed was a staggering 4.8 million in December, which is 2 million more than when Obama took office. The average length of unemployment was 38 months — almost 20 months longer than four years ago and 15 months longer than when the recession ended in June 2009.

And, despite Obama’s endless talk about growing the economy from the bottom up, the nation’s workers aren’t seeing slow, steady progress when it comes to household income.

In fact, real average weekly earnings have dropped about 1% over the past two years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And median household income is down 7% since January 2009, according to Sentier Research.

In the face of this ongoing calamity, we get various and changing excuses about “head winds,” or the lingering effects of the Bush recession, or the uncertainty caused by the fiscal cliff. Or we’re told we just need to lower our expectations for growth.

And what does Obama do?

He forced a tax hike through Congress that his own favorite economists say will slow growth and cost jobs. He’s continued to push forward on ObamaCare, despite the fact that it’s scaring employers away from adding new jobs out of fear of getting hit with exorbitant new costs. He’s taken the leash off the EPA to wreak havoc on industries with massively expensive, and entirely unnecessary new regulations. He’s offered no real plans to get the nation’s debt under control.

And he claims he can make up for all this economic drag with a new round of federal spending on roads.

We want the economy to grow and America to prosper as much as anyone. But it’s hard to see much of that in the near future given the economic poison Obama keeps prescribing.

Kind of like A caretaker who feeds you arsenic every day and expects you to be an Olympic athlete by Noon and then goes on TV to take credit for the medal you haven’t won yet.

While the U.S. punishes millionaires, Russia and China reward them. In the upside-down era of Barack Obama, the capitalists act like communists and the communists act like capitalists.

Our multimillionaire president frowns on “millionaires and billionaires” and soaks them with higher taxes. But Russia loves them and even offers refugees of high-tax countries asylum.

Last week, the Kremlin, once headquarters of the Evil Empire, granted millionaire French actor Gerard Depardieu Russian citizenship so he can avail himself of Russia’s 13% flat tax and avoid his home country’s proposed new 75% supertax on millionaires.

Depardieu has been looking for a new home after telling France’s newly elected socialist prime minister that he would surrender his passport and French social security card in protest of the tax.

Moscow hopes its lower tax rate will attract a “massive migration of rich Europeans to Russia.” Russia already ranks seventh in millionaires worth more than $30 million. And Deloitte expects the number of Russian millionaires to triple to 1.2 million by 2020. (America, by comparison, has 5.2 million millionaires.)

Take note, Mr. President: Russia’s flat-tax miracle has helped bring its budget back into balance. Its revenues from income taxes have more than doubled since the single, low tax rate was instated.

Communist China, which now runs a socialist market economy, also welcomes millionaires. And it’s been creating record numbers of them since reducing its tax burden. There are now 1.1 million millionaires in China — a national record — and 63,500 multimillionaires and billionaires.

Since abolishing its agriculture tax and slashing its tax on small businesses by 50%, China has enjoyed the world’s biggest gains in the number of rich (though granted, coming off a low base). The vast majority of millionaires in China are business owners, who are taking advantage of the government’s recent market reforms and pro-business tax incentives.

As part of its post-crisis economic stimulus package, Beijing is reforming its VAT tax, which would cut corporate taxes as well. And just two months ago, it launched a new round of tax-cutting measures that will help more than 900,000 companies throughout China.

Meanwhile, back in formerly supercapitalistic America, our leaders have agreed to jack up taxes on small businesses. Obama’s new fiscal-cliff tax hike on individual filers earning $400,000 or more in income will hit more than 750,000 small-business owners. They account for more than 56% of all income from such firms and employ tens of millions of workers, both of which will be hurt by the higher rate.

Yet Obama says “there is still more to do” to make sure “the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share.” He vows to make “our tax code more progressive than it’s been in decades.”

Funny how the Russians and Chinese figured out that class-warfare ideology doesn’t work and is in fact, a recipe for failure. Funny how communists know that lower taxes grow the economy and keep you competitive.

As our president mau-maus the rich to “pay their fair share” to help fund his massive social programs, America, like Europe, risks losing a fair share of its wealth and power to communist superpowers that have rethought and reformed their command-and-control economies.

Obama thinks he’s taking the nation “Forward!” But he’s really taking it back to the failed past.

But ideological adamantium will prevent him from seeing any of this.
This is what the under informed, mal-informed, and the don’t-wanna-be informed voted for.
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

Give The People What They Want

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

After his party’s devastating setback in the 2010 midterm elections, Barack Obama was reelected earlier this month by painting his Republican opponents as heartless in favoring lower taxes for the rich. They were portrayed as nativists for opposing the DREAM Act amnesty for illegal immigrants, and as callous in battling the federal takeover of health care.

Republicans countered with arguments that higher taxes on the employer class hurt the economy in general. They assumed most voters knew that amnesties are euphemisms for undermining federal law and in the past have had the effect of promoting more illegal immigration. They tried to point out that there is no such thing as free universal health care, since Obamacare will only shift responsibility from health-care practitioners and patients to inefficient government bureaucracies and hide the true costs with higher taxes.

And they utterly failed to convince the American people of any of that.

Why doesn’t the Republican-controlled House of Representatives give both voters and President Obama what they wished for?

The current battle over the budget hinges on whether to return to the Clinton-era income-tax rates, at least for those who make more than $250,000 a year. Allowing federal income rates to climb to near 40 percent on that cohort would bring in only about $80 billion in revenue a year — a drop in the bucket when set against the $1.3 trillion annual deficit that grew almost entirely from out-of-control spending since 2009.

Instead, why not agree to hike federal-income-tax rates only on the true “millionaires and billionaires,” “fat cats,” and “corporate jet owners” whom Obama has so constantly demonized? In other words, skip over the tire-store owner or dentist, and tax those, for example, who make $1 million or more in annual income. Eight out of the ten wealthiest counties in the United States voted for Obama. Corporate lawyers and the affluent in Hollywood and on Wall Street should all not mind “paying their fair share.”

Upping federal tax rates to well over 40 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year would also offer a compromise: shielding most of the small businesspeople Republicans wish to protect while allowing Obama to tax the 1-percenters whom he believes have so far escaped paying what they owe, and then putting responsibility on the president to keep his part of the bargain in making needed cuts in spending.

Likewise, instead of hiking death taxes on small businesspeople, why not close loopholes for billion-dollar estates by taxing their gargantuan bequests to pet foundations that avoid estate taxes? Why should a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates act as if he built his own business and can solely determine how his fat-cat fortune is spent for the next century — meanwhile robbing the government of billions of dollars in lost estate taxes along with any federal say in how such fortunes are put to public use?

The president flipped in an election year on the DREAM Act. Suddenly, in 2012, Obama decided that he indeed did have the executive power to order amnesty without congressional approval for those who came illegally as children, stayed in school or joined the military, avoided arrest and thus deserved citizenship. In response, Republicans supposedly lost Latino support by insisting that federal immigration law be enforced across the board, regardless of race, class, gender, or national origin.

But why not make the president’s DREAM Act part of the envisioned grand bargain on immigration? Once it is agreed upon that we have the ability to distinguish those foreign nationals deserving of amnesty, then surely we also have the ability to determine who does not meet those agreed-upon criteria.

Why, then, cannot conservatives allow a pathway to citizenship for the play-by-the-rules millions who qualify, while regrettably enforcing an un-DREAM Act for others who just recently arrived illegally; enrolled in, and have remained on, public assistance; or have been convicted of a crime? Who could object to that fair compromise?

Finally, Obamacare will be imposed on all Americans by 2014. But so far the Obama administration has granted more than 1,200 exemptions to favored corporations and unions, covering about 4 million Americans. Shouldn’t Republicans seek to end all exemptions rather than tackle the improbable task of overturning Obamacare itself? Their motto should be: “Equality for all; special treatment for no one!”

One of the brilliant themes of the 2012 Obama campaign was forcing Republicans, on principle, to systematically oppose most of the things that the administration wanted them to oppose — thereby shielding itself from the unwelcome consequences of its own ideology while winning political points. Now, in defeat, Republicans should agree to let the chips lie where they fall: Tax only the truly rich; reward only the truly deserving illegal immigrants; and exempt no one from Obamacare.

Nothing could be fairer or more equal than that. (Victor Davis Hanson)

So when it all goes to hell, at least you can say, “we gave you everything you wanted” and look what happened.

Fascinating…

 

Giveaway

Still smarting from his “you didn’t build that” comment, President Obama opened another window into his far-left thinking. According to his world view, Americans keeping more of what’s theirs is a “giveaway.”

Speaking last Wednesday in New Orleans at a campaign event, Obama talked about “another trillion-dollar giveaway for millionaires” in reference to an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts.

A day later, White House spokesman Jay Carney did the same thing. He called the extension “another $1 trillion giveaway to the wealthiest Americans.”

What they are talking about is the House Republicans’ opposition to legislation approved in the Senate that would raise taxes on those earning more than $250,000 a year, a sum less than the president makes yet is somehow considered to be the mark of wealth.

As a president who has done a good job of insulating himself from anyone who would challenge him, Obama wasn’t asked to explain his statement.

But Carney was.

ABC’s Jake Tapper wanted to know what he would “say to a small-business owner who says that’s not a giveaway, that’s my money, and by the way, I’m going to need some of that money in order to help pay the health care of individuals that I’m now mandated to do?”

Tapper further said, “It’s not giving anything away; it’s allowing me to keep my money.”

It’s a straightforward question that deserves a straightforward answer.

But it didn’t get one. Carney prattled on in response, but he would not address the point, which is:

How can government officials make a moral claim on money earned by others?

Jake Tapper:

TAPPER: You used the word “giveaway,” and President Obama, in his statement yesterday, used the word “giveaway,” referring to the extension of the Bush — lower — the lower Bush tax cut rates for the — I guess, the top 1 or 2 percent of the country, people making over $200,000 a year or couples making 250. What do you say to a small-business owner who says, that’s not a giveaway; that’s my money, and by the way, I’m going to need some of that money in order to help pay for health care of individuals that I’m now mandated to do; it’s not giving anything away; it’s allowing me to keep my money?

CARNEY: Well, the phrasing of the question leaves out a few things, which is, one, this tax cut that the Senate passed and that the president supports would go to 97 percent of small businesses in America, 97 percent. Further, this president has cut the taxes of small businesses in America 18 times, independent of this. So he’s — his focus on assisting small businesses, which he considers the engine of economic growth in this country, the engine of job creation in this country, has been intense and will continue to be.

The Earth’s rotation just stopped because of the Spin… But hey, if you tell a lie often enough it become the Truth. 🙂

TAPPER: Yes, I left out people I wasn’t talking about.

CARNEY: Well, no, but I mean, your — but your question framed it around the — so you’re talking about the 3 percent here. And as we’ve noted, under the definition of small businesses that Republicans trot out when they’re insisting on these tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires means that –

TAPPER: I wasn’t talking about millionaires and billionaires.

CARNEY: No, but it means –

TAPPER: I was talking about somebody making over $200,000 a year.

CARNEY: Sure. But I mean, again, that’s 97 percent of people who file — small businesses that file taxes under the individual tax code will receive this tax cut. Many of the remaining, you know, self-described small businesses that we’re talking about, we’re talking about hedge fund managers often, and law firm partners.

And addressing those small businesses that fall in the remaining category — this tax cut goes to everybody. This is an often- misunderstood fact in reporting and, I think, just in general that giving this tax cut — extending this tax cut to 98 percent of Americans, those who make up to $250,000, means that everyone gets it, even those who make millions and billions, up to the first $250,000 of income, so that for a family — that includes everyone, OK, and including small businesses that file in this manner.

Secondly, the president — the president believes that small businesses are so important that he has dedicated a lot of energy and focus on providing tax credits and tax incentives and tax cuts to small businesses throughout his three and a half years in office.

Beyond that, he believes that extending the high-end Bush tax cuts again is something we simply cannot afford. We — you know, we’re talking about a trillion dollars over a decade. We’ve seen what happened when these tax cuts, which you may recall — you and I were covering it — were sold initially as a payback from the budget surpluses that were achieved under the Clinton administration. And then when the economy ran into trouble and those surpluses were beginning to erode, it was sold as an economic stimulus measure. And what we got was middle-class income stagnating, the slowest expansion in 50 years and an economic crisis the likes of which we haven’t seen in more than 70 years. So –

TAPPER: I’m not — the question is this: Why is it a “giveaway”? Why are you guys using — you and President Obama — using the term “giveaway” when even if you support the Senate Democrats’ bill, it’s not technically a giveaway; it is allowing people to keep the tax cut that they got in 2001 and 2002?

CARNEY: Right, but these are tax cuts that we cannot afford, that do not, by — as — by the estimates of credible, independent economists do not measurably help the economy and do not — in the way that tax cuts to working and middle-class Americans help the economy.

And you know, we have to make choices. And it is a — it is a tax cut for the wealthiest Americans that we simply can’t afford.

And the — and those who say that, oh, well, it — you know, that it’s terrible for the economy — remember, again, you and I were there and covered it. There were proclamations of gloom and doom, of economic crisis and stagnation and recession that were promised by Republicans when President Clinton instituted the tax rates that existed throughout the ’90s. And instead of everything that Republicans predicted, we got the longest peacetime expansion — economic expansion in our history. We got 24 million jobs created, so — and plenty — as the president says, plenty of millionaires and billionaires created as well.

So it’s a matter –

TAPPER: You can feel free to run on President Clinton’s record, but that’s –

CARNEY: — it’s a matter of choices. I mean, that’s what the — I think the president makes clear. We can’t afford this tax cut for the wealthiest Americans. It is a giveaway that we cannot afford. Middle-class Americans need that tax cut. Our economy needs it for 98 percent of the country.

TAPPER: Okay, I’m going to change the subject. Vice President Biden issued a rather strong statement yesterday about an unattributed quote or unattributed quotes from unnamed Romney advisers in a British newspaper. The Romney campaign’s response was that unattributed quotes should not merit a response from the vice president of the United States. And I wondered if you had any response to that.

CARNEY: Well, I’ll leave specific campaign questions to the — for the campaign to answer. I find it a little ironic, given some of the attention paid to quotes from unnamed — alleged unnamed Obama campaign advisers that have been the focus of attention on the — of the Romney campaign.

What I can say is that the record here is what matters. When this president came into office, our alliances were under strain and frayed; our standing in the world had been diminished. In the three and a half years that President Obama has been in office, he has strengthened our alliances around the world, including and in particular with NATO countries and including and in particular with the United Kingdom, with whom we have a remarkably strong bond, a special relationship that has never been stronger. And you know, I’ll leave the back-and-forth to the campaign.

But let’s talk about policy and fact here. And I would note that in that article in question, again, as a matter of policy, the only difference that I could tell, aside from the quote that’s gotten a lot of attention that was focused on, was the need to — you know, that the only difference in policy proposals that seemed apparent were that we should move a bust from one room to another in the White House. And that was a principal policy difference, which is pretty preposterous.

This president has strengthened our alliances; he has built up American credibility around the globe; he has kept his commitments to end the war in Iraq, to take the fight to al-Qaida, to wind down our war in Afghanistan, to rebalance our focus towards Asia, which was neglected in the eight years prior to President Obama coming into office. And he is meeting all those commitments.

BS OVERLOAD!

The public needs to be clear about how this administration and many Democrats think. It’s more than a big-government mindset. It’s a government-is-god mentality.

The idea that government owns all and has the authority to manage everyone’s life is corrosive. The president doesn’t think that individuals should be recognized and compensated for their business success.

He wants to take them down a few notches and diminish and socialize their achievements. That’s neither a plan for prosperity nor an advancement of human dignity.

The language is as disturbing as it sounds. It is not consistent with deeply cherished ideals of American freedom. It is not democratic. It is not republican. It is primitive, tribal, backward, regressive. It hearkens back to an earlier age in which monarchs ruled absolutely and, as well, a more recent era of totalitarian governments.

The language itself is also dangerous. What kind of society would we have if the government indeed owned everything? What sort of economy would that produce? Imagine the quality of life under such an arrangement.

Actually, we don’t have to use our imaginations. All we have to do is look at Cuba. North Korea. The Soviet Union. East Germany. Maoist China. Murderous failures all.

No, we’re not saying that the administration wants to use those nations as models for a transformed U.S. We’re merely pointing out that, taken to its logical conclusion, the idea that government owns all will produce a totalitarian system.

It can’t be any other way.

Americans should be deeply offended that anyone would categorize the act of keeping one’s own money as a giveaway. And they should be profoundly alarmed when policymakers and their aides hold that view because they can turn their beliefs into oppressive law.

Remember, government creates neither wealth nor jobs. It has to take everything that it owns, and that requires force — real or implied.

Obama was elected in 2008 on a platform of hope and change. The promises sounded good to many even if they were not defined.

Now those terms have taken shape — unmistakably and unsettlingly so.

If a government that owns all is the change Obama promised in 2008, and it becomes the dominant governing philosophy of this country, then there’s not much hope left. (IBD)

Giveaway. That’s your Money. And you need to give it away to the government. After all, they are so vastly better and morally righteous in spending it than you are. 🙂

So give it up!

 

 

The Throw America Under the Bus Tour

Listen to the reason we are so in the dump:

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

He just finished his “Listening Tour” of campaign first-up state Iowa and his home state of liberals in Illinois (which some liberals in Minnesota). And I bet you thought it was tour like he said it was, to listen to you….Wrong!

It was a tour to LISTEN TO HIM give more speeches about his disapproval of Republicans (euphemism- “Congress”) and finally his new jobs plan that he will revealed after Labor Day.

So, Obama has YET ANOTHER new plan for “creating jobs”. What is this, the 15th one? He goes to it for 5 minutes every time he wants to look like he gives a crap about anything other than his ideology (and it has failed miserably).

But, like the leader he is, you are going to have weeks for it. He has to go on vacation at a $50,000 a day resort in “the rich”s playground of Martha’s Vineyard first. Gotta have your priorities straight.

I wonder how many “corporate jet” owners will be in the area?

But you don’t have to wait for him unveil his new speech (he doesn’t actually have a real plan-he just gives speeches that his minions say are “plans”) because it will be like all the others except he’ll have come up some new euphemism for TAX you to death so he can spend more.

He’s burned through “Investments” and “Infrastructure” and “revenues” already in the last year, so get ready for “Tax Reform”.

Yes, folks, he’s going to “reform” your taxes.  Yes He Can!

HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY BE AGAINST “TAX REFORM”!?? 🙂

So how’s that “hope and Change” working for you”?

And if “Congress” aka Republicans, won’t pass it he’ll pout all over his teleprompter and get his Liberal Media minions to play Ministry of Truth and whine 24/7/365 while they slag anyone who isn’t him running for president into a radioactive pile of poo because “vote for me, the other guy’s an asshole!”.

So I just can’t wait to find out what is in this latest present all wrapped up under the tree with a pretty bow and puppies and kittens on it…say  do you smell something…it smells like death…

Well, if equality of income is the priority, liberals should be thrilled with the last four years. The recession and weak recovery have been income levelers. Those who make more than $200,000 captured one-quarter of the $7.6 trillion in total income in 2009. In 2007 the over-$200,000 crowd had one-third of reported U.S. taxable income. Those with incomes above $1 million earned 9.5% of total income in 2009, down from 16.1% in 2007.

The President needs to levy his tax increase at such a lower income level because that’s where the money is. In 2009, 237,000 taxpayers reported income above $1 million and they paid $178 billion in taxes. A mere 8,274 filers reported income above $10 million, and they paid only $54 billion in taxes.

But 3.92 million reported income above $200,000 in 2009, and they paid $434 billion in taxes. To put it another way, roughly 90% of the tax filers who would pay more under Mr. Obama’s plan aren’t millionaires, and 99.99% aren’t billionaires.

It’s an old story: The best way to produce income equality is to destroy trillions of dollars of wealth. Everyone loses, but the rich lose relatively more than the poor and the middle class. By that measure, if few others, Obamanomics has been a raging success. (WSJ)

So $200,000 is the new “million”. That’s Obamanomics for you!

BUT HE HAS A NEW CUNNING PLAN! 🙂

The Obama administration has a big idea to bolster employment: a Department of Jobs. This isn’t a South Park episode satirizing the White House but an actual idea floated by an administration official in the New York Times. The irony of a “Department of Jobs” is clearly lost on the hapless president. (WSJ)

The only jobs that will be created will be Government Bureaucrats! And we all need more Bureaucrats!

Rejoice. Don’t be a sourpuss (aka disagree with his speeches and his minions).

Be Happy.

It could have been so much worse! 🙂

“First, I want to echo the sentiments of those who have spoken before me in praising you and thanking you for all of your efforts and all the things that you’ve tried to do during probably one of the most difficult situations faced by any president in the face of unreasonable obstruction and opposition.”–President Obama in Cannon Falls,MN.

Yeah, the 15 months of complete control by Democrats doesn’t count. It’s only the last 7 months of  Republican “obstructionism” is to blame. Yeah, they keep proposing solutions and the Democrats slag them and then the Republicans cave. That’s your obstructionism, folks.

And Vote for Obama, the Other Guy’s an Asshole! 🙂

And a final note from Big Sis on the evils of White people (Not Muslims)

My Objection: Wheres the 97 year old dying grandma with the colostomy bag? or the 18 month old with a diaper?

All’s right with the world… “Blackadder” Obama has a new cunning plan…

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Filtered

It’s not relevant if Dictatorship and oppression is your goal…

If Liberals have to even ponder the question you know there’s trouble!

Independence Day provides all Americans with an opportunity to celebrate  the many freedoms that make our country both great and unique. Our Declaration of Independence  was breathtaking in scope and written in precise, plain, unequivocal  language. When read in townships across the Colonies, crowds listened in  hushed silence and then broke out in applause when the reading was complete. Our Founding Fathers felt no need to dilute or cloak their intentions to form a government.

As you celebrate the 4th, it might be appropriate to contrast the  straightforward language of our founders and other great American  leaders with the weasel words now emerging from Washington, and all too  frequently, from President Obama, who prefers euphemism-laden,  convoluted, pixilated flummery. 

A quick review of Obama’s speeches  reveals his most common euphemisms seem to show a pattern of deception,  obfuscation and misdirection. In President Obama’s lexicon, words have  different meanings; to decipher the message and understand what the  President is saying requires a special Washington Dictionary. Here are  some samples from President Obamas special dictionary: 

Investment is the president’s word for government spending.  When he says we need to invest more, he really means he wants to  increase spending on some special project. Obama knows that the word  investment is reassuring to most Americans and implies that at some  point in time a good investment will return a decent profit. But, no  return is envisioned with Obama’s “investments”. In fact, to Obama all  government spending is an investment.

Millionaires and Billionaires Obama often talks about the  need to increase taxes on the millionaires and billionaires. Of course,  what he really means is higher taxes on any family making more than  $250,000. Obamas math skills must be sufficient to understand that  there is a huge mathematical difference between 250,000 and a billion,  but he chooses to ignore the difference to better stoke class  resentment, all while hoping that average Americans are too stupid to  understand.

Working People is invoked to demonstrate commitment to average  Americans. Of course, what Obama really means is that he supports the  primacy of unions over other American workers.  According to Obamas  definition, the vast majority of Americans, including small business  owners, are not working people at all, regardless of how many thousands  of hours they work. In Obamas dictionary, only union members are  working people and deserving of special preferences and consideration. 

Spending Reductions in the Tax Code  means more tax increases. President Obama likes to wear the mantle of  spending cuts, but lacks the courage to call a tax increase what it  really is.

Paying Their Fair Share is the president’s phrase for wealth  redistribution. What Obama really means is that entrepreneurs and other  successful business owners are not paying high enough taxes, and that  all of the money they earn should be “contributed” to the government for  wealth redistribution to those that Obama considers worthy. Of course,  Obamas supporters, the bulk of whom do not seem to pay income tax, are,  according to this definition, already paying a fair amount of tax  (zero). It is the rest of America that is not paying their fair share.  Obama offers no criteria to what is fair or not, so that is why he  seems to think it is perfectly acceptable to require 20% of American to  pay 78% of the taxes and then criticize them for not paying their “fair  share”.

Green Jobs and Green Economy these are the jobs that President  Obama believes are more important and more valuable than any others,  even if creating a “green job” that pays $40,000 actually costs the  taxpayers $300,000 to create. Moreover, if creating one magical “green  job” results in the loss of 10 or more jobs that were dependent upon  cheap, reliable power, that too is of no consequence. A green job has  magical properties that do not conform to economic principles.

Unprecedented. Perhaps Obama’s favorite word, which he uses to  describe most of his actions. This word has no meaning to Obama, but  reflects his belief that he is so special that everything he does or  says must be admired. Obama is so, fundamentally, unaware of American  history that he thinks that the challenges and issues that he faces are  unique. (Move over George Washington!)

Unfortunately, our President seems unaware that the dangers of repeated,  euphemistic bastardization of the English language erodes his  credibility. Increasingly, Americans know they cannot trust what Obama  says. 

And so, President Obama is likely to tell Americans:

“In response to an unprecedented challenge we must provide more aid to working people by increasing investments in green jobs. We will implement savings in the tax code that will only impact millionaires and billionaires who are not currently paying their fair share“.     

And yet what Obama really means is:

My policies have failed. The stimulus was a disaster, and the country is  broke. We need more money to keep the Unions, and my special  constituents who pay very little or no taxes, happy, so I need everyone  else to pay more, otherwise I won’t get re-elected. 

Americans have a reputation for being straightforward and for plain  speaking and are only slowly becoming aware of the vague, expansive, and  misleading words in President Obama’s unique dictionary.  Our Founding  Fathers said: “we hold these truths to be self-evident”.  With Obama,  none of his words are self-evident.(Lurita Doan)

Except the deceit and dishonesty and complete disingenuousness that is not only self-evident, it’s self-serving.

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden