You’ve Been Warned…

A ‘Paycheck Fairness Act’ introduced in Congress last week would require employers to show pay disparity is related to job-performance and prohibit employer retaliation for sharing salary information with coworkers.

Currently, the law allows employers to sue or otherwise punish employees for sharing their salary information and women still make just 77 cents on their male counterpart’s dollar, according to Sen. Mikulski’s office.

So expect massive “workers” lawsuits to force a quota for “fairness” and “equality” if this passes.

In other words, Government will be looking over your shoulder every time you hire a man or a woman and you’d be nice or The Grinch (NOW,etc) will come get you.

This isn’t about Men, you know. They are just evil to begin with. So you better be hiring more Women and minorities than Men, especially White Men.

Racial quotas, sexual quotas, income quotas…Nope, no socialism or authoritarianism here…Government is you friend and you will bow down to us or else!

Mikulski and DeLauro said the Paycheck Fairness Act would also allow women to seek punitive damages for pay discrimination, establish a grant program to strengthen salary negotiation and other workplace skills and require the Department of Labor to enhance outreach and training efforts to eliminate pay disparities. (This being the same Department that wanted Illegal Aliens to call them if their boss was being mean to them).

Like I said… 🙂

The unemployment rate is at 7.9 percent which is .01% higher than when Obama took office 4 years ago.

So, what does Obama do?

He disbands his “jobs council” that rarely met anyways.

Mission Accomplished.

The new Normal has been achieved and no one is really complaining about it.

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

The welcome materials the federal government directs new immigrants to read — which detail, among other facets of American life, how and where to get government benefits — are in the process of getting a bit of a makeover to increase accessibility for newcomers.

The WelcometoUSA.gov website, which bills itself as “the U.S. Government’s official web portal for new immigrants,” maintained by the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), will soon feature information about President Barack Obama’s signature health care legislation, USCIS spokesman Chris Bentley told The Daily Caller

Not that they are worried about Legal Immigration all that much, But gotta show the drug benefits to the new addicts so they’ll vote for Democrats.

******************.

In a final regulation issued Wednesday, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) assumed that under Obamacare the cheapest health insurance plan available in 2016 for a family will cost $20,000 for the year.

I’m sure everyone can afford that and that rate will never go up. 🙂

And if you smoke, add $5,000. More restrictions (for your own good) to come…

And absolutely no “Pathway” death Panels… 🙂

Under Obamacare, Americans will be required to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the IRS.

Now, that’s Freedom at it’s core. 🙂

The IRS’s assumption that the cheapest plan for a family will cost $20,000 per year is found in examples the IRS gives to help people understand how to calculate the penalty they will need to pay the government if they do not buy a mandated health plan.

The examples point to families of four and families of five, both of which the IRS expects in its assumptions to pay a minimum of $20,000 per year for a bronze plan.

“The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000,” the regulation says.

Bronze will be the lowest tier health-insurance plan available under Obamacare–after Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Under the law, the penalty for not buying health insurance is supposed to be capped at either the annual average Bronze premium, 2.5 percent of taxable income, or $2,085.00 per family in 2016.

In the new final rules published Wednesday, IRS set in law the rules for implementing the penalty Americans must pay if they fail to obey Obamacare’s mandate to buy insurance.

To help illustrate these rules, the IRS presented examples of different situations families might find themselves in.

In the examples, the IRS assumes that families of five who are uninsured would need to pay an average of $20,000 per year to purchase a Bronze plan in 2016.

Using the conditions laid out in the regulations, the IRS calculates that a family earning $120,000 per year that did not buy insurance would need to pay a “penalty” (a word the IRS still uses despite the Supreme Court ruling that it is in fact a “tax”) of $2,400 in 2016.

For those wondering how clear the IRS’s clarifications of this new “penalty” rule are, here is one of the actual examples the IRS gives:

“Example 3. Family without minimum essential coverage.

“(i) In 2016, Taxpayers H and J are married and file a joint return. H and J have three children: K, age 21, L, age 15, and M, age 10. No member of the family has minimum essential coverage for any month in 2016. H and J’s household income is $120,000. H and J’s applicable filing threshold is $24,000. The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000.

“(ii) For each month in 2016, under paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(2)(iii) of this section, the applicable dollar amount is $2,780 (($695 x 3 adults) + (($695/2) x 2 children)). Under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, the flat dollar amount is $2,085 (the lesser of $2,780 and $2,085 ($695 x 3)). Under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the excess income amount is $2,400 (($120,000 – $24,000) x 0.025). Therefore, under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the monthly penalty amount is $200 (the greater of $173.75 ($2,085/12) or $200 ($2,400/12)).

“(iii) The sum of the monthly penalty amounts is $2,400 ($200 x 12). The sum of the monthly national average bronze plan premiums is $20,000 ($20,000/12 x 12). Therefore, under paragraph (a) of this section, the shared responsibility payment imposed on H and J for 2016 is $2,400 (the lesser of $2,400 or $20,000).” (CNS)

UNIONS

The following is hilarious since Unions were the #1 beneficiaries of ObamaCare Waivers…

Labor unions enthusiastically backed the Obama administration’s health-care overhaul when it was up for debate. Now that the law is rolling out, some are turning sour.

Union leaders say many of the law’s requirements will drive up the costs for their health-care plans and make unionized workers less competitive. Among other things, the law eliminates the caps on medical benefits and prescription drugs used as cost-containment measures in many health-care plans. It also allows children to stay on their parents’ plans until they turn 26.

To offset that, the nation’s largest labor groups want their lower-paid members to be able to get federal insurance subsidies while remaining on their plans. In the law, these subsidies were designed only for low-income workers without employer coverage as a way to help them buy private insurance.

In early talks, the Obama administration dismissed the idea of applying the subsidies to people in union-sponsored plans, according to officials from the trade group, the National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans, that represents these insurance plans.

As financial reality sets in, and rather than figure out a way to pay for the bill they helped pass, unions are trying to see if Washington will bail them out.

Poor Babies. Slept with the Devil, campaign for him, Now they found he is a Devil and he stabbed them in the back and now they want him to kiss their butts!

They are his favourite Pets.

Typical Union.

“A handful of unions say they already have examined whether it makes sense to shift workers off their current plans and onto private coverage subsidized by the government. But dropping insurance altogether would undermine a central point of joining a union, labor leaders say,” the report adds.

No, really, union heads are acting like no one warned them that costs would go up.

“We are going back to the administration to say that this is not acceptable,” said Ken Hall, general secretary-treasurer for the Teamsters.

“I heard him say, ‘If you like your health plan, you can keep it,’” said John Wilhelm, chairman of Unite Here Health, the insurance plan for 260,000 union workers. “If I’m wrong, and the president does not intend to keep his word, I would have severe second thoughts about the law.”

D’OH!

Why? Why? Why didn’t anyone tell these leaders about the costs associated with “Obamacare”?

“It seems someone finally noticed that mandating benefits and imposing regulations has a tendency to … increase costs,” Doug Bandow writes for the American Spectator. “Increases which workers are stuck paying. Who would have imagined such a result?  It’s not like anyone warned them, right?”

🙂

We are from the Government and we are here to Help you…..

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

The Seinfeld Revolution

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

The “revolution” about nothing.

The pot at the end of the socialist rainbow was Fool’s Gold.

Reality just isn’t “fair”. Like fer sure…

On the “unofficial, defacto online resource for the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protests,” there is a proposed list of 13 demands, including immediate debt forgiveness for all, free college education, elimination of free trade, a $20 an hour minimum wage, guaranteed “living wage” regardless of income, open borders, $1 trillion government spending on infrastructure, $1 trillion government spending on ecological restoration, a racial and gender equal rights amendment and easier unionization voting procedures.

“These demands will create so many jobs it will be completely impossible to fill them without an open borders policy,” “LloydJHart,” the drafter of the online demands, asserts. “LyoydJHart” lists his hometown as Vineyard Haven, a Massachusetts town on the island of Martha’s Vineyard — a favorite summer vacation spot for the president.

The demands listed by “LyodJHart” are more specific than the general dictate of these protests. As one Internet forum poster, “GandhiKingMindsetResist,” put it, “The one demand in New York is: ‘Shut Down Wall St.’ Why are we shutting down Wall St.? ‘Because Wall St. is hurting Americans, hurting citizens of the world and ruining our environment.”

Business Insider has reported on what an n+1 magazine writer discovered during his foray into the protests: That outside of the aforementioned demands, the protesters also want full employment, negative income tax (in which the government actually pays people below a certain income bracket), repeal of the Citizen’s United campaign funding Supreme Court ruling, universal health care centers, a Tobin tax (short-term tax on currency conversions), reinstatement of Glass-Steagall banking regulation, paid sick leave and pay-as-you-go military intervention.

The “Occupy Wall Street” protests and former White House “green jobs czar” Van Jones (an admitted communist) are the beginning of an “American Fall,” according to Rep. John Larson, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus.

In Tuesday evening remarks before a group of visiting activists and journalists from Egypt and Tunisia, Larson said the United States has drawn inspiration from revolutions in those countries and, as a result, is experiencing its own “Arab Spring, if you will.”

In an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller following his speech, Larson said left-wing activists with “the right morals” are pushing America’s democracy to “evolve.”
The protesters’ political demands have been far too widely varied to represent much agreement, but the group’s website claims: “The one thing we all have in common is that we are the 99 percent that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1 percent.”
“They’re standing up and saying the things they feel deep inside that are working unjustly and unfairly against them,” concluded Larson, “and everybody ought to take heed, that it’s not only an ‘Arab Spring,’ but there is an ‘American Fall’ as well.”

The little socialist were raised by Liberal educators to believe everything should be “fair” and when reality (and Liberal keynesian economics) hit them in the face they were mad and like children who don’t get the toy they want right now! they lash out and cry and whine that life just in’t fair and it should be!
I have said for quite a while now that this notion of “fair” is the inception point for the liberal mindset. If it isn’t “fair” in their minds then it’s evil and must be destroyed or control completely and utterly.
So you have the liberal need to control everyone and everything, so as to make it “fair”.
But these skulls full of liberal mush just hit the brick wall of reality and they want the wall to break because it’s just not “fair”.
Screw working hard to succeed, let those who have succeed pay THEM!! That’s “fair”

The gold at the end of the socialist rainbow turns out to be Fool’s Gold and they aren’t intellectually capable of understanding this and so they get frustrated and like a baby they cry and whine about it.

Oh,and then there’s a diversity problem.
The tea party is condemned by the left as just “angry white people” but it appears by photographic evidence so are the “occupiers”. 🙂

Though a few representatives of minority groups have appeared among the “Occupy Wall Street” protesters in New York City, photos and videos of the left-wing mini-throngs indicate they suffer from a serious lack of diversity. And the protesters themselves told The Daily Caller on Tuesday that they are conscious of the issue, if not the inconsistency it demonstrates.

A 40-photo Washington Post slideshow showing hundreds of angry protesters in New York and other cities includes no more than 15 clearly identifiable minority protesters, and just six African-Americans. The rest of the protesters shown are white, and most are male.
In 26 photos from San Francisco and Chicago gatherings posted on OccupyTogether.org, only one person from a minority group is clearly visible, and it’s unclear whether he is a protester or a bystander.

Minority groups are similarly underrepresented in photos and videos posted on OccupyWallSt.org, the self-described “unofficial de facto online resource for the ongoing protests happening on Wall Street.”

Even the “unofficial” organizers of the protest events admit this is — or at least appears to be — problematic.

“That’s an interesting question, and it comes up often,” OccupyWallSt.org’s Patrick Bruner said in an email to TheDC. “Unfortunately, we have a very high turnover rate, and nobody as of yet has come up with official diversity related statistics for us. From observation, I can tell you that we’re not all white, and that we also have a huge LGBT [Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender] population.”

“We’re working on reaching out to minority groups as well,” Bruner adds. “Thanks for the food for thought, I’m sorry I don’t have more exact information for you right now.”

I love liberal guilt. I hope they tear themselves apart trying to be “fair” to minorities while condeming the Tea Party as a bunch of angry racist white people.
The irony, hypocrisy and ludicrous double standards will be completely lost on the cognitively dissodent Left.
“When Occupy Wall Street activists call themselves the ‘99 percent,’ it turns out they mean 99 percent non-diverse (by their own politically correct measurements),” Meichelle Malkin said in an email.
And now the Government Unions and Democratic party Apparatchiks are “orginizing” these lost sheeple.

“It’s as pale out there at Camp Alinsky as MSNBC’s prime-time lineup or the New York Times editorial board.  Not counting the cameos by Jesse Jackson and Cornel West, that is.”

“The liberal media will only engage in racial bean-counting of protest crowds when it serves their political ends: Namely, painting the Right as homogenous and non-inclusive,” Malkin said. “We heard endless derision about the tea party’s lack of skin-color diversity from Hollywood and the national press. But not a peep about the Abercrombie & Fitch-meets-Apple central casting mob swamping lower Manhattan.”

Gainor added that mainstream media representatives “only see what they want to see.” He said reporters scoured tea party rallies for evidence of racism, while failing to notice how “white” the left-wing crowds are.

Exactly.

Leftist Rally
“What do we want?”
“We want an end to capitalism”
“When do we want it?”
“Now!”
“What do we want instead?”
“We don’t know, but we want it now!”
And can you can you give me a job, free health care, car, food, entertainment and pension for life…

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need–Karl Marx
🙂

Ann Coulter: They say they want Obama re-elected, but claim to hate “Wall Street.” You know, the same Wall Street that gave its largest campaign donation in history to Obama, who, in turn, bailed out the banks and made Goldman Sachs the fourth branch of government. (and many Obama appointees come from Goldman Sachs)

This would be like opposing fattening, processed foods, but cheering Michael Moore — which the protesters also did this week.

But to me, the most striking difference between the tea partiers and the “Occupy Wall Street” crowd — besides the smell of patchouli — is how liberal protesters must claim their every gathering is historic and heroic.

They chant: “The world is watching!” “This is how democracy looks!” “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for!”

At the risk of acknowledging that I am, in fact, “watching,” this is most definitely not how democracy looks.

Sally Kohn, a self-identified “community organizer,” praised the Wall Street loiterers on CNN’s website, comparing the protest to the Boston Tea Party, which she claimed, “helped spark the American Revolution,” adding, “and yes, that protest ultimately turned very violent.”

First of all, the Boston Tea Party was nothing like tattooed, body–pierced, sunken-chested 19-year-olds getting in fights with the police for fun. Paul Revere’s nighttime raid was intended exclusively to protest a new British tea tax. (The Wall Street protesters would be more likely to fight for a new tax than against one.)

Revere made sure to replace a broken lock on one of the ships and severely punished a participant who stole some of the tea for his private use. Samuel Adams defended the raid by saying that all other methods of recourse — say, voting — were unavailable.

Our revolution — the only revolution that led to greater freedom since at least 1688 — was not the act of a mob.

As specific and limited as it was, however, even the Boston Tea Party was too mob-like to spark anything other than retaliatory British measures. Indeed, it set back the cause of American independence by dispiriting both American and British supporters, such as Edmund Burke.

George Washington disapproved of the destruction of the tea. Benjamin Franklin demanded that the India Tea Co. be reimbursed for it. Considered an embarrassment by many of our founding fathers, the Boston Tea Party was not celebrated for another 50 years.

It would be three long years after the Boston Tea Party when our founding fathers engaged in their truly revolutionary act: The signing of the Declaration of Independence.

In that document, our Christian forebears set forth in blindingly clear terms their complaints with British rule, their earlier attempts at resolution, and an appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world for independence from the crown.

The rebel armies defending that declaration were not a disorganized mob, chanting slogans for the press and defacing public property.

Even the Minutemen, whose first scuffle with the British began the war, were a real army with ranks, subordination, coordination, drills and supplies. There is not a single mention in the historical record of Minutemen playing hacky-sack, burning candles assembled in “peace and love,” or sitting in drum circles.

A British lieutenant-general who fought the Minutemen observed, “Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob will find himself very much mistaken.”

By contrast, the directionless losers protesting “Wall Street” — Obama’s largest donor group — pose for the cameras while uttering random liberal cliches lacking any reason or coherence.

But since everything liberals do must be heroic, the “Occupy Wall Street” crowd insists on comparing themselves to this nation’s heroes.

One told Fox News’ Bill Schulz: “I was born to be here, right now, the founding fathers have been passing down the torch to this generation to make our country great again.”

The Canadian environmental group behind Occupy Wall Street, Adbusters, has compared the Wall Street “revolutionaries” to America’s founding fathers. (Incidentally, those who opposed the American Revolution fled after the war to … Canada.)

The — again — Canadians exulted, “You sense they’re drafting a new Declaration of Independence.”

I suppose you only “sense” it because they’re doing nothing of the sort. They say they want Mao as the president — as one told Schulz — and the abolition of “capitalism.”

The modern tea partiers never went around narcissistically comparing themselves to Gen. George Washington. And yet they are the ones who have engaged in the kind of political activity Washington fought for.

The Tea Party name is meant in fun, inspired by an amusing rant from CNBC’s Rick Santelli in February 2009, when he called for another Tea Party in response to Obama’s plan to bail-out irresponsible mortgagers.

The tea partiers didn’t arrogantly claim to be drafting a new Declaration of Independence. They’re perfectly happy with the original.

Tea partiers didn’t block traffic, sleep on sidewalks, wear ski masks, fight with the police or urinate in public. They read the Constitution, made serious policy arguments, and petitioned the government against Obama’s unconstitutional big government policies, especially the stimulus bill and Obamacare.

Then they picked up their own trash and quietly went home. Apparently, a lot of them had to be at work in the morning.

In the two years following the movement’s inception, the Tea Party played a major role in turning Teddy Kennedy’s seat over to a Republican, making the sainted Chris Christie governor of New Jersey, and winning a gargantuan, historic Republican landslide in the 2010 elections. They are probably going to succeed in throwing out a president in next year’s election.

That’s what democracy looks like.

DEPENDENCY

Going along with that, and that 47% of all american paid no income taxes at all.

Nearly half, 48.5%, of the population lived in a household that received some type of government benefit in the first quarter of 2010, according to Census data. Those numbers have risen since the middle of the recession when 44.4% lived households receiving benefits in the third quarter of 2008.

The share of people relying on government benefits has reached a historic high, in large part from the deep recession and meager recovery, but also because of the expansion of government programs over the years.

Some 34.2% of Americans lived in a household that received benefits such as food stamps, subsidized housing, cash welfare or Medicaid (the federal-state health care program for the poor).

Another 14.5% lived in homes where someone was on Medicare (the health care program for the elderly). Nearly 16% lived in households receiving Social Security.

So the number of people dependent on government (aka someone else) increases and the number of tax payers (the people paying for this mess) decreases. Meaning the ones left holding the bag are paying even more.

But don’t worry, it the “rich” people’s fault. And corporations are evil. Capitalism must be destroyed for people to be free.

From Whom the Bell Tolls…

OBAMACARE

Bantering with the audience at a fundraiser in St. Louis yesterday, President Barack Obama bragged about a new regulation, proposed by the Department of Health and Human Services, that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has denounced as an “unprecedented attack on religious liberty.”

“Darn right!” an audience member at the fundraiser shouted as Obama described the regulation.

Darn tooting!Obama said back.

The proposed regulation, designed to implement part of Obamacare, will require all private health plans in the United States to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives–including those that cause abortions—without charging any fees or co-pay. These regulations were drawn to implement a provision in Obama’s health-care law that calls for all health-care plans to cover “preventive services.”

Combined with Obamacare’s mandate that all individuals must buy health insurance, the “preventive services” regulation would require all American Catholics to buy health care plans that pay for sterilizations, contraceptives and abortions–all of which violate Catholic moral teaching.

A “religious exemption” in the regulation is so narrowly drawn that it does not include any lay Catholics, or any Catholic hospitals, charitable organizations, or colleges or universities. Thus, many major Catholic institutions in the United States would be forced to choose between dropping health insurance coverage for their employees and students or violating the moral teachings of their own church.

In comments on the regulation submitted to HHS last month, the Catholic bishops called for the regulation to be “rescinded in its entirety” and described the proposal as “government coercion of religious people.”

“Indeed, such nationwide government coercion of religious people and groups to sell, broker, or purchase ‘services’ to which they have a moral or religious objection represents an unprecedented attack on religious liberty,” the bishops said.

At a Democratic National Committee fundraiser at the Renaissance Hotel in St. Louis last night, Obama touted the “preventive services” regulation to an appreciative audience.

“And, yes, we passed health care reform because no one in America should go bankrupt because somebody in their family gets sick,” said Obama, according to the official White House transcript of his remarks.

“Insurance companies can’t drop your coverage for no good reason,” said Obama. “They won’t be able to deny your coverage because of preexisting conditions.  Think about what that means for families all across America.  Think about what it means for women.” 

At that point, an audience member shouted: “Birth control.”

“Absolutely. You’re stealing my line,” said Obama.

“Breast cancer, cervical cancer, are no longer preexisting conditions,” Obama continued. “No longer can insurance companies discriminate against women just because you guys are the ones who have to give birth.”

At this point, a member of a laughing audience shouted out: “Darn right!”

“Darn tooting,” Obama answered back—to laughter. “They have to cover things like mammograms and contraception as preventive care, no more out-of-pocket costs.”

Last week, the Catholic bishops distributed an insert for placement in church bulletins all across the country. It called on Catholics to contact HHS to object to the regulation. On their website the bishops are now asking Catholic to write Congress to urge members to support legislation that would overturn the regulation. (CNS)

Your only religion should be to Government. And the President is the Pope. And the Church of Ever More Spending and Control can’t possibly be wrong now can it, Citizen…. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler


The Role of Government

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Obama Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett: “We have to give people a livelihood so they can provide for their families,” Jarrett says in the video. “We are working hard to lift people out of poverty and give them a better life, a footing, and that’s what government is supposed to do.”

But that’s not socialism or government trying to run your life for you. Nope. Nothing to see here…

Contrast that with Sen. Marco Rubio during a recent speech at the Reagan Presidential Library:

These are proper roles of government — within the framework of creating an environment where economic security and prosperity is possible.  And on the compassion side of the ledger, which is also important to Americans — and it’s important that we remind ourselves of that — I don’t really like labels in politics, but I will gladly accept the label of conservatism. Conservatism is not about leaving people behind. Conservatism is about empowering people to catch up, to give them the tools at their disposal that make it possible for them to access all the hope, all the promise, all the opportunity that America offers. And our programs to help them should reflect that.

Now, yes, there are people that cannot help themselves. And those folks we will always help. We are too rich and prosperous a nation to leave them to fend for themselves. But all the others that can work should be given the means of empowering themselves to enter the marketplace and the workforce. And our programs and our policies should reflect that. We do need a safety net, but it cannot be a way of life. It must be there to help those who have fallen, to stand up and try again.
Amen.  Even if you’re a bleeding heart type who’s inclined to agree with Jarrett that the feds ought to take a more proactive role in directly aiding the poor through wealth redistribution, I’d point out that Big Government has done a really lousy job at achieving that goal through the years.  The Democrats’ Great Society and its “war on poverty” has been a wildly costly and tragically ineffective proposition.  More recently, President Obama promised that his 2009 “stimulus” program would “lift two million Americans from poverty.”  Hundreds of billions of dollars later, 2.9 million more Americans have fallen into poverty.  Which is to say nothing of the gutwrenching economic desolation that has afflicted so many of human history’s socialistic dystopias. 

Big, overbearing, meddling government isn’t merely philosophically wrongheaded, it just doesn’t work.  That’s why conservatives are exempliying true compassion when they work to limit the size, scope, and influence of a Leviathan that consumes greedily, but has little to show for it. (Guy Benson)

Speaking of overbearing…

The Obama administration is escalating its crackdown on tough immigration laws, with lawyers reviewing four new state statutes to determine whether the federal government will take the extraordinary step of challenging the measures in court.

Justice Department lawyers have sued Arizona and Alabama, where a federal judge on Wednesday allowed key parts of that state’s immigration law to take effect but blocked other provisions. Federal lawyers are talking to Utah officials about a third possible lawsuit and are considering legal challenges in Georgia, Indiana and South Carolina, according to court documents and government officials. (WP)

This would be the same Justice department that refused to prosecute the Black Panther Case, and is trying desperately to cover up the forceable walking of guns into Mexico under “Fast & Furious” amongst many other problems.

But states wanting to crack down on illegal immigration where this government refuses to go, well…That’s just evil. 🙂

He <Obama> told a roundtable of Latino reporters Wednesday that Arizona’s immigration law created “a great danger that naturalized citizens, individuals with Latino surnames, potentially could be vulnerable to questioning. The laws could be potentially abused in ways that were not fair to Latino citizens.”

The same old tired parroted argument that is, of course, utterly false and has been proven to be so. But since when did truth ever stop a liberal from using fear and intimidation? NEVER.

“We can’t have a patchwork of 50 states with 50 different immigration laws.”

We must have only 1 law. Ours. And if we chose to ignore it well too F*cking bad for you you can’t do anything about it! We are all powerful and what we say goes. Period. End of story.

Isn’t Democratic government grand? 🙂

PASS THE BILL

“Are they against putting teachers and police officers and firefighters back on the job? Are they against hiring construction workers to rebuild our roads and bridges and schools? Are they against giving tax cuts to virtually every worker and small business in America?”–President Obama

He’s going to drive the price of straw through the roof if he keeps this up? The army of straw men he’ll have by election time will rival the Chinese Military.
So if you’re against his bill not only are you racist, but heartless, mean, cruel and just want to kick people in the nuts repeatedly!
Emotions must trump logic because logic tells you he’s full of bovine fecal matter!
“Well, this isn’t about giving me a win, and it’s not about [Republicans],” Obama said.

Pinocchio’s nose just grew so long it hit the other side of the universe!
“This isn’t just about what I think is right.”
Yes it is.
Your Ego would have it no other way.
Liberal Economist God Paul Krugman: The truth is that we’re in this mess because we had too little regulation, not too much.
Dozens of infrastructure projects could qualify for expedited treatment under a White House plan to create jobs by cutting through regulatory red tape that critics say is holding up important initiatives.
But I thought we needed MORE regulations? 🙂

President Barack Obama last month ordered Interior, Agriculture, Housing, Transportation and Commerce Department officials to identify by Friday up to three big projects each that could merit faster environmental approvals and other permits. Funding must already be arranged or identified.

Obama is facing a tough re-election fight next year in the face of a stubborn 9.1 percent unemployment rate. Infrastructure projects, which can help state and local economies, are a key part of his job creation strategy.

Administration officials would not discuss proposals while they were under review, but transportation and construction groups say there are at minimum 50 projects in the permit process that could qualify for faster treatment.

Most are winding their way through a federal, state and local maze that often takes several years and can last between 15 and 20 years for the biggest proposals.

“It’s just the whole process itself. The way we build things in this country ensures that it will take decades,” said Mark Policinski, executive director and chief executive of the Ohio Kentucky Indiana Regional Council of Governments.

But I thought we needed MORE Regulations. 🙂

“We are very interested in any relief the president and his agencies can give us on the red tape that usually ties our projects up for years,” John Horsely, executive director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, told Reuters. “I’ve characterized the process we’ve been going through as one step forward, two steps back.”

But I thought we needed MORE Regulations. 🙂

We Need to Spend More. Regulate More. And it is the role of government to make sure everyone is “lifted up” and provided for.
Thanks comrades, but no thanks.
OBAMACARE
Guy Benson

ABC Newsman Jake Tapper surveys the national landscape and is startled by the observation that several of President Obama’s famous healthcare promises don’t quite seem to be coming to fruition.  (You don’t say).  He confronts White House deputy chief of staff Nancy-Ann DeParle with the evidence, and oh my does she spin.  Even I’m dizzy:

A new study by the Kaiser Family Foundation underlines that many of the promises surrounding President Obama’s health care legislation remain unfulfilled, though the White House argues that change is coming.  Workers at the Flora Venture flower shop in Newmarket, NH, remember when presidential candidate named Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., promised that their health care costs would go down if they elected him and his health care plan was enacted.  On May 3, 2008, the president told voters that he had “a health care plan that would save the average family $2,500 on their premiums.”  Last year workers at the flower shop saw their insurance premiums shoot up 41 percent.

The Kaiser Family Foundation shows family premiums topped $15,000 a year for the first time in 2011, increasing a whopping 9% this year, three times more than the increase the year before. The study says that up to 2% of that increase is because of the health care law’s provisions (me: and that’s just the beginning), such as allowing families to add grown children up to 26 years old to their policies.

What does Nancy-Ann have to say for herself?

DeParle insists families will see that savings — by 2019.  “Many of the changes in the Affordable Care Act are starting this year, and in succeeding years,” DeParle told ABC News, “and by 2019 we estimate that the average family will save around $2,000.”  DeParle said that the “big increases that occurred last year were probably driven by insurance plans overestimating what the impact would be and maybe trying to take some profits upfront before some of the changes in the Affordable Care Act occur.

In other words, everything will be turning up roses eight years from now — you’ve gotta trust us.  Plus, these know-nothing insurance companies are “probably” overestimating the impact of the law.  I mean, what do they know?   I wonder if Kathleen Sebelius is scribbling furiously in her “zero tolerance” notebook.  Tapper continues:

The Kaiser study also indicates employers are switching plans and shifting costs onto employees. Half of workers in smaller firms now face “deductibles of at least $1,000, including 28 percent facing deductibles of $2,000 or more,” according to the study.  Doesn’t that fly in the face of the president’s promise that “if you like your health care plan you can keep your health care plan”? ABC News asked DeParle.

Perfectly legitimate question.  Back to you, White House flack:

She said no — the president wasn’t saying the legislation would guarantee that everyone can keep his or her preferred plan, just that the legislation wouldn’t force anyone to change. “What the president promised is that under health care reform, that he would make it more possible for people to have choices in these (health insurance) exchanges,” DeParle said. “And that’s going to be what will help businesses bring costs down. Right now, they’re just struggling. That’s one reason why they’re shifting costs to employees.”

Unbelievable.  President Obama didn’t really mean you could keep your plan if you like it, we’re now told; he just meant the law would help provide more choices in the government-approved exchanges.  I’m sorry, but I’m quite certain that’s not what he said at all.  Unfortunately for the White House, there’s this thing nowadays called “the internet,” on which people can research topics such as, “what exactly did President Obama say about me being able to keep my plan?”  Well, well, well.  Look at what the search engine turned up:

“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.

Contrast that unambiguous, definitive pledge with DeParle’s historical revisionism and hedging.  You know, I’m beginning to suspect Joe Wilson’s sentiment — albeit disrespectful and inappropriate for the venue — was absolutely, positively on the money.

So remember how this blog started: “We are working hard to lift people out of poverty and give them a better life, a footing, and that’s what government is supposed to do.”

Now don’t you feel all warm and fuzzy… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers


Mindless III: The Continuation

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner didn’t dispute a Harvard economist’s estimate that each job in the White House’s jobs plan would cost $200,000, but said the price tag is the wrong way to measure the bill’s worth.

“You’ve got to think about the costs of the alternatives,” Geithner said when asked about Harvard economist Martin Feldstein’s calculation that each job created by President Obama’s American Jobs Act would cost taxpayers about $200,000.

And since around 4 million have lost their jobs since Obama took office that’s only $800,000,000,000,000 if everyone who wasn’t unemployed in 2008 got a job under this bill.

Such a deal! 🙂  You can’t pass that up now can you? Really, are you that heartless and cruel and want to protect rich people that much? 🙂

“If government does nothing, it does nothing now because they’re scared by politics or they want to debate what’s perfect, then there will be fewer Americans back to work, the economy will be weaker,” he said. (ABC)

Only government can solve this. Government is the only answer! And only Liberals have the answer!

And at $200,000 per job it’s a bargain and no one could possibly do better, certainly no those evil “obstructionist” “partisan” Republicans. 🙂

Cutting Corporate Taxes (so we aren’t the highest in the world) and cutting regulations that cost $$$ could not possibly work and is only designed to benefit the rich so that’s absolutely impossible.

Any questions… 🙂

“If the alternative plan is for Washington to do nothing, that’s unacceptable,” Geithner said. “If the alternative plan is to sit there and say we’re going to cut our way out of this by just cutting spending, that would make the economy weaker. Or we’re going to sit here and just complain about regulation. … That will not do anything to help the average family now still suffering so much from the crisis.”

Clueless aren’t they? Blinded by ideology.

“The focus right now from him [Obama] is ‘pass my whole bill, pass my whole bill,’ [and] some of the struggle with that is no Democrat in the House has even taken his bill and filed it yet (But when it fails it will be the Republican’s fault, mind you) So we can’t even pass the bill because no one wants to put their name on it and say, ‘this is my bill’ and file it in the House,” said Rep. Lankford in a September 23 interview at the U.S. Capitol.

According to a report by the Office of Personnel Management and reported in Ed O’Keefe’s “The Federal Eye” column in the Washington Post, our government has been sending checks to dead people. “In the last five years,” O’Keefe writes, “the Office of Personnel Management has made more than $601 million in payments to dead federal retirees, according to the agency’s inspector general. Total annual payouts range between $100 million and $150 million.”

This isn’t something new. Inspector General (IG) Patrick McFarland had urged OPM in 2005 and again in 2008 to more closely monitor such payments. It appears his advice has gone unheeded.

“Improper payments to dead retirees are up 70 percent in the last five years,” cites the OPM report. In one outrageous case, the son of a deceased annuitant kept receiving federal benefits for 37 years after his father’s death. OPM didn’t learn about the improper payments until after the son died. Of course, the agency never recovered any of the money. Could this be why the government has no qualms about spending other people’s money?

According to Citizens Against Government Waste (www.cagw.org), “The USPS has 600,000 employees and is the second largest employer in America behind Wal-Mart. The USPS Office of Inspector General reported that employees were paid $21.9 million for 875,540 hours of ‘stand-by’ time in FY 2010, and $4.3 million for 170,666 hours in the first half of FY 2011. The USPS also has a 24 percent vacancy rate in its 284 million square feet of interior office space.”

Also last week, Senate Democrats rejected a continuing spending resolution passed by the House because, among other reasons, it contains cuts in the very solar energy program that funded Solyndra. So just because a company or a person dies does not necessarily disqualify them from receiving additional taxpayer money (borrowed from the Chinese, of course).

It is beyond disgraceful that so many elected officials and unelected bureaucrats continue to waste so much of our money, all the while demanding we be taxed more because they can’t “afford” to cut a dime and some of us allegedly aren’t contributing our “fair share.”

We are past not being able to afford our government and it’s long past time to start cutting them off, much as a parent might stop sending money to a spendthrift college student who wastes it on partying and high-living.(Cal Thomas)

The EPA

The Environmental Protection Agency has said new greenhouse gas regulations, as proposed, may be “absurd” in application and “impossible to administer” by its self-imposed 2016 deadline. But the agency is still asking for taxpayers to shoulder the burden of up to 230,000 new bureaucrats — at a cost of $21 billion — to attempt to implement the rules.

The EPA aims to regulate greenhouse gas emissions through the Clean Air Act, even though the law doesn’t give the EPA explicit power to do so. The agency’s authority to move forward is being challenged in court by petitioners who argue that such a decision should be left for Congress to make.

The proposed regulations would set greenhouse gas emission thresholds above which businesses must file for an EPA permit and complete extra paperwork in order to continue operating. If the EPA wins its court battle and fully rolls out the greenhouse gas regulations, the number of businesses forced into this regulatory regime would grow tremendously — from approximately 14,000 now to as many as 6.1 million.

These new regulatory efforts are not likely to succeed, the EPA admits, but it has decided to move forward regardless. “While EPA acknowledges that come 2016, the administrative burdens may still be so great that compliance … may still be absurd or impossible to administer at that time, that does not mean that the Agency is not moving toward the statutory thresholds,”
The EPA is asking taxpayers to fund up to 230,000 new government workers to process all the extra paperwork, at an estimated cost of $21 billion. That cost does not include the economic impact of the regulations themselves. (DC)

Don’t worry, be happy and “feel” good. It’s good for the environment! 🙂

The Senate passed a continuing resolution by a vote of 79-12 funding the federal government through Nov. 18. The bill must still be approved by the House, but the Senate also passed a short term bill funding government through Oct. 4, giving both chambers additional breathing room.

They passed the buck and kicked the can down the road a piece.

Remember, Oct 1st is the beginning of a new fiscal year for Congress and the Senate Democrats have refused to pass any budget since April 2009!

It’s all continuing resolutions and stop-gap measures.
So how does that make you feel about the “super committee”?? 🙂
In Washington, “the problem is that things have gotten so ideologically driven, and everybody is focused on the election, and putting party ahead of country,” he claimed, in yet another repetition of the controversial claim that Republicans are unpatriotic for disagreeing with his progressive, big-government policies.“That [GOP disagreement] has got to change, and [that is] why your voices are so important,” he said. “I need everybody here to be speaking out on behalf of the things you care about … and to say to legislators you’ve elected, to say to them, act responsibly.”-President Obama 9/27/11

It’s Not Him, it’s Them!!!
Vote for me the other guys the problem not me!

Obama’s malcontent leftist friends on the Leftist Coast agree that he has not been liberal enough. So to regain their favor, he jetted out West in that covered wagon known as Air Force One and pleaded with them to understand the predicament he is in with nasty Republicans opposing him every step of the way. He is, he assured them, as radical as they are.

In Seattle, representing the downtrodden, Obama told the 65 guests who were paying a paltry $35,800 per couple, “From the moment I took office, what we’ve seen is a constant ideological push-back against any kind of sensible reforms that would make our economy work better and give people more opportunity.”

The bipartisan Obama told his fellow warriors for the poor that the Republican alternative “is an approach to government that will fundamentally cripple America in meeting the challenges of the 21st century.”

That’s the ticket. Unless we agree to Obama’s spending $450 billion more in borrowed money on the grounds that increasing the national debt will decrease the national debt, we will be crippling America. If we demand fiscal responsibility, we simply cannot be trusted to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

Why is it so hard for some people to grasp that neither government tax and regulatory roadblocks against economic growth nor massive wealth redistribution programs improve the plight of lower- and middle-income groups? When will a greater percentage of blacks realize that liberal prescriptions harm rather than improve their economic conditions? When will they realize they are being exploited and injured by the very leaders who say they are the only ones who care about them?

These demagogues had better hope minorities and lower- and middle-income groups never systematically study the damning results of their policies. Obama scapegoats Republican obstruction for the failure of his policies, but no matter how hard he dissembles, he had his way the first two years of his term.

Nevertheless, he persists. On the next stop on his propaganda tour, Obama told his audience that the 2012 election will be even more important than the one in 2008. It will be “a contest of values.”

Finally, there’s something we can all agree on. It will indeed be a contest of values. Unfortunately for Obama, recent polls show that essentially half the American people fear his beloved federal government.

So let’s get ready to rumble. (David Limbaugh)

Ronald Reagan noted the only proof of eternal life on Earth is a government program. And Obama and Co want Even More!

And if you don’t give it to them, well, you’re just an “obstructionist” right wing tea-bagger racist who just wants to crush the poor and save the rich.

Now don’t you “feel” better. 🙂

Been Here, Done This

Green Jobs Vs Reality: Green Jobs

President Obama is expected to seek another $250 billion or so in new stimulus funds next week, with plenty of money for clean energy and the creation of so-called green jobs.

Never mind that no one can seem to find many Americans who got green jobs as a result of the original stimulus spending. Consider two stories.

In the 2009 stimulus, the feds gave nearly $3.2 million in green-energy grants to my county of Arlington, Va., with almost $300,000 used to install solar paneling on the roof of our local library. (Don’t ask why the feds are giving one of the five wealthiest counties in America free money.)

Arlington officials boast the project will save $14,000 in annual electricity costs, but the solar panels have a life span of no more than 10 to 15 years. So the feds spent $300,000 to shave at most $150,000 off the net present value of Arlington’s electric bills. Some 3,000 counties across the country received federal funds for the same kind of negative-return energy conservation “investments.” This is the kind of “clean energy” program the administration wants to expand.

Oh, and the Company that got $535 Million in Stimulus Money and was the golden boy of Obama’s plan, just went bankrupt and we lost all the money and the jobs!

Wind, waves, and solar which are all the hippie liberals will consider in their “all in” energy plans are not viable. But they don’t care. They will make them work and if you have to suffer for it until they do (or don’t)–well by god you’ll suffer!

Obama instead touted steps his administration has taken without Congress, including the new vehicle-fuel economy standards announced in recent weeks. (The one that some economics predict will make your next car cost $11,000 more and may not be technologically viable at this point without everyone being forced to by a hybrid or an electric car–gee I never thought of that… 🙂 ).

Think about it. That’s what we got done — and by the way, we didn’t go through Congress to do it,” Obama told workers at an advanced battery plant. “But we did use the tools of government — us working together — to help make it happen.” (The Hill)

Congress (aka The Republicans) are evil and get in his way!

“I think the White House continues to believe that oil politics are very important to the economy and the next election, and they are determined to enact whatever policies they can, especially those that have a populist bent,” Paul Bledsoe, a senior adviser at the Bipartisan Policy Center said. (The Hill)

Whether they work or not is inconsequential. They just have to sound good, feel good, and get him re-elected. So that when he’ not facing a re-election campaign from 2013-2016 he can do whatever the hell he wants and Congress can go pound sand!

Don’t doubt it.

Now for a good energy news story. I recently traveled to Wheeling, W.V., which is 45 minutes down the road from Pittsburgh along the Ohio River and smack in the heart of the old Rust Belt. Unlike most places you go to these days, the town is booming. Defying the national mood, people are optimistic about the future. Why? It’s what residents are calling the “West Virginia gold rush.”

Except it’s not gold, it’s natural gas. Wheeling sits atop the famous Marcellus shale formation—one of the biggest treasure troves of natural gas ever discovered in America. With recent breakthroughs in hydraulic fracturing technology, that gas can be extracted at very affordable prices. A few years ago Wheeling farmers and land owners were getting about $50 to $100 an acre for drilling rights. Now they get up to $3,000, plus monthly royalties. What was once a dying town now has jobs and new funds for schools and roads, while West Virginian farmers and land owners are getting rich. The same story of economic revival can be told about counties in Pennsylvania and Ohio sitting atop the Marcellus bonanza.

Then there the oil in the Dakotas, possibly more than Saudi Arabia…

Even the White House acknowledges that the natural gas deposits in the Midwest and Texas contain potentially 100 years worth of cheap natural gas. Yet as far as I can tell, President Obama has never even uttered the words “Marcellus shale” in a major speech. Incredible.

In early August a Department of Energy advisory panel reported that fracking for natural gas poses risks to air and water quality and so should be subject to tighter regulations—hardly a ringing endorsement. The green movement wants it stopped completely because of dangers to water, even though continued technological progress will reduce these risks.

The White House’s hostility toward fossil fuels seems to know no bounds. Exxon has made some of the largest oil finds in a decade, in the Gulf of Mexico, and yet the Obama administration is holding up the leases and permitting process. In North Dakota, an Obama-appointed U.S attorney has brought criminal charges against seven oil companies (with penalties of up to six months in prison) for causing the deaths of 28 migratory birds found in oil waste pits.

According to data from the Federal Reserve Board’s Industrial Production Indexes, the oil and gas industry, which the Obama Energy Department loathes, has had more growth in output than any other manufacturing industry in the U.S. from 2005 through 2011. As a reward, the administration is proposing $35 billion in new taxes on the industry to slow it down. Even if we accept the dubious White House claim that all the oil and gas tax write-offs are unwarranted loopholes, a 2011 Congressional Research Service study finds that per unit of electricity produced, for every two cents of tax subsidy to Big Oil, Big Green (wind and solar) get closer to $1 in handouts.

The environmentalists are for any energy source unless it actually works,” notes Stephen Hayward, an energy expert at the American Enterprise Institute. A few years ago the Democrats were all in favor of natural gas at least as a “bridge” energy source. That abruptly changed when the extent of America’s abundant natural gas resources became fully known and more affordable drilling techniques opened up a superhighway to energy security. The irony of the green movement’s reactionary antifracking crusade is that one of the most important developments in cutting U.S. carbon emissions has come from replacing coal-burning fire plants with natural gas.

So we now have a national energy policy directing our resources away from cheap, efficient and increasingly abundant fuels like coal, oil and natural gas while we channel billions of tax dollars to 500-year-old energy technologies like wind power that can’t possibly scale up to power a modern-day industrial economy. That’s a shame. (Stephen Moore)

But it “feels” good.:) It’s all touchy feely…

For more than two years the president has been giving “important” jobs speeches — and no wonder. After an $830 billion stimulus and multiple “jobs” bills since, the employment picture has only deteriorated. The economy added zero jobs in August, and 2.4 million fewer people work today than when Obama took office.

Yet despite the advance billing on all those previous speeches, none was anything remotely “bold” or “imaginative,” something Democratic lawmakers and Obama’s liberal media cheerleaders are now hoping for with his next one.

Instead, in every speech, Obama simply dusted off the same crabbed list — more money for roads and “clean energy,” various temporary tax credits, more unemployment insurance, temporary payroll tax cuts — despite the fact that each has already been tried on his watch, and all proved to be expensive failures. A rundown:

• In December 2009, Obama’s big jobs speech called for billions more on roads, extended unemployment benefits, tax credits for weatherizing homes and some temporary help for small companies.

• In his 2010 State of the Union address, Obama said “jobs must be our No. 1 focus in 2010” and touted his “new jobs bill.” What was in it? Money for roads, a small-business tax credit, weatherization credits and investment in clean energy.

• On Labor Day that year, Obama delivered yet another jobs speech, but offered only one idea — $50 billion more for roads.

• His 2011 State of the Union speech was also supposed to focus on jobs, but all he had to offer was a vague “innovation agenda,” another push for clean energy and — you guessed it — more money for roads.

• And then in July 2011, Obama argued that once the debt-ceiling debate was finished, the country could turn again to jobs. His big ideas: extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits, and spend more on roads.

Maybe this speech will be different. But unless Obama has kept some secret breakthrough job-creating idea hidden in his closet all this time, would it be a surprise if he just puts a fresh rhetorical gloss on these same proposals?

The problem isn’t just that these ideas aren’t “bold,” it’s that they’ve all been tried since Obama took office, and they’ve all failed. Among those he’s expected to include this time around:

More infrastructure spending. The stimulus bill spent nearly $100 billion on infrastructure. Yet when the bulk of that money started to get spent in the “Recovery Summer” of 2010, the economy shed 329,000 jobs.

A new-hire tax credit. Obama signed the $17.5 billion HIRE Act in March 2010 that offered companies up to $6,000 in credits and exemptions for hiring unemployed workers. Obama said this would “encourage businesses to hire and put Americans back to work.”

Employers apparently didn’t get that memo, since the number of private-sector jobs climbed a meager 0.6% by the end of the year.

More unemployment benefits. These have been extended several times in the past few years. The administration thinks they will create jobs. But every credible economic study says that extending unemployment benefits mainly extends unemployment as many workers wait until benefits run out before taking that next job.

Extending the payroll tax cut. In January, Vice President Biden claimed the one-year payroll tax cut that had just kicked in would “put $112 billion into the pockets of 155 million workers … spurring growth and creating jobs.”

The results so far this year: virtually no GDP growth and 104,000 more unemployed. Economist Bruce Bartlett summed it up: “There is no evidence that the lower payroll tax has done much of anything to stimulate either spending or hiring.”

Money for clean-energy jobs. In January 2010, Obama announced a $2.3 billion clean-energy tax-credit plan that would, he said, “give a much needed boost” to this industry.

Today, the landscape is increasingly littered with failed clean-energy companies, including Solyndra, a solar panel manufacturer that got $535 million in stimulus-backed loans but which is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Will Obama go bold this time? What other options does he have? The nation’s in no mood for another massive “stimulus” plan after the last one mainly just doubled the nation’s debt.

But he’ll give us one anyways, he’ll just manipulate the words but the meaning will be the same. His ideological playbook doesn’t have any other pages in it.

And he and his economic advisers don’t appear ideologically capable of embracing genuine free-market solutions that would generate actual growth — real tax reform that cuts rates and dramatically simplifies the code, significant relief from Obama’s own out-of-control regulatory machinery, an end to the looming ObamaCare nightmare, major entitlement reform, among them.

Instead, the administration appears eternally wedded to the idea that endless government meddling and tinkering in the private sector with targeted spending, temporary tax credits, and eye-of-the-needle tax relief will somehow, someday miraculously combine to spark growth.

In a piece published almost exactly one year ago, Obama’s newly appointed chief economic adviser, Alan Krueger, boasted that the HIRE Act was “an example of the kind of temporary, targeted and responsible policy that has been the hallmark of this administration.”

We hope Obama has learned by now that this approach isn’t responsible at all, and that he would offer some truly bold proposals that break from his failed Keynesian past. But given what we’ve seen over the past 2 1/2 years, we’re not holding our breath. (IBD)

I wouldn’t. He’s too ideologically rigid to notice. If we just SPEND EVEN MORE  (“Infrastructure”) eventually banging our ideological head against the wall will break the wall! 🙂

Don’t doubt it.

The Ghost of Depressions Past

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Two years into a “recovery,” the unemployment rate leaps to 9.1% and just 54,000 new jobs are created. Is this just “bumps on the road to recovery,” as the White House insists, or something more dangerous?

This has been the most miserable recovery in modern history. Not only are there not enough jobs being created, but also the economy itself looks to be stalling.

Yet the Obama administration is crowing about its accomplishments as if slowing growth and rising joblessness have nothing to do with its bad policies.

“The initiatives put in place by this administration — such as the payroll tax cut and business incentives for investment — have contributed to solid employment growth overall this year, but this report is a reminder of the challenges that remain,” said Austan Goolsbee, Obama’s top economic adviser.

“Solid employment growth”? Since the end of last year, job growth has averaged 130,500 a month — about the number of people who enter the workforce each month. That’s not “solid” enough.

By the way, the unemployment rate has been below 9% for just five months since Obama took office — and three of those months were in the first 12 weeks of his presidency, before his policies took effect. (IBD)

The Democrats are focused on NOT passing a budget. They are not concerned with China dumping out debt. They are just attacking like angry bees anyone who might disagree with them.

“Throw grandma off a cliff” “End / Kill Medicare” et al.

And what are the Republicans doing about it? Not much.

But we can obsess about Wiener’s Weiner! 😦

And today is the anniversary D-Day.

But at least they spent $2 million to produce a new “food pyramid” so the stupid morons who don’t know that chips and beer is not a food group can ignore this too.

The upcoming election may become less about candidates and more about whether enough voters believe America faces a looming collapse that must be addressed now. Democrats minimize the threat of unfunded entitlements and our growing debt and promise to stay the course to “protect” those who depend on government support. Republicans, pointing to a looming crisis brought on by our unsustainable entitlement culture, the exploding deficit, and an anemic economic recovery, propose an austere budget and program changes that can easily be demagogued as severe and uncaring. One party campaigns on “caring enough to give you what you want” while the other campaigns on “caring enough to confront America’s unsustainable path.” As a result, the 2012 election may be the most important choice Americans have faced in decades.

With apologies to Charles Dickens’ beloved family classic, A Christmas Carol, what some voters need is a midnight visit by the ghosts of elections past, present and future to break through the denial that so many exhibit.

The Ghost of Elections Past might show voters how Roosevelt’s New Deal, designed to combat the Great Depression, actually suppressed economic growth and prolonged the depression and high unemployment. He’d point to President Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society.” Designed to wage war against poverty, Johnson launched costly entitlements that expanded the reach and cost of government—expanded welfare, low-income housing, Head Start, and Medicare. Over the next thirty years, over 5 trillion dollars was spent on the “war on poverty,” but the number of Americans in poverty remained the same. Worse yet, more Americans were now dependent on expensive government programs, and responsible taxpayers were feeling the strain on their pocketbooks.

The ghost could note that when the Social Security Act of 1935 was being debated, it was estimated that Social Security payments would total $4 billion in 1980. In fact, government paid out a staggering $108 billion—off by a massive 2,600%. When Medicare was instituted in 1965, the House Ways and Means analysts predicted it would cost $12 billion in 1990; the actual cost topped $110 billion. They estimated that Medicare Part A would cost $9 billion in 1990—the actual cost $67 billion. Washington entitlements always cost more than projected!

The Ghost of Elections Present would point to the stark contrast about what was promised in President Obama’s “Hope and Change” campaign and the economic results after two years of his administration. The ghost could show the empty storefronts indicative of our anemic “recovery,” the continuing housing defaults and dropping price index, the long unemployment lines, the exploding gas prices at the pump, and end with a face-to-face encounter with the rapidly advancing U.S. Debt Clock.

But it’s the Ghost of Elections Future who could bring home the implications of the upcoming election. Four more years of President Obama means home prices continue on their downward spiral and bankruptcies grow with no relief in sight. The private sector responds to increased taxes, regulations and healthcare costs by refusing to hire more workers. Layoffs continue and real unemployment approaches 20%. The Fed continues to print dollars and buy debt, bringing creditors to the realization that they’ll never be repaid in anything other than a massively devalued dollar.

Reacting to the loss of confidence in the dollar, the IMF and WTO choose to no longer use the U.S. dollar as the standard currency of exchange. With the dollar nothing more than the obligation of a bankrupt government, a new round of double-digit inflation is unleashed. The cost of imported oil skyrockets. With over half of Americans receiving some form of direct government payments and the top 10% of wage earners unable to carry the load, state and federal governments are forced to make severe austerity cuts. With the cuts and the devalued dollar, the poor and middle class are hit with a devastating blow. Millions take to the street in protest, but the government cupboards are bare, and no one is willing to fund America’s debt.

Rather than being caught in America’s collapse, companies that can…leave. Those with wealth have long since moved to gold and strategic commodities. The ghost ends his warning pointing to a cavernous cliff a mile in the distance where young and old alike are forced off a cliff of no return for America.

Have you had enough of my ghosts? Get past the denial; we can’t borrow forever! As citizens, we must face the problems our current president refuses to address. Be prepared. Demand both parties to provide viable answers instead of campaign rhetoric. If we don’t, get ready to face three ghosts in your dreams…or, even worse, a nightmare that becomes reality! (Terry Paulson)

Ams for the poor?

Sorry, we are supposed to have Hope and Change and Win the (Socialist) Future for the Annoited One?

Ignore the Debt behind the curtain!

isn’t he just so wonderful…. 😦

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

You’ve been IPABed!

“What they’ll say is, well, you know what, that will never work because it’s government imposed and it’s bureaucracy and it’s government takeover and there are death panels,” the president said. “I still don’t entirely understand the whole ‘death panel’ concept. But I guess what they’re saying is somehow some remote bureaucrat will be deciding your health care for you.”

Well, Meet your ‘remote’ Bureaucrats…. 😦

Most of the legal challenges to Obamacare, the president’s signature legislation that allows the federal government to take over health-care decision-making, focus on the “unconstitutional individual mandate” that defines sitting in one’s living room as “interstate commerce” and demands the purchase of government-approved health insurance.

However, there’s a new round of alarms developing over what critics have described as the ultimate “death panel,” concerns that have been raised because Barack Obama himself suggested giving an already-unaccountable board more authority.

It’s the idea of Obama’s Independent Payment Advisory Board, which is one of 150 board and commissions established by Obamacare but is the most notorious because it would be made up of 15 Obama-appointed individuals and would dictate Medicare policy affecting millions of seniors and disabled Americans with essentially no congressional or judicial oversight.

Here is the authority Obama endorses for IPAB: It wouldn’t have to follow the basic steps for adopting and enforcing administrative rules. Its payment schedules and policies couldn’t be examined by courts and automatically would become law unless amended by Congress through a difficult and complex procedure. And even if Congress would repeal the board in 2017, Obama’s strategy automatically delays the effectiveness of that repeal until 2020.

This will be the so-called “death panel” for medical rationing. Goldwater Institute has filed a lawsuit against IPAB.

But don’t worry, We are from the Government and we are here to save you from yourself! 🙂

You’ve been IPABed! 🙂

Obama then specifically said his panel’s authority should kick in at an earlier time than it already is scheduled to become the law.

U.S. Rep. Michael Burgess, who has authored “Doctor in the House” on the issue of the nationalization of health care, said the IPAB was a bad idea when ex-Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., proposed it before voters removed him from office, and it hasn’t gotten better.

“Now for the first time ever the primary party for health care for seniors, Medicare, is going to be able to tell you what kind of care you can get, where and when you can get it and worst of all, when you’ve had enough,” he told WND today.

“If all you’re looking to do is be able to figure how to take care of old people cheaply, this is the way to go,” he said. “If what you want to provide is meaningful medical care, why would you set up or embellish a system that leads to waiting lists and rationing?”

He cited Obama’s recent comments, and said the board will become “the central command and control system” and the “primary tool” to limit, ration, reduce or restrict treatments.

Obama: “We will change the way we pay for health care – not by the procedure or the number of days spent in a hospital, but with new incentives for doctors and hospitals to prevent injuries and improve results. And we will slow the growth of Medicare costs by strengthening an independent commission of doctors, nurses, medical experts and consumers who will look at all the evidence and recommend the best ways to reduce unnecessary spending while protecting access to the services that seniors need,” he said.

“No possible reading of the Constitution supports the idea of an unelected, stand-alone federal board that’s untouchable by both Congress and the courts,” said Clint Bolick, litigation director for Goldwater.

But you can bet a Liberal Ideological Judge could find one. And a Liberal Ideological Appellate Court could agree with it. And if Obama gains control of the Supreme Court, then they too will find it. 🙂

‘Protecting any new federal agency from being repealed by Congress appears to be unprecedented in the history of the United States,” said Diane Cohen, the Goldwater Institute’s lead attorney in this case.

So why did the Liberals do it, because they know precisely what they are doing but will lie to your face about until the end of time.

The Wall Street Journal said, “Mr. Obama … is relying on the so far unidentified technocratic reforms of 15 so far unidentified geniuses who are supposed to give up medical practice or academic research for the privilege of a government salary. Since the board is not allowed by law to restrict treatments, ask seniors to pay more, or raise taxes or the retirement age, it can mean only one thing: arbitrarily paying less for the services seniors receive, via fiat pricing.

“Now Mr. Obama wants to give the board the additional power of automatic sequester to enforce its dictates, meaning that it would have the legal authority to prevent Congress from appropriating tax dollars. In other words, Congress would be stripped of any real legislative role in favor of an unaccountable body of experts.”

Supporters say the board will be able to make tough decisions because it will be largely insulated from legislative politics.
Yeah, because it will already BE ideologically driven and immune and untouchable. Just what a dictator wants when deciding the life and death of his subjects.

Dick Morris: “The IPAB will be, essentially, the rationing board that will decide who gets what care. Its decisions will be guided by a particularly vicious concept of Quality Adjusted Life Years … If you have enough QUALYS ahead of you, you’ll be approved for a hip replacement or a heart transplant. If not, you’re out of luck.

So like the case from Canada, is your life worth enough to save?

And I’m sure party apparatchiks will not receive any special consideration. 🙂

After all,  Obama officials have granted 1,040 waivers to the new law already, because many groups, especially unions who supported Obama, and companies, contend they simply cannot meet its requirements, so shouldn’t have to.

Why would the IPAB be any different.

Jim Messina, in charge or Dear Leader’s re-election: “We have to act like an insurgent campaign that wakes up every single day trying to get every single vote we can,” Messina said in the video, which was described as a “sneak peek at 2012 strategy.”

Meaning, you though 2008 and 2010 were bad, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

And the Ministry of Truth News Media is already to go.

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

—George Orwell

Only it will say IPAB on the soul of the boot when it grinds you into pavement.

But don’t worry, be happy!

And if you dare oppose Dear leader you are a Radical,Racist, Extremist who just wants to starve women and children, kick grandma down the stairs,make rich people richer and steal candy from babies you souless heartless motherf*cker! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester