Saturday, August 20, 2011

Guest Article - He Can't Run on HIS Record

Change for the Worse
Just as he promised, Obama has fundamentally transformed America...
By PETE DU PONT , The Wall Street Journal

"The Standard & Poor's downgrade of U.S. debt is the latest fruit of the Obama administration's big-government policies. Ask Americans how the country is doing, and the response is a vote of no confidence. In August 2009, 34% of likely voters said the country was headed in the right direction. A month ago that proportion had declined to 25%, and last week only 16% thought so. Rasmussen's mid-August poll found that 4% of adults rate the economy as good or excellent, and 66% think we are doing poorly.

Just before his election as president, Barack Obama declared that "we are five days from fundamentally transforming America." He has made good on that promise. Huge increases in federal spending—up 28% in just three years—were the beginning. Putting health care—17% of the American economy—under Washington's control was next. Government control of business is expanding too: 379 new government business rules were added in July alone, according to Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming. Federal government debt held by the public rose from $6 trillion (40% of GDP) in 2008 to $9 trillion (62%) in 2010, The Congressional Budget Office says it could reach 200% by 2037, if the economy doesn't collapse first.

Mr. Obama's original budget for fiscal 2012 would have more than doubled the debt held by the public, from 2010's $9 trillion to $19 trillion in 2021. Politico reports that by the 2013 inauguration, the government will have taken on addition debt to the tune of "$22,500 for every man, woman, and child in the nation" during Mr. Obama's tenure. Some 45 million Americans, or 1 in 7, receive food stamps, up from less than 30 million a few years ago. Finally, in the previous two years our annual economic growth after inflation has averaged only 1.3% annually, just about half our past 10-year average of 2.5%. In the first half of this year, it was running at an annual rate of 0.8%.

The White House says unemployment will decline to 8.25% this year, though it may well remain above 9%. Looking back at the past 50 years, no president has been re-elected when unemployment was higher than 7.2%.

One of the Obama administration's central (and most damaging) beliefs is that tax rates must be raised for what President Obama calls "millionaires and billionaires," which he defines to include individuals and small businesses making as little as $200,000. Interestingly, Christina Romer, who was chairman of Mr. Obama's Council of Economic Advisors, has done some research on the impact of tax increases, and concluded that increasing taxes by 1% of GDP for deficit-reduction purposes leads to a 3% reduction in GDP.

Raising taxes on affluent taxpayers is not just bad economics, it's unfair. The Tax Foundation has pointed out that in 2009 taxpayers earning over $200,000 paid half of all income taxes, even though they had earned just 25% of adjusted gross income. On the other hand, more that 58 million taxpayers, around 42% of tax filers, paid no income tax at all. Add in the money some of them receive in refundable child care tax credits, the Making Work Pay program and the Earned Income Tax Credit, and it is obvious that ratcheting up taxes on higher income taxpayers would just exacerbate this inequity.

Growing dissatisfaction, skyrocketing spending, a weak economy, and a real debate about tax hikes all suggest that the 2012 presidential election will be very different from the 2008 Obama victory. A recent Pew report finds that 41% of voters would like to see Obama re-elected, and 40% would prefer a Republican win in 2012. That one-point Obama lead was down from 11 points in May. The President's approval rating from January through June averaged 47%. Earlier this month, according to Gallup, it fell to 39%. Mr. Obama is unlikely to win re-election unless that number improves.

He faces three major challenge. The first is a rift with business leaders, who resent being scapegoated. They may work hard to raise campaign money for Mr. Obama's opponent.

The second is the increasing disappointment of independent voters, who are rightly unhappy with higher spending, higher taxes, ObamaCare, a lack of progress on trade, increased restrictions on the energy supply, and the near-commandeering of the auto and banking industries, all of which amount to an effort to Europeanize America, just as European welfare states are facing their own crisis

His latest challenge may well be from Texas Gov. Rick Perry's fresh presidential campaign speech: "The fact is, for nearly three years President Obama has been downgrading American jobs, he's been downgrading our standing in the world, he's been downgrading our financial stability, he's been downgrading our confidence and downgrading the hope for a better future for our children. That's a fact." Indeed it is, and it's a fact that bodes ill for the future of America."

Friday, August 19, 2011

Guest Article - More Collapse Strategy

Why Obama Wants to Spend More
by Ben Shapiro

"President Obama wants to spend more money. That’s why he wanted the debt ceiling raised; that’s why he wants to raise taxes; that’s why the Fed is keeping interest rates artificially depressed and printing dollars. When you see the great use he’s put our money to already, it’s not hard to see why he thinks that spending more will rocket our economy out of the pits and into the stratosphere.

We are two years into President Obama’s stimulus package, and it’s difficult to ignore the spectacular results. People all over the country are getting back to work. For example, President Obama’s National Endowment for the Arts granted $50,000 to Atlanta, Georgia’s Center for Puppetry Arts. “Since 1978, the Center has introduced millions of visitors to the wonder and art of puppetry,” the Center’s website claims. “We believe puppetry is awe-inspiring and magical.” The Obama administration agreed, and in the process, they created 1.90 jobs. Perhaps one retained puppeteer was missing a digit. (In actuality, five jobs were “retained,” and none were created, according to the aptly-named website.)

The American Museum of Ceramic Art, which received $50,000 to create 1.37 jobs, was also part of this economic surge. If the Obama administration had given this amount to the Center for Puppetry Arts, making a total of $100,000 it could have created 3.80 total jobs rather than 3.27.) Puppetry is more cost-effective than ceramics – you don’t have to pay the puppets.

It has only cost us $50,304,622 so far for awards through the NEA. This is certainly an example of recovery one job at a time.

But Obama hasn’t spent it all in one place. He’s spent $10,890,060,866 ($10.8 BILLION) on important agricultural programs. Aquaculture producers in Alabama, for example, received over $9 million to compensate them for their losses due to increased feed costs for catfish. Those of us who love peculiar seafood dishes will be satisfied. Those of us who keep kosher will not. But at least we can keep full with Algood peanut butter – that company has pulled in $5 million in awards from the feds. The Department of Agriculture went even further with its stimulus dollars, ensuring that states like New York would be reimbursed for subsidizing student lunches. How’s that for a racket? Subsidize farmers for making peanut butter, then subsidize schools to buy that costly peanut butter for their students. Everybody wins!

The real estate market is already in a hole. But President Obama is determined not to stop digging. Under the auspices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD], the stimulus package has provided $325,877,114 to build low-income housing in California. The goal: building 3,550 units of affordable housing. By 2012, nearly two million homes in California will have been foreclosed upon. One in five foreclosures in the country takes place in California. President Obama’s solution: build more houses. How many jobs were created by this initiative? According to the administration, 1,164.78. (That last guy must have been missing two digits.) Taxpayers absorbed a cost of $279,775.68 for each of those jobs.

President Obama also ensured through the stimulus package that union members would get a fair shake via the Department of Labor. The 1199 Service Employees International Union [SEIU] League Job Security Fund grabbed in excess of $2 million. What does the fund provide? According to the SEIU website, the fund is to be used to place laid off workers in new jobs. But if that can’t be achieved – and how could it, exactly? – the laid off workers are given extra unemployment benefits along with their government unemployment benefits. In other words, we are paying for laid off union members to get unemployment benefits twice.

The Department of Health and Human Services is providing jobs by funding research studies like the one at Emory University on how to get more gay black and Hispanic men to participate in research studies. That study has only cost the taxpayers $998,982. HHS is also providing $939,585 to Boston University to study how effective Massachusetts’ socialized medicine has been in treating “traditionally underserved women” with cancer. Does anyone really doubt what the outcome of that government-sponsored study will be?

And let’s not forget the most important people of all: the people who enable us to track where our money is going. Smartronix, Inc., received an award in 2009 to build the website. “The scope of this order,” according to the award summary, “is to provide and implement a complete Web solution, known as Version 2.0 that facilitates maximum transparency in support of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.” That they do – and at the bargain basement price of just over $15 million. That $15 million, according to the website, has created 4.00 jobs.

The stimulus: the gift that keeps on giving."

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Guest Article - O's Job Plan

Obama’s Unemployment Fix: A Department of Jobs?
by Daniel Flynn of

"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.

President Barack Obama has had difficulty creating jobs. But he is a master at creating new government bureaus, commissions, and agencies. He seems oblivious to the causal connection between the latter and the former.

The president has taken his message of government jobs to the Midwest in a bus-charioted campaign swing this week. The Potemkin-Village audiences are impressed with the president’s performance. One especially obsequious town-hall attendee in Cannon Falls, Minnesota proclaimed to Obama, “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.” The president apparently enjoys a 100 percent approval rating in Cannon Falls. He rates support from just 39 percent of Americans in the latest Gallup poll. The president’s incapacity to perform the job of cultivating jobs stands as the main reason why so many Americans want him out of his job.

President Obama touted his bailout of Detroit in Cannon Falls. “But what we said was, if we’re going to help you, then you’ve got to change your ways,” Obama lectured about the auto industry. “You can’t just make money on SUVs and trucks. There is a place for SUVs and trucks, but as gas prices keep on going up, you have got to understand the market.”

The words fall on the heels of an announcement of an average industry standard of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. Not one of the top 15 cars sold in the United States currently gets forty miles per gallon on the highway. In fact, the bestselling automobile in the United States is the Ford F-150. The large truck became the American top seller the year Obama graduated from Columbia University and remains so through the third year of his presidency. The bestselling vehicle for each of the Big Three is a truck or SUV. The Chevrolet Volt, Government Motors’ prized battery-gasoline hybrid, found just 125 owners in July.

Who, really, has “got to understand the market”?

As the president advertised his fundamental ignorance of markets in Minnesota, headlines in Massachusetts further highlighted his misconceptions. Evergreen Solar, beneficiary of tens of millions in stimulus funds, announced bankruptcy after having earlier shipped jobs to China. It no longer makes solar panels for the “green economy.” The White House had boasted that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act would create 800 “green” jobs for the Marlborough, Massachusetts-based company. The jobs never materialized. The stimulus funds dematerialized.

Back in Minnesota, Obama apparently didn’t get the memo. He bragged, “We have put billions of dollars into energy research and to help move in a direction of greater reliance on fuels that are homegrown.” The commander-in-chief even envisioned “fighter jets running on alternative fuels.

Why not pour billions into flying bicycles or invisibility rays?

Businesses reliant on government and not business can’t survive in the market. The public doesn’t demand what the bureaucrats want. So, state-propped-up industries such as Evergreen Solar inevitably fail. If the administration’s unprecedented subsidies to corporations—euphemistically called “investments” by the president—are so wise, why do actual investors (the ones who make a living at this sort of thing) balk? The question answers itself.

A command economy, in which the government dictates through coercive regulation what cars will be made and through subsidies what companies will profit, can’t satisfy the needs and wants of the people. It replaces the democracy of the market, where 310 million consumers vote with their money on what products they like, with the autocracy of planners, where a few state officials decide winners and losers by remote. You should prefer electric go-carts to trucks. You should prefer collectivized medicine to your family doctor. You should prefer windmills to coal. So, you will. This is force. This is arrogance. This is doesn’t work.

The results prove far more damaging to our economy than billions in wasted tax dollars. Subsidies pervert the entrepreneurial impulse from pleasing consumers to pleasing a few guys in Washington. The subsidies give rise to a loathsome creature, the government entrepreneur, whose success depends on connections, lobbying, and perhaps bribery, but not on developing a popular product. Talents that might have been used to satisfy market demand have been reoriented to fulfill the bureaucrat’s command. It’s a waste of capital. Worse still, it’s a waste of human capital.

Predictably, attempts to manage a private economy with 310 million moving parts (by people who have never worked in the private economy no less!) has been disastrous to the private economy. Don’t believe it, the president insists. He assured his fawning Minnesota audience that “we’ve had a string of bad luck” around the world this year and that the economic slump started before his presidency “dating all the way back to 2007, 2008.”

President Obama cautioned his Minnesota audience not to “buy into this notion that somehow government is what’s holding us back.” Clearly a man thinking about establishing a federal “Department of Jobs” doesn’t."

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Guest Article - Seniors Beware!

Social Security lies on super committee’s chopping block

"The 12-member congressional committee charged with trimming the federal budget over the next 10 years has a new advocate for putting entitlement programs on the chopping block: President Barack Obama.

Obama, on a Midwest bus tour this week, said Democrats have to be “flexible” when it comes to spending on Social Security and Medicare.

But if the committee did want to take on Social Security, what would need to happen?

Craig Jennings, a federal fiscal policy director at OMB Watch, a nonprofit that monitors federal spending, said there are two ways to close the gap between Social Security’s expenditures and its revenues: increase the payroll tax or lower current benefits.

How do you cut benefits? Raising the retirement age is one way, Jennings said. Changing the way inflation is measured for automatic annual Social Security cost-of-living adjustments is another. Both methods would allow Congress to preserve much of the existing program.

David John, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said he could see the committee agreeing to both of those changes. (RELATED: Gingrich: Scrap super committee and extend payroll tax holiday)

I don’t anticipate that the super committee is going to do a wholesale change in the program,” John said. “I expect … if anything, small changes around the edges.

The Congressional Budget Office projects that in fiscal year 2011, Social Security’s outlays will total $733 billion, or one-fifth of the federal budget.

But Jennings argued that at this point cutting Social Security makes no sense from a deficit-reduction standpoint.

Social Security doesn’t have an impact on the broader budget deficit, certainly not in the near term,” Jennings added."

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Places to Start Cutting

Where Would You Cut?
America is on fire. We are spending way too much. in fact, federal spending exceeds tax revenues by $1.4 TRILLION dollars each year under Obama. That means 40% of what Big Government spends is borrowed money! If our creditors stop buying our debt, Ben Bernanke (Federal Reserve Bank) sells us freshly printed money to Tim Geithner (Treasury Secretary). We pay INTEREST on the newly printed dollars to the Federal Reserve Bank (a privately owned bank). That's a nice deal for the Federal Reserve Bank and its owners. Too bad it's a secret to Americans as to who actually owns the Federal Reserve Bank. Isn't it time to find out?

Place To Cut #1
Audit the Fed. Find out if George Soros has anything to do with the Federal Reserve bank. If so, abolish the bank and STOP PRINTING MONEY from thin air. Return to the gold standard.

Place To Cut #2
The Federal Department of Education has an annual budget of $121 Trillion dollars. It was created by Jimmy Carter back in 1979. Since its creation, American education has fallen behind many countries - including China. The more we budget, the less we get in return. This Department has failed - so why keep it? So why not cut the entire Department of Education since they have failed to do what they set-out to do?

Place to Cut #3
Government workers salaries. Federal workers average between 30 and 40 percent more than their respective equivalents in the private sector. Bring their salaries in line and save $240 BILLION per year!

Place To Cut #4
Obama's Stimulus. We set aside $240 BILLION for this disaster. It did not reduce unemployment and has wasted huge amounts of money. Much of Obama's Stimulus remains unspent. CUT IT NOW to stop any further losses. It Failed!

Place To Cut #5
ObamaCare! Repeal it immediately. This would save $5 BILLION in just 2012! Over the next 10 years ObamaCare will add over $1 TRILLION dollars in new healthcare spending. There are many reasons to repeal it besides, it has been ruled unconstitutional is several Federal Courts.

Just for Openers
So you see, we can cut spending and cut now. We can save tons of money. The next places to look for cuts would be to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) who has gone crazy under the Obama Administration over-regulating - even the air we breathe!

Think about it, there are many good places to find wasted Federal monies. The problem is to get the lazy BASTARDs in Washington to do something about it!

Monday, August 15, 2011

Guest Article - Obama's Collapse Plan Continues

Super. CAFE standards for big rigs
by Jazz Shaw of

"We’ve had the opportunity to previously discuss the Obama administration’s proposed changes to CAFE standards for the nation’s fleet of passenger vehicles and the downstream effects this will have on auto prices and jobs. Never satisfied with half measures in “helping” us in this struggling economy, the White House has apparently decided to double down and apply similar new standards to long haul, big rig trucks now.

WASHINGTON–President Obama announced the first-ever fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas standards for long-haul rigs, work trucks, and other heavy duty vehicles Tuesday, the second mileage pact with manufacturers in less than a month.

The regulations call for reductions on fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by 2018 of 9 to 23 percent, depending on the type of vehicle. Trucks and other heavy vehicles make up only 4 percent of the domestic vehicle fleet, but given the distance they travel, the time they spend idling and their low fuel efficiency, they end up consuming about 20% of all vehicle fuel, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Experts say that a 20 percent reduction in heavy vehicle emissions would boost fuel efficiency to an average of 8 miles per gallon from 6 miles now.

I’m sorry, but didn’t the president just stand up at a battery factory someplace and tell us that his renewed focus was not only on jobs but on repairing the tanking national economy? I thought I remembered something about that.
Transportation companies have their eye on the bottom line just like everyone else, and fuel is one of their biggest expenses. Does anyone honestly believe that they aren’t already demanding the most gas efficient trucks the manufacturers can provide at a sustainable cost? It’s just how the market works.

So if this plan has the same effect we anticipate ramped up CAFE standards to have on the passenger vehicle fleet, it’s going to cost more for these companies to operate and haul their cargo. And who gets the bill for the increased shipping costs? I’ll give you one guess.

These trucks haul all sorts of things… particularly food. The Lonely Conservative chimes in with what should be a no-brainer.

President Obama and his nasty regulators have set new fuel standards for large trucks. No doubt this will drive up the cost of the food we put on our tables, because that food has to get from point A to point B. Does anyone out there think this won’t drive up the price of our food, and everything else we buy? Hellloooo? McFly?

By now, savvy observers should see something of a disconnect between the stated goals of the Obama administration and the actions of its regulatory agencies. The hits just keep on coming, don’t they?"

Sunday, August 14, 2011

New Foolproof Antiseptic

Created in Scotland
Ironic that a foreign country "gets the picture" better than half of the US citizens. However, this is worth sharing for today's blog.

Other ditties that came with this cartoon included the following rumor:

"President Obama’s approval ratings are so low now, Kenyans are accusing him of being born in the United States ..."

America - Wake UP!
The world laughs while America burns. Perhaps they should because we are the fools - not them! If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck - it's a FRIGGIN' DUCK! But instead, Americans ignore the obvious and still hang on for "Hope and Change You Can Believe In." Lah, lah, lah, lah, lah. "the Tea Party Terrorists did it, it's not my fault."

Reality Check
It's time to look and the big picture: Obama wants to bring the economy down. He will never tell you that. No, instead he repeats himself over and over and over. (Just like in Star Wars - "These aren't the Droids you're looking for"). The non-politically minded believe that CRAP - especially if you repeat a lie enough times like he does. This should start to make sense. For our sake, I hope it does.

Obama IS smart and this IS his plan. He's not failing, no, he's succeeding. His "Stimulus" is on track. Look at our economy in the past 30 months. It's gone down! The Stimulus wasted BILLIONS of borrowed dollars that we cannot afford. ObamaCare is going to cost us BILLIONS more while giving Big Government greater control over our lives! The auto bailouts, bank bailouts, and Wall Street bailouts, all wasted our economic power to bring down our economy and NOT provide any jobs. These are deliberate actions as are all of Obama's "economic" remedies. Why are we actively fighting 5 wars-(two of which never got Congressional approval)? It's costing us BILLIONS MORE to fight those "military actions."

He is trying to overload the system as outlined by the 1960's radicals Cloward and Piven. Incidentally Francis Piven is still alive spouting her Marxist rhetoric to anyone who will listen to her. Want to hear more Marxist Crap? Google "Francis Piven."

Action To Take
It's time to get scared America. We're loosing our freedom and way of life while we all sit around wondering what's next. If any of this is beginning to become clear, you need to get politically active. Join you local Tea Party. Help elect a candidate to eliminate the CORRUPTED incumbents in Washington. Start letting YOUR voice be heard.

Stop watching and waiting for someone to Bail-You-Out and do something constructive! Get on Twitter, Join FaceBook, talk to your neighbors. Do SOMETHING! Voice your opinions. Help make a difference if you care!