Friday, September 30, 2011

Jobs Bill Can Not Get Pass a Democrat Control Senate



It is all politics. With 23 Democrat Senators running for re-election, the jobs bill is dead on arrival. Many Democrats are running the opposite direction from Obama and they are avoiding to debate any bill Obama supports. The blame for a "do nothing" congress rest within a Democrat control Senate. They have opposed every bill from the Republican house. The Senate Democrat Majority Whip Dick Durbin wants Republicans to join the Democrat cause and pass the Obama job's bill. Senate Democrats should do the right thing and joing the Republicans and kill the bill. It is an election season. The Democrat Senate is prolonging the inevitable.

(The Hill) Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said, at the moment, Democrats in Congress don’t have the votes to pass President Obama’s jobs bill, but Durbin added that that situation would change.

“Not at the moment, I don’t think we do, but, uh, we can work on it,” Durbin said, according to Chicago radio station WLS.

President Obama has been calling for Congress to pass his American Jobs Act since legislators returned from their August recess. The jobs plan is made up of a combination of tax increases on the wealthy, new infrastructure spending, an extension of the employee payroll-tax cut and additional funding for unemployment insurance benefits.

Republicans have voiced opposition to the plan, albeit less than with other pieces of legislation Democrats have proposed recently.

“The oil-producing-state senators don’t like eliminating or reducing the subsidy for oil companies,” Durbin said. “There are some senators who are up for election who say ‘I’m never gonna vote for a tax increase while I’m up for election, even on the wealthiest people.’ So, we’re not gonna have 100 percent of Democratic senators. That’s why it needs to be bipartisan and I hope we can find some Republicans who will join us to make it happen.”

Biden Says Obama Owns the Economy, not Bush



You got to love Joe Biden. He speaks his mind without regret. It is obvious after 3 years in office, Obama has to take some form of responsibility. Obama said he would turn the economy around at the beginning of his presidency. It is at that point he owned the economy. After three year of failed policies, stimulus bills, and Obamacare, Obama must be held liable for his action.

(CBS News) Vice President Joe Biden said in a live interview with Miami public radio station WLRN Thursday that the Obama administration - not the Bush administration - now has ownership of the struggling U.S. economy.

Biden said Americans have "good reason to be upset" because they lost jobs because of the recession, "something they didn't have a thing to do with creating."

"Even though 50-some percent of the American people think the economy tanked because of the last administration, that's not relevant," said the vice president. "What's relevant is we're in charge."

The economic recession began during the final year of the Bush administration, and polls show many Americans continue to blame Mr. Bush - not his successor - for the current economic situation. A CBS News/New York Times poll over the summer found that 26 percent of Americans mostly blame the Bush administration for the state of the economy, while just 8 percent blame the Obama administration.

"Right now, we are the ones in charge, and it's gotten better but it hasn't gotten good enough," Biden told WLRN. "...I don't blame them for being mad. We're in charge. So they're angry."

Biden said it is "totally legitimate" for the 2012 presidential election to be "a referendum on Obama and Biden and the nature and state of the economy." He said Americans will need to make a choice between what the Obama administration is offering to address the problem and what is being offered by the eventual Republican nominee.

Thursday, September 29, 2011

Anti-Obama sign in Uptown neighborhood draws controversy





It is call the 1st Amendment: The Freedom of Speech.

(WWLTV) NEW ORLEANS -- There are several political signs attracting all kinds of attention in one Uptown neighborhood.

On Wednesday, crowds gathered at the corner of Calhoun and Coralie streets, looking at several signs depicting President Barack Obama as either a dunce, a puppet or a crying baby in a diaper.

"It disrespects the nation -- and President Barack Obama represents our nation," said Skip Alexander, as he looked at one of the signs. "He represents everybody, not some people."

Dozens of protesters came by the house in the 1500 block of Calhoun throughout the day, demanding the sign come down.

"He wouldn't do that to [President] Bush, I'm sure. It's just insulting. It's insulting," said C.C. Campbell-Rock. "He's going to have to take them down."

"This is nothing put pure racism," said Raymond Rock. "This is a disgrace."

The home is owned by Timothy Reily, who declined to be interviewed about the signs. Former Mayor Ray Nagin showed up at the house and went inside to speak with Reily. He emerged later and would not comment on what they discussed.

Some neighbors tell Eyewitness News that Reily has been putting the signs up for months. Some of the protesters learned about the signs through a local radio station on Wednesday morning.

"He can put up a sign if he wants to. It doesn't bother me," said Harold Gagnet, a neighbor.

"I think it's fine. It's on his property," said Katherine deMontluzin. "He can say whatever he wants."

The signs have created such a firestorm of controversy, though, that police came to the scene-- called in by City Council Member Susan Guidry. She represents the district where the home is located. Guidry said she was concerned about public safety and was trying to figure out if the sign was even legal. She also said she spoke to Reily, but didn't get far.

"We have to determine that there is a zoning law that prohibits perhaps the size of the sign, perhaps the way that it's erected, that it is leaning over onto public property," Guidry said. "Whatever we can use, we will, but of course, we do have to balance that with First Amendment rights."

Yet, the signs remain in place, fanning the flames of a free speech debate on both sides of the fence.

The Democrat Party is Now Accountable because of Obama



If history is a good indicator for tomorrow, the 2012 election will be historic in epic proportions. For decades, the Democrat party was successful to shroud and disconnect itself from Liberalism. In fact, the Democrat party took the path of blending their moderate ideas with Liberalism. However, that changed when Obama came into the picture. Obama is what the Democrat party represents, but was afraid to admit. Voting Americans are now fully aware the meaning of Liberalism. Currently, there is a common association among Obama, the Democrat party, and Liberalism.

As more people see Obama as the true voice of the Democrat party, in 2012, we will see a huge backlash from the American people. We will see Democrats touting themselves as moderate Republicans. We will see Democrats keeping an arms distance from the president. At the end, we will see Obama as the worst president in America's history. Jimmy Carter should be relieved. George W. Bush is laughing out loud.

(The American Spectator) Barack Obama is on a far worse political trajectory than Jimmy Carter was. First, the Democrats lost Sen. Ted Kennedy's seat to a Republican in ultraliberal Massachusetts who campaigned against Kennedy's signature issue of national health insurance. Nothing that dramatic happened while Carter was President.

Then Democrats suffered historic, grievous losses in the 2010 midterm elections, with a New Deal size loss in the House of 63 seats, and a loss of 6 seats in the Senate. In Jimmy Carter's 1978 midterms, Democrats lost only 15 seats in the House and 3 seats in the Senate.

Now in the recent special election in New York City, Democrats have begun to lose seats they haven't lost since before the New Deal.

That is so fitting, because President Obama is not an anomaly in today's Democrat party. Quite to the contrary, he represents the party's heart and soul today, which is well to the Left now even of George McGovern in 1972. Witness the reelection of Far Left San Francisco Democrat Nancy Pelosi as House Democrat leader even after the historic voter repudiation of the Pelosi Democrat House majority in 2010. Witness the choice of Far Left screamer Debbie Wasserman Schultz as leader of the Democratic National Committee. Witness Obama EPA Chief Lisa Jackson, Obama Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, and the numerous similar, utterly clueless, ideologically rigid, far left appointees throughout the Obama Administration.

That is also so well deserved, because of what the Democrats are doing to our nation, even as their power starts to wane. Historically, for the American economy, the deeper the recession the stronger the recovery. Based on that historical record, we should be nearing the end of the second year of a booming recovery by now.

But almost four years after the last recession started, there still has been no real recovery. Unemployment is stuck over 9%, with unemployment among African-Americans, Hispanics, and teenagers at depression level double-digit rates for at least 2 years now. Real wages and incomes are falling, back to levels last seen over 30 years ago. Poverty is soaring to new records as well, with more Americans suffering in poverty than any time since the Census Bureau started keeping records over 50 years ago.

As a result, we are on track now for an historic conservative victory in 2012, far bigger even than in 1980.

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Top 10 Reasons Why There Couldn’t Be a Filipino-American US President



Filipinos are certainly getting into mainstream America and into the world. With an estimated 4 million Filipino-American population (as of 2007), Filipinos are an emerging group in a diverse society in the United States .

Filipino talents like Manny Pacquiao, Charice Pempengco, Arnel Pineda, Lea Salonga, and Monique Lhuiller are doing a great job pitching in!

David Letterman, apparently used Filipino-Americans in one of his skits.

Here’s the recap:

Top 10 Reasons Why There Couldn’t Be a Filipino-American US President

By David Letterman

10. The White House is not big enough for in-laws and extended relatives.

9. There are not enough parking spaces at the White House for 2 Honda Civics,
2 Toyota Land Cruisers, 3 Toyota Corollas, a Mercedes Benz, a BMW , and
an MPV (My Pinoy Van).

8. Dignitaries generally are intimidated by eating with their fingers at State dinners.
7. There are too many dining rooms in the White House – where will they put
the picture of the Last Supper?

6. The White House walls are not big enough to hold a pair of giant wooden
spoon and fork.

5. Secret Service staff won’t respond to “psst… psst” or “hoy.hoyhoy!”

4. Secret Service staff will not be comfortable driving the presidential car with a Holy Rosary hanging on the rear view mirror, or the statue of the Santo Nino on the dashboard.

3. No budget allocation to purchase a Karaoke music-machine for every room in the White House.

2. State dinners do not allow “Take Home”.


AND THE NUMBER I REASON WHY THERE COULDN’T BE A FILIPINO-AMERICAN U.S. PRESIDENT IS…

1. Air Force One does not allow overweight Balikbayan boxes!

Obama Believes He Gave Tax Cuts to Small Business



I am so glad that someone actually fact checked the president. Obama has been touting the claim that he gave tax cuts to small business for the past couple years. I was afraid that the constant lies would be construed as fact. American should not believe anything Obama says, especially with his trusty TelePrompter. The Titanic is sinking, and Obama believes he can save the sinking ship.

(Washington Post) “As I said, we’ve actually cut taxes for small business 16 times since I’ve been in office. So taxes for small businesses are lower now than they were when I came into office.”

--President Obama, Town Hall with LinkedIn, Sept. 26, 2011

We’ve been meaning to look into the administration’s claim that the president has cut small business taxes “16 times,” and now the president’s appearance in Silicon Valley has given us an opportunity. (The White House also has claimed as many as 17 small business tax cuts, including a tax cut in a bill signed at the end of 2010.)

The president, in fact, went even further this week and asserted: “Taxes for small businesses are lower now than they were when I came into office.” That’s a big claim. How true is this?

The Facts

The White House first began to cite “16 tax cuts” last year, as the president prepared to sign a small business bill. The fact sheet distributed by the White House stated that bills signed by the president in 2009 and 2010 (primarily the stimulus bill) had yielded “eight separate small business tax cuts,” and that the new bill would add another eight.

The list also appears to be inflated. The first group of eight tax cuts includes bonus depreciation; the second group of tax cuts extends this provision. There is also an expansion on the limits of small-business expensing in the first list; the second set of tax cuts includes this provision. To us, these seem to be more or less the same tax cut, though others may disagree.

Moreover, these tax cuts are often quite limited in impact. Not only do many require the small business executive to do something to get the tax cuts—as opposed to a real cut in tax rates--but they have sometimes narrowly drawn criteria.

The National Federation of Independent Business estimates that fewer than 250,000 businesses would qualify for the full health-care tax credit—out of an estimated 27 million small businesses--while another 1.2 million would qualify for a partial credit.

Finally, we have to look at the other side of the equation. The new health-care law includes taxes, especially an increase in Medicare payroll taxes, which in 2013 would begin to affect more affluent small business owners making net income of more than $200,000 (single) or $250,000 (couple). That amounts to about three percent of all small businesses.

Liberalism Made Our Current Democrat Leaders Stupid



We had many well-known Democrats who were great orators. However, they are Democrats of the past. The ideology has change dramtically after John F. Kennedy was in office. Currently, Liberalism took hold and made the modern day Democrats look like idiots. The Democrat party will never be the same again.

The following are examples of great orators of the Democratic PAST:

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." - Franklin D. Roosevelt

"The buck stops here." - Harry S. Truman

"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for
your country." - John F. Kennedy


And, Great orators of the Democrat party TODAY:

"It depends what your definition of 'Sex' is?'' - Bill Clinton

"That Obama ... I would like to cut his nuts off." - Jesse Jackson

"Those rumors are false ... I believe in the sanctity of marriage." -
John Edwards

"I invented the Internet." - Al Gore

"The next person that tells me I'm not religious, I'm going to shove
my rosary beads up their ass." - Joe Biden

" America is is no longer, uh, what it, uh, could be, uh, what it was
once was - uh, and I say to myself, uh, I don't want that future, uh,
for my children.." - Barack Obama (spoken entirely without a
Teleprompter. (WOW!)

"I have campaigned in all 57 states." - Barack Obama (Quoted 2008)

"You don't need God anymore, you have us Democrats." - Nancy Pelosi
(Quoted 2006)

"Paying taxes is voluntary." - Sen. Harry Reid, Chairman of the U.S.
Congressional Senate

"Bill is the greatest husband and father I know. No one is more
faithful, true, and honest than he." - Hillary Clinton (Quoted 1998)



The prize winning wisdom comes from the "Mother of all Morons:

"We just have to pass the Healthcare Bill to see what's in it." -
Nancy Pelosi (Quoted March, 2010)

Obamacare is Heading to the US Supreme Court



Obamacare is heading to the US Supreme Court. The portion of the law allowing government to force individuals to purchase health insurance will be questioned. There has been many lawsuits filed by the states. Surprisingly, I didn't expect the SCOTUS will be hearing any case related to Obamacare. If the ruling favors for the American people, it would be a devastating blow to the Obama Administration.

(Heritage Foundation) The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) stole a march on the Obama Administration this morning by filing a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court appealing the 11th Circuit’s Obamacare decision.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) had announced on Monday that it was not going to ask all 11 judges of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to review en banc the August 12 decision of a three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit that found the individual mandate unconstitutional. This opened up a path to an appeal by DOJ to the Supremes.

However, with this petition, the NFIB jumped ahead of Eric Holder’s slow-moving DOJ (which until Monday had done everything it could to slow-walk this case filed by 26 states and the NFIB). The NFIB is obviously not appealing the three-judge panel’s opinion about the unconstitutionality of the individual mandate. But the NFIB is appealing the portion of the panel’s decision that held that the unconstitutional individual mandate could be severed from the Obamacare legislation.

The NFIB is asking the Court to overrule this holding, since “Congress itself deemed [the mandate] ‘essential’ to the Act’s new insurance regulations.” Given that the 11th and 6th Circuits have issued “directly conflicting final judgments about the facial constitutionality of [Obamacare’s] mandate,” the case is one that the Court should obviously take up given its interest in eliminating conflicting opinions in the courts of appeal.

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Obama says Republicans will Cripple America



Obama says Republicans will cripple America. I say, "Mr. President, you don't need Republicans. You are doing it just fine all by yourself."

(Associated Press) ATHERTON, Calif.-- President Barack Obama charged Sunday that the GOP vision of government would "fundamentally cripple America," as he tried out his newly combative message on the liberal West Coast.

Aiming to renew the ardor of Democratic loyalists who have grown increasingly disenchanted with him, the president mixed frontal attacks on Republicans with words of encouragement intended to buck up the faithful as the 2012 campaign revs up.

"From the moment I took office what we've seen is a constant ideological pushback against any kind of sensible reforms that would make our economy work better and give people more opportunity," the president said at an intimate brunch fundraiser at the Medina, Wash., home of former Microsoft executive Jon Shirley, where about 65 guests were paying $35,800 per couple to listen to Obama.

The trip comes as Obama has shifted from focusing on compromise with Republicans on Capitol Hill to calling out House Speaker John Boehner and others by name. The president has criticized them as obstructionists while demanding their help in passing his $447 billion jobs bill.

The revamped approach is a relief to Democratic activists fed up by what they viewed as the president's ceding of ground to the GOP on tax cuts and other issues while the economy has stalled and unemployment is stuck above 9 percent.

Obama said 2012 would be an especially tough election because people are discouraged and disillusioned with government, but he also said he was determined because so much is at stake.

The GOP alternative, Obama said, is "an approach to government that will fundamentally cripple America in meeting the challenges of the 21st century."

Obama to blacks, Stop Your Bitching and Fight



It disturbs me when Obama says, "I listen to some of y’all." The President of the United States should be listening to everybody and not to a group that could get him re-elected. The president had 3 years and didn't do anything to improve the economy. Reagan turn a Carter disaster into prosperity after the first term. Likewise, George W. Bush created 52 months of growth after 9/11. In regards to Obama, we got racial division, class warfare, interoffice strife, high unemployment, horrid economy, unproductive regulations, and high gas prices.

(Washington Times) WASHINGTON (AP) — In a fiery summons to an important voting bloc, President Obama told blacks on Saturday to quit crying and complaining and “put on your marching shoes” to follow him into battle for jobs and opportunity.

And though he didn’t say it directly, for a second term, too.

Obama’s speech to the annual awards dinner of the Congressional Black Caucus was his answer to increasingly vocal griping from black leaders that he’s been giving away too much in talks with Republicans — and not doing enough to fight black unemployment, which is nearly double the national average at 16.7 percent.

“It gets folks discouraged. I know. I listen to some of y’all,” Obama told an audience of some 3,000 in a darkened Washington convention center.

But he said blacks need to have faith in the future — and understand that the fight won’t be won if they don’t rally to his side.

“I need your help,” Obama said.

The president will need black turnout to match its historic 2008 levels if he’s to have a shot at winning a second term, and Saturday’s speech was a chance to speak directly to inner-city concerns.

He acknowledged blacks have suffered mightily because of the recession, and are frustrated that the downturn is taking so long to reverse. “So many people are still hurting. So many people are barely hanging on,” he said, then added: “And so many people in this city are fighting us every step of the way.”

But Obama said blacks know all too well from the civil rights struggle that the fight for what is right is never easy.

“Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes,” he said, his voice rising as applause and cheers mounted. “Shake it off. Stop complainin’. Stop grumblin’. Stop cryin’. We are going to press on. We have work to do.”

Obamacare, More Insured With Fewer Medical Access



Obamacare will force everybody in America to get health insurance. It does not take a rocket scientist to realize that there will not be enough doctors and nurse to take care a huge influx of new patients with insurance. Also, the cost will be the burden of the young healthy people. Thus, Americans can expect a horrible and shoddy service. It will be similar to the DMV with the long waits, exorbitant fees, and lousy service.


(The Tennessean) Nearly 700,000 Tennesseans will gain new coverage under health-care reform, but those already with insurance might have to wait longer to receive care and younger people overall may have to pay more.

Those are among findings from a report out from a think tank the state’s largest health insurer, BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee, launched this year to study the interface between public policy and health care.

“It will be a little longer line, but everybody will be in the line,” said Dr. Steven L. Coulter, president of the insurer’s Tennessee Health Institute and co-author of the report with William T. Cecil, an independent health-care consultant.

The bulk of the new people obtaining coverage would be younger men who become eligible for Medicaid under new guidelines because of their low incomes, according to the report.

The rest will be people who qualify for subsidies to buy insurance policies through state health exchanges starting in 2014.

Expanding insurance coverage without a corresponding increase in the number of primary care doctors, though, could create problems with access to medical care, the study says.

Coulter called for a coordinated statewide strategy for increasing primary care. “We’re going to have a lot of new patients, but not going to have any new doctors,” he said.

There will be other issues bubbling up as the federal heath reform law takes effect. The reform law narrows the advantage that younger people had over older people when it comes to costs of insurance policies, for instance, Coulter said. As a result, healthy young adults will pay more unless they’re poor and eligible for government help, he said.

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Sarah Palin Biggest Jump in the Polls to Catch Obama



In Washington, the narrative is beginning to take hold. Independents are favoring Palin over the other GOP candidates to beat Obama. I will predict Sarah Palin will announce her bid to run in mid-October. Learning from the 2008 election, it is never too late to jump into the race. The GOP candidates are dull and not exciting. They do not have the charisma like Palin. Palin is smart to allow the GOP candidates to attack on one another. It is a brilliant move on her part.

(Miami Hearld) WASHINGTON -- Look out President Barack Obama. Even Sarah Palin's gaining on you.

A new McClatchy-Marist poll finds that Obama looks increasingly vulnerable in next year's election, with a majority of voters believing he'll lose to any Republican, a solid plurality saying they'll definitely vote against him and most potential Republican challengers gaining on him.

The biggest gain came for Palin, the former Alaska governor who hasn't yet announced whether she'll jump into the fast-changing race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.

After trailing Obama by more than 20 percentage points in polls all year, the new national survey, taken Sept. 13-14, found Palin trailing the president by just 5 points, 49-44 percent. The key reason: She now leads Obama among independents, a sharp turnaround.

By a margin of 49 percent to 36 percent, voters said they definitely plan to vote against Obama, according to the poll. Independents by 53 percent to 28 percent said they definitely plan to vote against him.

With that sentiment permeating the electorate a little more than a year before the general election, most Americans think Obama won't win a second term.

By 52 percent to 38 percent, voters think he'll lose to the Republican nominee, whoever that is. Even among Democrats, 31 percent think the Republican nominee will win.

Monday, September 19, 2011

Democrats Suggesting Obama Not Run for Reelection



Liberals and Democrats are talking among themselves suggesting that Obama should not run for re-election. Obviously, Obama's presidency came under scruitiny from the first day in the Oval Office. From his associations with crooked affiliates to his questionable birth certificate, Obama never had a chance to prove himself. His inexperience has damage America's economy and exceptionalism. If Obama wins re-election, he will deal with a duel majority in both chambers of Congress. A second term will be a lame duck presidency. It was historical that America put Obama into the White House. It is a shame he couldn't deliever.

(Chicago Tribune) When Ronald Reagan ran for re-election in 1984, his slogan was "Morning in America." For Barack Obama, it's more like midnight in a coal mine.

The sputtering economy is about to stall out, unemployment is high, his jobs program may not pass, foreclosures are rampant and the poor guy can't even sneak a cigarette.

His approval rating is at its lowest level ever. His party just lost two House elections — one in a district it had held for 88 consecutive years. He's staked his future on the jobs bill, which most Americans don't think would work.

But there is good news for the president. I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he's willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

That might be the sensible thing to do. It's hard for a president to win a second term when unemployment is painfully high. If the economy were in full rebound mode, Obama might win anyway. But it isn't, and it may fall into a second recession — in which case voters will decide his middle name is Hoover, not Hussein. Why not leave of his own volition instead of waiting to get the ax?

Someone said that when a man is smitten with a beautiful woman, he should remember that somebody somewhere is tired of her. Likewise, the most inspiring presidents get stale after years of constant overexposure.

In the event he wins, Obama could find himself with Republicans in control of both houses of Congress. Then he will long for the good old days of 2011. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner will bound out of bed each day eager to make his life miserable.

Besides avoiding this indignity, Obama might do his party a big favor. In hard times, voters have a powerful urge to punish incumbents. He could slake this thirst by stepping aside and taking the blame. Then someone less reviled could replace him at the top of the ticket.

Obama Calls For Huge Tax Increase for Everybody



Without a shadow of a doubt, Obama support tax increases. There hasn't been a recent president that ran on raising taxes and won re-election. Without knowing the consequence, I am baffled how there are a swarm of individuals who want taxes to be raise. All of the sudden, these individuals feel charitable and want to give more of their hard earn money for the government to waste. That is the purpose of the government. The government is to take taxes from the American people and waste it on idiotic projects. Each year since Obama took office, the president created trillion dollar deficits that can never be repaid. These wasteful spending has not created jobs or stimulated the economy. Liberals say Obama hasn't spent enough. Republicans say how much is too much. A trillion dollar is a lot of money.

(Washington Times) President Obama on Monday proposed a deficit reduction plan that calls for about $3 in new tax increases for every dollar in additional spending cuts as he seeks to put his imprint on the ongoing talks with Congress over reducing the government’s staggering debt.

In a plan his advisers described as his ideological vision rather than a compromise offer to Hill Republicans, Mr. Obama also threatened to veto any plan Congress sends him that makes changes to Medicare benefits without also raising taxes on the wealthy, which he argues is central to a “balanced” approach.

“This is not class warfare, it’s math,” Mr. Obama said in the White House’s Rose Garden as he laid out the outlines. “The money’s got to come from some place.”

The White House argues his plan totals $4.4 trillion in deficit reduction over the next 10 years, though $1.1 trillion of that comes from savings on war-fighting expenses that all sides agree were going to happen anyway as the U.S. missions in Iraq and Afghanistan shrink. Another $1.2 trillion has already been signed into law in last month’s debt deal and another $430 billion comes from lower interest payments because of the potential lower debt.

Yet another $450 billion comes from the tax increases the president proposed last week — and has already accounted for in new spending he wants on infrastructure, and other tax cuts.

That means in terms of actual new proposals, the president’s plan totals about $1.2 trillion, of which the lion’s share comes from his longstanding vow to raise taxes back to Clinton-era rates on the top income brackets. The rest is $580 billion in reductions to formula-driven entitlement programs such as Social Security, with much of the savings coming from reducing overpayments and finding waste.

Republicans Love When Obama Opens His Mouth



Every time Obama opens his mouth, people yawn and roll their eyes. Without the Teleprompter, Obama is unable to put two coherent sentences together. If you notice very closely, the president stutters and gets tongue tied. In other words, the "great communicator" is persuading the American people with rhetorical gibberish.

Lately, Obama has kept quiet about Obamacare because he does not want to lose his prize gem. For most of the year, the president stopped talking about Obamacare. Like FDR and Social Security, Obama got Obamacare pass, and the president is hoping that people will forget about Obmamcare until it gets implemented in couple years. This is something people must not forget. Currently, taxes is the new narrative. Americans must not forget that Obamacare is one big tax on the tax payer. Also, it is a job destroyer. It will ruin this economy.

(The Blaze) President Barack Obama was thought of by liberal commentators as “The Great Communicator” and “Communicator-in-Chief” during his 2008 campaign, as he pitched himself as the “post-partisan” politician.

“He believes he’s a game-changer, but I don’t believe the game has changed,” said Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole to the Washington Post in January 2008. “It’s captivating. It’s intoxicating, but it’s not going to last.”

On ABC’s This Week nearly four years later, George Will read the riot act in regards to President Obama’s “astonishing faith in his persuasive powers” refuted by repeated communication failures throughout his first term.





In addition to condensing the video, Mediate has transcribed Will’s intense rant:

“He went to Massachusetts to campaign against Scott Brown. Scott Brown is now a senator. He went to New Jersey to campaign against Chris Christie, who’s now the governor. He went to Virginia to campaign against Bob McDonnell, who’s now governor. He campaigned for the health care plan extensively, it became less popular. He campaigned in 2010 for the Democrats, they were shellacked. He began, in a sense, his presidency flying to Copenhagen to get Chicago the Olympics. Chicago was the first city eliminated. There is no evidence that the man has rhetorical powers he is relying on.”

Following Will‘s burn on Obama’s rhetorical powers, Presidential Historian Michael Beschloss said of the current President of the United States, commonly referred to as the leader of the free world, “I think it’s not in him to be a fighter.”

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Obama, Being in Poverty Is Not That Bad in America



Obama's economic policy brought more people in poverty than any other president in American history. There are 22% of children living in poverty. There are 43.5 million people classified as poor. There are 42 million people on food stamps. Even though there are more poor people living in America, Obama doesn't seem to mind. He created this mess, but looking at the article, the majority of poor people living in America are doing better than poor people from other countries. This is the vision of Obama's America. He wants to create more poor people dependent on the government. It is a dream for anyone wanting to be a socialist dictator.

(Heritage Foundation) For two decades, the Census Bureau has reported almost yearly that more than 35 million Americans live in “poverty.” Last year, census officials grabbed headlines by saying 43.5 million persons were poor. That’s one in seven Americans.

But what does it mean to be “poor” in America? What is poverty?

For most U.S. residents, the word “poverty” suggests destitution: an inability to provide yourself and your family with reasonable shelter, nutritious food and clothing.

A Poverty Pulse poll taken by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, for example, asked: “How would you describe being poor in the U.S.?” The vast majority of responses focused on homelessness, hunger or inability to eat properly, and failure to meet basic needs.

The dominant news media amplifies this link in the public mind between poverty and severe deprivation. Most stories on poverty feature homeless families, or folks living in crumbling shacks, or lines of the downtrodden waiting to eat in soup kitchens.

Fortunately, such images have little or nothing to do with the actual living conditions of most of the more than 40 million Americans defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau.

The following was extrapolated from previous census survey:


1. The average poor household lived in a house or apartment equipped with air conditioning and cable television. The family had a car – and a third of the poor have at least two cars.

2. For entertainment, the average poor household enjoyed two color TVs, a DVD player and a VCR. If children were in the home (especially boys), the family had a video game system such as Xbox or PlayStation.

3. A microwave, refrigerator, oven and stove were all in the kitchen of the average poor household. Other conveniences included clothes washer and dryer, ceiling fans, cordless phone and coffee maker.

4. The home of an average poor family also was in good repair and not overcrowded, according to government data. In fact, the typical poor American had more living space than the average European. (That’s average European, not average poor European.)

5. Not only was the average poor family able to obtain necessary medical care, but when asked most families said they had enough money in the past year to meet all essential needs.

6. By the family’s own report, it wasn’t hungry. In fact, the average intake of protein, vitamins and minerals by poor children is indistinguishable from that of kids in the upper middle class. In most cases, it’s well above recommended norms.

7. Poor young men today are actually taller and heavier at age 18 or 19 than young men in the middle class were in the late 1950s. They’re also a full inch taller and 10 pounds heavier than American soldiers who fought in World War II.

8. The main dietary problem faced by poor Americans is eating too much, not too little. The majority of poor adults, like most Americans, are overweight.

Should a family that lives this way be considered poor? The overwhelming answer from the public is no.

Does this mean there are few poor families in the United States? Of course not. Many families experience significant material hardship. Fortunately, they are a distinct minority among the more than 40 million Americans the government calls poor.

During the recession year of 2009, for example, the majority of poor families had an adequate and reasonably steady supply of food. However, many worried at times about having enough money for food. One in five temporarily ran short on food at various times.

Although the overwhelming majority of the poor were well-housed, the government numbers show, roughly 4 percent became temporarily homeless during 2009.

Such problems remain a real concern. But effective government policy and programs must be based on accurate information, not sensation-mongering.

In the long run, grossly exaggerating the extent and severity of material deprivation in America won’t benefit the poor, the economy or society as a whole.

Obama Seeks the Buffett Rule as New Tax Rate for the Rich



If the rich believes they aren't paying their fair share, no one is stopping them from writing an extra check to the government. If they felt guilty for being rich, why don't they give us a break and share some of their wealth to us?

The problem is with this president. Obama has created wealth envy in America. In fact, we are proud of those who made it out from humble beginnings. However, every rich person in America will not help bring down the deficit. Also, majority of every rich person in America aren't like Warren Buffett. Majority of "rich people" living in America owns a small business. These small business provide 70% of jobs in America. These small business create the economy. Many get confused and associate the rich to the billionaires like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, who live off from their dividends that is tax at 15%. Taxing business that create jobs will permanently destroy the American economy.

(AP) -- President Barack Obama is expected to seek a new base tax rate for the wealthy to ensure that millionaires pay at least at the same percentage as middle income taxpayers.

A White House official said the proposal would be included in the president's proposal for long term deficit reduction that he will announce Monday. The official spoke anonymously because the plan has not been officially announced.

Obama is going to call it the "Buffett Rule" for Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor who has complained that rich people like him pay a smaller share of their income in federal taxes than middle-class taxpayers.

Buffett wrote in a New York Times op-ed piece last month that he and his rich friends "have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress."

The measure would be in addition to $447 billion in new tax revenue that Obama is seeking to pay for his short-term spending and tax cutting plan to jump start the economy.

House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday he would oppose tax increases to reduce the deficit. Boehner has urged Congress' deficit "supercommittee" to lay the groundwork for a broad overhaul of the U.S. tax code.

Saturday, September 17, 2011

College Republicans Seige on Voter Remorse on College Campus



College Republicans are not using scare tactics. They are point out facts. Also, there is no law against "throwing it to their face." It is time to point out voter remorse to the ignorant masses, who voted for Obama.

(Yahoo) CHICAGO (AP) — The young people in the ad look dissatisfied and pouty. Barack Obama's voice and the words "winning the future," from one of his old campaign speeches, echo in the background.

"You're LOSING my future," says one young man.

The ad, which has aired during sportscasts, reality TV shows and late-night comedy programs popular with younger people, was produced for the College Republican National Committee. It is an attempt to play on the fears that haunt college students, that they won't find jobs and will be living with less than their parents did.

Their fears aren't exclusive to their generation. But given that it seems to taken hold in a voting bloc that helped elect Obama with a wave of hope and change, there could be an opening for Republicans, unless the president can find a way to get young people fired up again.

That's been confirmed by recent polls, which show that young voters' support for the president is waning. It's true even on campuses like Northwestern, one of many where Obamamania began to take hold four years ago, when young voters supported the president by a 2-1 margin.

Others worry that apathy could cause a lot of young voters to sit this one out.

Young Republicans see an opportunity.

Even at the University of Chicago, a short walk from the Obamas' home in Hyde Park, members of the small local chapter of College Republicans are feeling empowered to engage students in conversation as the fall term begins.

Jewish Americans Need to Stand Up or Die as Infidels



As long as a pro-Israeli ad is allowed by the MTA to be posted, I have no problem with the pro-Palestinian NYC billboard ad. The 1st Amendment right is upheld, but it doesn't mean the message is correct. The pro-Palestinian ad conveys a message to end US military aid to Israel. The consequence of it will lean to the end of Israel. Only ignorant people don't understand the importance of Israel in the Middle East. It is the only true Democrat society in that region and to lose an important ally is a national security issue. For a small country that doesn't have any oil, many wonder why Israel is being single out. It is because a Muslim dominated region can't stand Jews.

If Jewish-Americans don't stand up and allow Israel to crumble, I can expect the same fate for them too in America. There will be wide spread antisemitism and racial prejudice to anybody that look Jewish. We are racially divided in this country because we have a president who supports

(NY Dailynews) A subway station billboard war is the latest flareup in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The dispute began with posters urging an end to U.S. military aid for Israel, prompting a City Council member to demand an end to the ads - and spawning an upcoming series of counter-ads.

"This is a highly political campaign with a controversial underlying anti-Israel message," Councilman Lewis Fidler (D-Brooklyn) wrote MTA President Thomas Prendergast.

The group behind the ads, the Westchester County-based WESPAC Foundation, said the subway spots are intended to encourage dialogue and not dissension.

Israel was slated to receive roughly $3 billion in military aid this year from the U.S. The ads - with the tagline "End U.S. military aid to Israel" - appeared in 18 stations beginning Sept. 5.

The pro-Israel group Stand With Us said it planned to counter the WESPAC campaign with a series of ads appearing in stations later this month.

"We didn't ask for a billboard war," said the nonprofit group's CEO, Roz Rothstein. "But the group putting them up wants a response, and we have to give them a response."

The answering ad shows two small boys with their arms over each other's shoulders. "The Palestinian Authority Must Accept The Jewish State & Teach Peace, Not Hate," the copy reads.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority said it had no problem with the ads.

Thursday, September 15, 2011

50 Million People are Forced to Drop their Health Insurance



Expansion of the Federal Government is shrinking the size of the private sector. There are more private companies dropping or decreasing insurance coverage because it is too expensive. There are over 49.9 million people who are not insured. It is reported that since 1999, health insurance premium jumped over 131 percent. While employment coverage dropped by 1.5 million, 31 percent of the population is covered by government insurance programs. Obama doesn't need to mandate an option plan. He needs to destroy the private sector and increase the size of the government. It means to nationalize the private sector so everybody will be covered by a government option plan.

(Washington Times) Fewer people received insurance coverage through their employer in 2010 than in 2009, and the number of people covered through government insurance programs continued to rise, according to 2010 data reported Tuesday by the U.S. Census Bureau.

It's a trend that started a decade ago, as costs continue to rise and make it harder for employers to offer coverage to their workers. The Kaiser Family Foundation found that since 1999 family premiums for employer-sponsored health coverage have increased by 131 percent.

"Over the last 10 years, private health insurance has continuously decreased," said Brett O'Hara, chief of the Census Bureau's Health and Disability Statistics Branch. "The number of people covered by government programs has increased for the fourth consecutive year."

According to the data, employment-based coverage dropped by 1.5 million, while the number of people covered by government programs rose by 1.8 million and now stands at 31 percent of the population.

Census data also indicated that while the number of Americans without health insurance coverage rose to 49.9 million in 2010 from 49 million 2009, the percentage of uninsured remained steady at 16.3 percent. Similarly, the percentage and number of people covered by Medicaid — 15.9 percent and 48.6 million — did not change, despite the economic recession.

The census report covered health insurance, income and poverty.

The bureau found that the poverty rate has grown 2.6 percentage points since 2007, to reach 15.1 percent last year. It's the highest level since 1993.

It also marks the second-highest increase in poverty on record for a year after a recession ended, following the 1980 recession.

Pennsylvania Federal Judge Ruled Obamacare Unconstitutional



Another state ruled Obamacare is unconstitutional. A federal judge in Harrisburg, Pa., said that the law overly exceeds the power given to the president and Congress. It is obvious that the government cannot force a product on the American people. It may be okay in some dicatorship country, but not in the USA.

(Philly) President Obama's plan to require individual Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty exceeds the powers granted both the president and Congress by the Constitution, a federal district court judge ruled Tuesday in Harrisburg

Federal District Judge Christopher C. Conner said the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce does not give it the power to compel individual citizens to purchase products against their will.

"The nation undoubtedly faces a health-care crisis," Conner said. "Scores of individuals are uninsured and the costs to all citizens are measurable and significant.

“The federal government, however, is one of limited enumerated powers,” Conner continued, “and Congress' efforts to remedy the ailing health care and health insurance markets must fit squarely within the boundaries of those powers."

The lawsuit was brought by a married couple in York County who sued Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who is overseeing the health-care plan, to overturn the law. The couple, Barbara Goudy-Bachman and her husband, Gregory Bachman, said they had dropped their own health coverage because it exceeded the cost of their mortgage payments.

They said they preferred to pay for their health care out of pocket.

However, Conner rejected an argument by the couple that the mandate is "disastrous to this nation's future, such as the Bachmans' prediction of America evolving into a socialist state. These suggestions of cataclysmic results ... are both unproductive and unpersuasive."

While most of the massive law can remain intact, Conner said, certain provisions are linked to the health insurance requirement and must also be struck down. Those provisions are designed to guarantee that insurance companies cannot discriminate against or deny coverage to the sick or people with pre-existing conditions.

Their complaint is one of 30 different lawsuits in various federal jurisdictions around the country challenging Obama's health-care plan, which became law in 2010.

Separate lawsuits have already reached appeals courts in Richmond, Va., Atlanta and Cincinnati.

The Supreme Court is expected to eventually take up the issue.

Obama Sees High Unemployment Through End of 2012



The CBO always portrays conservative estimates. In reality, when the CBO is putting unemployment close to 9 percent through the end of 2012, the actual numbers is way over 9 percent. I don't recall remembering any CBO estimate to be exact. They tend err on the conservative side to prevent themselves to look like idiots.

(Fox Business) The U.S. economy will grow slower than anticipated and joblessness will stay high as the fallout of the deepest recession since the Great Depression takes its toll, the Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday.

In testimony to a ``super committee'' of Congress weighing deficit-reduction steps, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said the non-partisan agency sees economic growth of around 1.5 percent this year and 2.5 percent in 2012. That's down from CBO's August estimate of 2.3 percent and 2.7 percent, respectively.

The U.S. unemployment rate, CBO said, now at 9.1 percent, will remain ``close to 9 percent through the end of 2012,'' Elmendorf said. Last month, CBO estimated joblessness at 8.9 percent this year, falling to 8.5 percent in 2012.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

1.75 Workers to Pay for One Social Security Recipient



Before this dreadful news came out, it took 3 full time workers to pay for one social security recipient. Today, the new figure is 1.75 workers to pay for one social security recipient. With unemployment to remain above 9 and more baby boomers retiring, there will not be enough workers to pay for social security. The government can extend the retirement age, cut benefits, or increase payroll tax; but one thing is certain, social security will go bust if reform is not taken seriously.

CNSNews.com) - There were only 1.75 full-time private-sector workers in the United States last year for each person receiving benefits from Social Security, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Social Security board of trustees.

That means that for each husband and wife who worked full-time in the private sector last year there was a Social Security recipient somewhere in the country taking benefits from the federal government.

Most state and local workers are part of the Social Security system and pay Social Security taxes; and, since 1984, all federal workers have been part of the system and pay Social Security taxes. However, unlike private sector workers who pay Social Security taxes with private-sector dollars, government workers pay their payroll taxes out of wages government pays them with tax dollars or with money that was borrowed by government and taxpayers must eventually repay.

In its latest annual report, the Social Security board of trustees reported that the federal government’s total revenue from Social Security taxes in 2010—$544.8 billion—was not enough to cover Social Security’s total benefit payments—$577.4 billion.

Obama Wants a Win, to Get a Break, and to be Loved



Obama can ask to be re-elected, to be given a break, and to be loved, but the American people wants to see him out of the White House. A tall tell sign of a big change coming is to look what happened at New York District 9. A very heavy Democrat district that never lost an election since 1923 went to a Republican, who never held a public office.

(Breitbart) President Barack Obama told fired up supporters Wednesday that if they loved him, they must help pass his jobs bill, injecting more urgency into his push for key legislation.

Obama hit another key 2012 electoral swing state, North Carolina, to hike pressure on Republicans over his $447 billion American Jobs Act which is designed to jolt the economy and ease 9.1 percent unemployment.

One supporter from the raucous crowd shouted to Obama that they loved him, and in a standard response from his 2008 campaign he replied "I love you back" then added a new twist.

"If you love me, you got to help me pass this bill," Obama said, repeating the line to more cheers.

Obama's appeal may work with his supportive political base, but will cut little ice with Republicans seeking to exploit his diminished job approval ratings which are at 44 percent in a RealClearPolitics average of recent polls.

The president, on the latest leg of what aides say will be a months-long tour to promote the bill, also complained that some Republicans were against the legislation because they wanted to deprive him of a political victory.

"Give me a win? Give me a break" Obama said, during his pared down stump speech which is peppered with demands that Republicans "pass this bill."

Republicans however are increasingly dismissing the jobs plan as a political stunt, complaining Obama proposes to finance it by reducing itemized deductions for Americans earning over $200,000 a year and closing corporate tax breaks.

They have said that they are interested in some aspects of the bill which is weighted towards payroll tax cuts and includes infrastructure spending, but may pass those pieces separately, not in the whole bill as Obama demands.

Jewish Americans Fed Up With Obama and Voted Republican



Finally, Jewish Americans are fed up with this president. New York District 9 has gone Democrat since 1923. To have a Republican win in a special election for former Anthony Weiner is significant. 40 percent of voters are Jewish and overwhelming voted for Republican Bob Turner, who doesn't have any political background. It is laughable to hear the DNC chairwoman spinning this as a difficult election. In District 9, it is the home of Senator Schumer and former Congressman Anthony Weiner. Democrats out number Republicans four to one. Democrats won every election since 1923. Former Democrat NYC Mayor Ed Koch gave his endorsement to Bob Turner. So, to hear the DNC chairwoman say it was a difficult election is nuts. That election should been an easy Democrat win, but the Jews let their voice be heard. Washington is panicking.

(National Journal) The White House is girding for a political loss in the heart of New York on Tuesday. They’re also spinning up an explanation that won’t entirely result in the blame landing on the low popularity of the president. As in Massachusetts, where Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley was faulted by the White House and many others for tone-deaf campaigning, Democratic candidate Dave Weprin may see the undercarriage of that new White House campaign bus.

Democratic officials and President Obama’s advisers expect Weprin to lose the election to upstart Republican Bob Turner in the contest to fill the 9th District seat vacated by Democrat Anthony Weiner.

Obama won the district, which spans southern Brooklyn and Queens, by 11 percentage points in 2008. His approval rating there is now 33 percent.

Democratic strategists studying the district say Turner’s strength comes from independents and traditionally Democratic voters in Orthodox Jewish communities, a demographic displaying an enormous amount of interest in voting.

The district has very moderate-to-conservative pockets. Weiner, who resigned after a sexting scandal, did a very good job of appealing to the concerns of the Archie Bunker part of the district while also speaking to the younger transplants. That took a lot of skill and a careful cultivation of Jewish community leaders.

Weprin is an Orthodox Jew and for years represented that constituency in the state Assembly. But his vote in favor of gay marriage last spring drew significant protest. He’s been down among Orthodox Jews by a 2-1 margin since entering the race.

In contrast, secular Democrats in the district, including secular Jews, display the sort of apathy associated with a demoralized political party. Weprin has been hemorrhaging support from all traditional Democratic constituencies.

The Republican Jewish Committee and independent Democratic allies like former New York Mayor Ed Koch have called the race a referendum on President Obama’s policies in general, and specifically his orientation toward Israel. They say a Turner victory would send a message that they don’t want to be the president’s rubber stamp. But Congress, controlled by Republicans, is no more popular in the district than Obama. And when polled, conservative Jews don’t list Israel among their top concerns. But of all voters who do say Israel is at the forefront of their minds, a mega-majority supports Turner.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Michelle Obama is Unpatriotic at 9/11 Ceremony. WENCH



I reviewed the video all day yesterday. Also, I showed the video to an army buddy who confirmed my assessment. That wench had the gall to disrespect the 9/11 ceremony with her ugly, hypocritical presence. She should have stayed home and pretended to have a migraine. It doesn't matter what she said. Michelle Obama body language said it all. Wench!

(American Thinker) There is a growing internet buzz over the First Lady's comment to her husband during the 9/11 commemoration Sunday, as the flag ceremony is taking place. Watch the video clip below, and lip readers are invited to comment on what she is saying. To my unskilled eyes, it looks as though she is saying, "All that for a flag!"

TSA Officers Arrested on Illegal Narcotic Transport



ABOLISH THE TSA. They work for a crooked government. The TSA is not making airport security safer. Airport passengers are more concern with TSA intrusive pat downs, scans, and theft than a terrorist or bomb in the plane.

(NY Post) STAMFORD, Conn. — Federal prosecutors in Connecticut say a state trooper, a police officer and three Transportation Security Administration officers based at airports have been arrested on charges of participating in a conspiracy to distribute tens of thousands of highly addictive painkiller pills.

Authorities say the TSA officers, based at airports in Florida and New York, a Westchester County, N.Y., police officer and a Florida state trooper received cash payments to help transport oxycodone pills from Florida to New York and Connecticut and/or transport cash proceeds from the sale of the drugs back to Florida.

Authorities plan to announce details of the arrests at a news conference in Stamford on Tuesday afternoon.

One in Seven Americans Live in Poverty. Obama is Satisfied



For 2009, 1 in 7 people in America lived in poverty. Today, it was reported that in 2010 poverty affected 1 in 6 people in America. At this point, each of the GOP candidates are adequate to get the presidential nomination. It is important to get rid of Obama from the White House. The president is creating an environment forcing people to believe big government is the norm. The younger generation, who weren't born during the Carter Administration, is getting a rude awaking. I guess every generation needs to feel the pain being ruled by a liberal president. Not since JFK, every Democrat U.S. President was an embarrassment.

(Yahoo) WASHINGTON (AP) — The ranks of U.S. poor swelled to nearly 1 in 6 people last year, reaching a new high as long-term unemployment woes left millions of Americans struggling and out of work. The number of uninsured edged up to 49.9 million, the biggest in over two decades.

The Census Bureau's annual report released Tuesday offers a snapshot of the economic well-being of U.S. households for 2010, when joblessness hovered above 9 percent for a second year. It comes at a politically sensitive time for President Barack Obama, who has acknowledged in the midst of his re-election fight that the unemployment rate could persist at high levels through next year.

The overall poverty rate climbed to 15.1 percent, or 46.2 million, up from 14.3 percent in 2009.

Reflecting the lingering impact of the recession, the U.S. poverty rate from 2007-2010 has now risen faster than any three-year period since the early 1980s, when a crippling energy crisis amid government cutbacks contributed to inflation, spiraling interest rates and unemployment.

Measured by total numbers, the 46 million now living in poverty is the largest on record dating back to when the census began tracking poverty in 1959. Based on percentages, it tied the poverty level in 1993 and was the highest since 1983.

The share of Americans without health coverage rose from 16.1 percent to 16.3 percent — or 49.9 million people — after the Census Bureau made revisions to numbers of the uninsured. That is due mostly because of continued losses of employer-provided health insurance in the weakened economy.

Monday, September 12, 2011

U.S. Boots on the Ground in Libya, Pentagon Confirms



It is only 4 armed military personnel, but that is only the start. Obama broke his promise. He said the Libyan conflict would be short, but it has been going on for months. Then we had US military officers assessing the situation in Libya several months ago. Now, we have 4 military specialist on ground in Libya. Obama's Libyan war will escalate into one big cluster!

FoxNews) Despite repeated assurances from President Obama and military leaders that the U.S. would not send uniformed military personnel into Libya, four U.S. service members arrived on the ground in Tripoli over the weekend.

According to Pentagon spokesman Capt. John Kirby, the four unidentified troops are there working under the State Department's chief of mission to assist in rebuilding the U.S. Embassy.

Kirby noted the embassy in Tripoli was badly damaged during the conflict between Muammar Qaddafi's forces and the rebels.

Two of the military personnel are explosive-ordnance experts who will be used to disable any explosives traps left in the embassy. The other two are "general security," according to Kirby.

Kirby also made clear these troops are in no way part of a military operation on the ground. They are armed, however, if for some reason they need to protect themselves.
The troops are only expected to be there for a short while. After the assessment of the embassy is complete, they are expected to leave.

Obama assured Americans in March when the bombing campaign over Libya began that there would be no boots on the ground. From the East Room of the White House on March 18, he said: "The United States is not going to deploy ground troops into Libya."

Several days later at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C., he said: "I said that America's role would be limited, that we would not put ground troops into Libya, that we would focus our unique capabilities on the front end of the operation and that we would transfer responsibility to our allies and partners. Tonight, we are fulfilling that pledge."


Saturday, September 10, 2011

Obama Pass the Jobs Bill Remix Video



This is so hysterical. LOL.

Did Bush Say Abe Lincoln Founded the Republican Party



No. Obama said that in his job speech and the media ignored it. In fact, the government sponsored media outlet PBS covered up Obama's gaffe. It is nice to see the media still loves this president. Obama has made more gaffes and mistakes than George W. Bush; and still, there are many going to support Obama. I wish everybody got over the "white guilt" complex and vote for a female president. Oh wait, do I have to label everybody sexist? (sarcasm).

(American Thinker) Barack Obama has gone to Congress asking for more money to spend. The President, in a rambling and tedious exercise mixing blame with demands, made quite a few dubious statements in laying out the case for Congress to vote for the plan which as yet does not exist. Much like Obamacare, Congress must ultimately vote for the bill to know what is in it.

At one point Mr. Obama made a major gaffe; he identified Abraham Lincoln as the founder of the Republican Party.

Lincoln did not join the Republicans until 1856, over two years after the party was founded. The first Republican convention was held in Ripon, Wisconsin in 1854.
Such a gaffe would have brought huge amounts of ridicule and derision on George W. Bush, but in the case of Obama the media yawned.

Actually, they did more than yawn; government-funded PBS has altered the transcript of the President's speech, removing the offending comment.

The New York Times transcript has the following quote:

"We all remember Abraham Lincoln as the leader who saved our Union. Founder of the Republican Party. But in the middle of a civil war, he was also a leader who looked to the future -- a Republican President who mobilized government to build the Transcontinental Railroad -- (applause) -- launch the National Academy of Sciences, set up the first land grant colleges. (Applause.) And leaders of both parties have followed the example he set."

But how does it appear in the PBS transcript?

"We all remember Abraham Lincoln as the leader who saved our Union. But in the middle of a Civil War, he was also a leader who looked to the future - a Republican president who mobilized government to build the transcontinental railroad; launch the National Academy of Sciences; and set up the first land grant colleges. And leaders of both parties have followed the example he set."


So PBS has purposely altered a transcript containing a major gaffe by the President.

Friday, September 9, 2011

Obama Jobs Plan Speech is More of Campaign Speech



One of a few things Obama can do fairly decent is giving a nice campaign speech. The only question from last night jobs speech Obama forgot to mention is who is going to pay for it. The president said that his jobs plan will be paid in full. Of course, it will! It will fall on the lap of the American taxpayer. In other words, Obama wants more spend, spend, spend. The jobs bill is another stimulus bill, which won't work. It is bunch of empty promises right before the election.

(RealClearPolitics) This is one question that the White House and a number of Democrats clearly don’t want to answer. That’s why some of them are out there coaching people not to use the word Stimulus when describing the President’s plan. Others are accusing anybody who criticizes it of being unpatriotic or playing politics. Well, as I’ve said, there’s a much simpler reason to oppose the President’s economic policies that has nothing whatsoever to do with politics: they don’t work. Yet, by all accounts, the President’s so-called jobs plan is to try those very same policies again, and then accuse anyone who doesn’t support them this time around of being political or overly partisan, of not doing what’s needed in this moment of crisis.

“This isn’t a jobs plan. It’s a re-election plan. That’s why Republicans will continue to press for policies that empower job creators, not Washington.

“According to The Wall Street Journal, nearly a third of the unemployed have been out of work for more than a year. The average length of unemployment is now greater than 40 weeks, higher than it was even during the Great Depression. As we know, the longer you’re out of a job the harder it is to find one. That means for millions of Americans, this crisis is getting harder every day. It’s getting worse and worse."

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Dick Cheney Wants Hillary Clinton to Run to Implode Democrats



video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Dick Cheney is putting a monkey wrench in Obama's second term of the presidency. By throwing in Hillary Clinton into the mix, Democrats will implode. This soap opera is getting better everyday. LOL


(ABC) LOS ANGELES — Hillary Clinton for president?

“So far she hasn’t said she would, but I think it’s not a bad idea,” former Vice President Dick Cheney told ABC’s Jonathan Karl in an interview on Wednesday to promote his new book “In My Time.”

Cheney declined to say whether he thought the current Secretary of State would have been a better president than Barack Obama, but called her a “pretty formidable individual.”

“I think she’s probably the most competent person they’ve got in their– in their cabinet. And– frankly, I thought she was gonna win the nomination last time around,” Cheney said. “Maybe if– the Obama record is bad enough– and these days it’s not very good, given the shape of the economy maybe there will be enough ferment– in the Democratic Party so that there will be a primary on their side.”

During the interview, Cheney criticized several of the Republican presidential candidates, including front-runner Rick Perry whose comments about Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, Cheney described as “over-the-top.”

While Cheney sounded positive notes about Clinton, he said not to expect him to endorse anyone on the Republican side anytime soon.

“I don’t plan to endorse anybody till we get a lot farther down the road,” he said.

Rick Perry Gets Pissed Off and Physical With Ron Paul



Rick Perry's true colors comes out. He is a Rhino and part of the Washington establishment. Rick Perry change parties as soon Al Gore lost his bid to be president. That itself should be a red flag.

(IBTimes) At the September 7 Republican debate, Ron Paul clashed with fellow Texan Rick Perry once again.

This time, things got physical.

During a commercial break, Perry walked up to Paul's podium, physically grabbed Paul's wrist, and pointed at Paul's face with his other hand (photo above from Reuters).

Perry and Paul were placed next to each other at the center for the Republican debate.

Before the physical confrontation, the war of words between Paul and Perry was perhaps even more heated.

When Paul was asked if he supports getting rid of the minimum wage, the doctor briefly answered the question (he supports getting rid of it) and then launched into an attack against Perry.

Rick Perry "criticized the Governor of Massachusetts [Mitt Romney] for RomneyCare, but he wrote a really fancy letter supporting HillaryCare," said Paul.

In response, Perry said he didn't know it was going to be "the monstrosity that was known as HillaryCare."

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Ron Paul Projects Rick Perry as a RHINO



The media are highlighting Romney and Perry as the top GOP presidential contenders for 2012. By handicapping the narrative, the media are pushing two RHINO's as the top candidates for Republicans to choose. Since Perry is an unknown to many, more ugly reports surfacing that this Texas Governor is a joke. Of all people, Texas Congressman Ron Paul puts the slam-down on Perry. Paul puts a new light showing that Perry as an opportunist.

(Washington Times) Republican presidential contender Ron Paul, for the second day in a row, criticized Rick Perry’s record as a conservative and cast the Texas governor as a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

In an open letter to the Perry camp, Paul campaign spokesman Jesse Benton hammers the three-term governor’s record and accuses Mr. Perry of acting like a Democrat during his long political career.

Mr. Perry, he said, praised Hillary Clinton’s health care plan in the 1990s, pushed for federal stimulus funds and supported welfare for illegal immigrants. He also notes that Mr. Perry backed a mandate that 12-year-old girls be vaccinated against sexually transmitted diseases, raised taxes twice and more than doubled Texas’ debt during his time in office.

“You supported ALL of these bad ideas that are inconsistent with how most Republicans understand conservatism, yet you now try to swagger your way into the tea party,” he wrote, underscoring the Paul camp’s message that GOP voters shouldn’t trust Mr. Perry.

CEOs to Obama, Get Out of the Way for Job Growth



Business gave a hint how the economy can recover, but will Obama listen? After 3 years of high unemployment, I highly doubt it.

(CNBC) President Obama's highly-anticipated jobs package will be unveiled Thursday in front of Congress.

Ahead of the economic speech, an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed Obama's overall job approval rating at a low of 44 percent, down 3 percentage points since July, while his handling of the economy stands at 37 percent.

We asked several CEOs leading up to the speech what bold steps Obama could take to reduce the 9.1 percent unemployment rate.

John Schiller, chairman and CEO of Energy XXI, said "if the government would get out of the way, from a regulation standpoint, and let us [XXI] do what we do good you'll see us continue to hire and grow this economy."

Monday, September 5, 2011

Perry Does NOT Support US-Mexico Border Fence



There is another big reason why Rick Perry should not be president. He opposes building a fence along the American-Mexican border. If Perry wasn't serious about the border issue as governor, he won't as president. Perry's talk about a virtual fence is another way of deflecting the question because he won't do anything about it.

(The Blaze) MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — He may have been 2,000 miles from the border, but Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry’s immigration record in Texas quickly became the focus in New Hampshire Saturday afternoon.

Speaking to hundreds of Granite State voters at a private reception, the Texas governor was asked whether he supported a fence along the Mexican border.

“No, I don’t support a fence on the border,” he said, while referring to the long border in Texas alone. “The fact is, it’s 1,200 miles from Brownsville to El Paso. Two things: How long you think it would take to build that? And then if you build a 30-foot wall from El Paso to Brownsville, the 35-foot ladder business gets real good.”

Instead, Perry said he supported “strategic fencing” and National Guard troops to prevent illegal immigration and violence from Mexican drug cartels.

The answer produced an angry shout from at least one audience member. And it exposed an ongoing rift with some conservative voters over Perry’s immigration record.