The "New" Plan Going Wrong

I watched the State if the Union address the other night and it almost cost me a new television as I was about ready to put my foot through mine. How can one person stand up in front of the nation and do what BHO did? Let me outline a few of my thoughts on this fiasco in no particular order.

BHO chastising the Supreme Court

WOW... it takes some kind of cajones or a complete lack of tact to stand up in front of the world and chastise another branch of our government. Especially when you first, are not accurate in what you are stating and second when that branch deals with the Constitutionality of the laws the other two branches write and pass.

The ruling in question, contrary to BHO's opinion, will not allow foreign countries to influence elections. The law prohibiting foreign influence is not the one that was in question. The law was declared unconstitutional as it stifles the First Amendment right of free speech.

Now Mr. President, I realize that you are not fond of the Constitution and the rights that are mentioned therein. You seem to want to step all over them as often as possible. However, the law was not just and therefore struck down. If you and your cronies want to pass another law, one that does not violate the Constitution, then feel free. I'll be interested to see how many of the other programs this administration is pushing can pass that same Constitutional test.

The Latest Executive Order

Yet another example of the sheer arrogance of our President. The Senate refuses to pass a bill creating yet another government committee and the response is to form said committee by using an Executive Order? A little history here Mr. President... our Founding Fathers created three branches of our government for the sole purpose of ensuring that one branch was not able to create a dictatorship. However, your use of the Executive Orders is doing just that. Under our Constitution (again with that pesky document), the duties of the president are:

• To be Commander in Chief of the military
• To conduct foreign affairs
• To negotiate treaties with other nations
• To nominate members of the cabinet, judiciary, etc.
• To review and sign or veto bills
• To administer the laws of the nation
• To issue pardons as he sees fit
• To address the Congress from time to time to assess the state of the nation

I do not see anywhere in that list that the duties of the President includes creation of committees after the Senate has denied such an action.

"Green" Jobs

I know that the latest Washington buzzword to pull us out of this economic mess is the creation of alternative energy related jobs. In other words, we need to build more solar panels, windmills and other assorted "green" items.

While jobs are certainly an issue, let's look at economics here. If there were money in making those items in this country, someone would be doing it on a grand scale. There has to be a market for the product and the company must be able to produce that product cheaper and/or better than one that is imported.

Let's face it, the U.S. as an industrial might went out the door at the same time the unions came in. Since BHO is currently catering to those same unions, it is highly unlikely that there is going to be a climate that is conducive to new manufacturing jobs anytime in the near future.

So... we all go green and we can buy our solar panels from China and our windmills from Taiwan. More dollars going overseas and none coming back unless it is in the form of another loan to keep us afloat.

More on Jobs

So, now the jobs that BHO is proposing are little more than the Works Progress Administration (WPA) jobs of the Roosevelt years. Let's put the country to work, building bridges, roads and dams then pay those employees from the public monies. While I can see some trickle down into the public sector, how much of this is going to lead to more government spending?


An Open Comment to our President

Yes, the country was in a mess when you started this job a year ago. However, you have taken things from bad to worse. Your administration has focused almost solely on health care reform. Something that is apparently not what the public wants. Maybe if you had spent the last year turning around the economy and focusing on jobs, Massachusetts voters would not have turned their back on the candidate you were campaigning for and your approval ratings would still be high.

Here is a suggestion; create a climate that allows businesses to grow and prosper, loosen the collar of the government and the unions that are holding back growth then watch what happens.

This Blame it on Bush mentality is wearing a bit thin to say the least. Your party has enjoyed a majority in both the House and Senate for a year now and still cannot accomplish a thing. My math tells me that a majority is 51%, not 60%. So then, why isn't anything getting done when your party has enjoyed more than enough votes to pass just about anything?

The capitalistic system works, leave it alone!. Mr. President, if the government decides that taking my hard earned money away from me and then "spread it around" to others, then I have no incentive to work. I can sit on my ass and await my check each month along with the others on the government tit.

Being successful is not a crime and it actually used to be encouraged in this country. If you worked hard, you made money. Make enough money and then you can have others work for you. It is that simple. Let me keep the fruits of my labor and I will decide who deserves to share in it, not the government.

Get off the ass of the banks. Yes, the government stepped in to bail out some of the banks. The same banks that were encouraged to make sub-prime loans. The same banks that the Federal Reserve is supposed to over see. Many of those banks have paid back that money, and in record time. Now leave them alone! Those repaid loans should release the banks from an obligation to the public or the government.

The budget "freeze". Freezing a bloated budget is like telling an obese person that freezing at 10,000 calories a day will help in losing weight. Let's take this a step further, Let's freeze the salaries of all governmental employees. Better yet, let's drop them to the level of their civilian counterparts and factor in all of their benefits. In fact, I'd even take a bit further for our elected officials, turn your entire salaries back in to the treasury for the use of the country. Show me that you are serious about cutting spending then maybe I can sit up and take notice of what you are trying to accomplish.

----

I received the following in an email the other day, and really liked the sentiments. Feel free to forward this to your elected officials:

The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775. You have had 234 years to get it right and it is broke.

Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 74 years to get it right and it is broke.

Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right and it is broke.

The War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.

Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44 years to get it right and they are broke.

Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 39 years to get it right and it is broke.

The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 32 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.

You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars

AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM??

"Doomsday" Plan

According to the NY Daily News, it appears that the majority party is going to ensure passage of some form of a health care bill come hell or high water in the event that the Massachusetts race goes to the Republican contender.

To me, this race is probably the best indicator of how the general public is looking at our legislators and specifically how the majority party is taking care of business. Massachusetts has long been a stronghold for the Democrat's. While Ted Kennedy was in office, he was a shoe-in every election no matter what. Mitt Romney helped to build the Massachusetts version of Obamacare for the state that failed miserably. Yet they were still re-elected time after time.

Now why would this race for Kennedy's vacated spot be so contested that a Democrat needs to get the POTUS in to campaign on his wife's birthday? Is this maybe a sign that the public, at least in Massachusetts, has realized the error of their ways by putting the Democrats in power? Considering that Massachusetts is a known Democrat stronghold and the race is almost a dead heat it sure seems that way to me.

Now back to the "Doomsday Plan". According to the NY Daily News, the Dems have a plan to rush the Senate version of the bill through the House without the standard meetings and reconciliation steps. This will ensure that there is some form of framework in place before Brown can make it to Washington to slow down the bill by opposing the mess.

What does this all mean to the average person? To put it simplistically, those in the majority party are once again going to sell out the American public for the sole purpose of getting some form of a bill passed. Since the two bills differ and there have been late-night secret meetings with special interest groups to make sure they are satisfied, then why the hell would it be necessary to rush this bill through if it was good legislation?

So here are my predictions:
1. Brown will send Coakley back to the farm come tomorrow by winning the election.
2. A form of the health care bill will be passed immediately upon hitting Obama's desk thus negating his promise that there would be five days for the public to review and comment before he signs any major bill.
3. The 2010 midterm elections will result in the Dems losing their majority in both the House and Senate.
4. Our legislators spend the next two years battling to get rid of junk legislation that caters to special interest groups instead of focusing on re-building the economy.

Let's hope my crystal ball is defective....

Is the creation of jobs really a priority?

In the last week I have read article after article that states that BHO and the Democratic leaders are now making the creation of jobs in this country a top priority. With about 1 in 10 Americans out of work, I would say that this should have been the number one priority for the last year. But I digress...

So...now that the creation of jobs is the highest priority for BHO and the majority leaders, let's take a quick look at what they are up to today:

BHO - Campaigning in Massachusetts for Coakley to ensure that his party can shove the health care bill through. Hell, campaigning for Coakley was more important to BHO than spending the day with his wife on her birthday. Hell, if campaigning is more important that your wife's birthday, what chance do the unemployed have of having a job created for them?

Reid - Busy campaigning himself and trying to backtrack over his racist remarks. Oh wait a minute, those remarks would only be considered racist if Reid were not a Democrat and in BHO's back pocket.

Pelosi - No news reports today. However did take the time to slam the health insurance companies for ads opposing the health care reform bill calling it lying to the public. Well Nancy, once you finish your latest botox refill, you may want to review the promises that your party leader made and refuses to uphold. Especially the one about transparency in government. Remember that one? It was the one that you quipped about stating that BHO was "for many things when on the campaign trail".

I see our leaders are hard at work. After all, they surely put in a lot of work in the last few days since they returned from the Christmas break.

Oh the lies... a compilation of videos... featuring BHO

Note to those viewing the blog on Facebook: To see the videos, you need to click on the "View original post" link to go to blogger for the videos to show up.

Oh what a tangled web we weave....

Anyone else remember these promises from BHO while on the campaign trail?



Ok...so he was on the campaign trail and all those aspiring to hold office make promises that they cannot keep...right? Well how about this from right after he took office:



Ah but surely he was just misunderstood...single payer was not what he really is striving for...



I guess we should have seen this coming...here is his claim that his father, born in 1936, is a WWII Veteran:



Apparently, even Pelosi knew that the campaign promises on transparency were just lip service to get BHO elected:



How many more are out there? I got tired of searching after less than 30 minutes for clips of BHO with his lips moving... and lying through his teeth.

More back room deals

Wow...it is lovely to read today that the administration has now made yet another back room deal in order to push the "health care reform" down our throats. The latest in a long list of deals goes to the unions. Surprise, surprise, unions have long been on the bandwagon of entitlement mentality so it fits right into the socialist agenda of this administration. This administration has shown that the special interests groups have a huge hold on Washington. Those in power right now are willing to sell their souls to get this bill passed.

The unions have managed to destroy the manufacturing industries in this country by excessively burdening the very businesses that provide employment to their members. The residual effects of this are impacting the auto industry due to the lifetime entitlements that the unions forced out of the companies under the threat to strike. When over $2,000 of the cost of a new car goes to pay for benefits to FORMER employees, there is something wrong with this system.

People, businesses are in business for one reason and one reason only, to make money for the stakeholders of that company. I know of not one single person who has founded a company with the goal of providing a lifetime of benefits for their employees. Employees are a commodity that are necessary to produce the goods and services. When the time comes that the commodity is no longer needed or becomes too expensive, then the business must raise their prices or reduce their costs, plain and simple.

Anyone who has taken a basic business management class understands that the quickest way to push cash to the bottom line is to cut labor costs. When limited by the legal extortion of a collective bargaining agreement, most compaies will choose to look offshore for cheaper labor, something that is not all that difficult to find. Once those jobs leave the U.S., they are gone for good. As the availability of the jobs in this country decreases, then unemployment increases further burdening the social programs. Those unable to find work are no longer contributing to the tax base that helps to pay for those services.

When are the union workers going to realize that the unions ARE big business. They are not there for the workers, they operate solely to continue to line the pockets of those that run the unions. Why do you think that the unions were(are) so popular with organized crime? It is a huge cash cow with a huge number of drones that are unable or unwilling to take care of themselves. By using extortion, they shut companies down in order to exact the pound of flesh they so desire.

The SEIU, one of the largest unions that has BHO in their back pocket, admits to representing ILLEGAL workers as well as some that are working legally here. Their catch phrase is that the workers of world need to unite as they try to spread the tentacles of the union overseas. Union workers, is this a group that actually has YOUR best interest at heart? Are they saving "American Jobs" for Americans or are they merely paying lip service to that philosophy while selling you out?

ILLEGAL workers can be forced to work for less than someone who is here legally under the threat of deportation. By representing the ILLEGALS, the SEIU ensures that they have yet another pool of drones to exploit. This time at the expense of those in the country legally. Now this administration is selling out the American people to that very union.

Come on with the midterm elections!!!

Transparent as a lead door

Well Obama once again has proven that he is not a man of his word. Big surprise, right? On the campaign trail, Obama promised a "transparent and bi-partisan government". I suppose that only applies to those items that they actually want the public to know about, health care reform is apparently not one of these items.

The health care reform is certainly a "fundamental change" to our system. The .gov is taking over health care just as it has taken over or shall we call it "nationalized" the financial and automotive sectors.

According to an article in the LA Times today, Obama now favors the "Cadillac Tax", something that his buddy in the SEIU and other unions are strongly opposed to. As union backing is the cornerstone of keeping this administration in office (that is if you exclude the voter fraud that groups like ACORN helped with), it will be interesting to see how long they will continue to support someone who gives the m the shaft along with the rest of the public.

To show how "transparent" this administration is taking this whole debacle, here are a few quotes from the LA Times: "A Senate aid who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the closed-door meetings said that the White House had signaled it would "convene and run" meetings from now on as lawmakers strive to reach a consensus" and "On one point both chambers seem to agree: keeping the negotiations private".

Note that the meetings are closed-door and cannot be discussed? What is going on behind those "transparent" doors? Very simple, the American public is being sold out for the Socialist agenda of this administration.

An open comment to our lawmakers; look at what the public wants. Put this whole bill up for a vote in front of the American people,. We are having a mid-term election in a year, well before this bill is set to go into effect. Place this measure on the ballot and let U.S. decide if we want it. Simple majority rules. Let's see if you first have the nerve to do this and second if the public is going to let you give us the shaft.

A Novel Idea

I am not sure where this originated so I am unable to give full credit to the author. This little ditty was sent to me in an email. After reading it, I felt compelled to send it to my legislators asking them to introduce this as a bill as well as post it here. Feel free to forward this to your legislator and see if anyone has the nerve to do right by the people and submit such a bill.

Congressional Reform Act of 2010

1. Term Limits: 12 years only, one of the possible options below.

A. Two Six year Senate terms
B. Six Two year House terms
C. One Six year Senate term and three Two Year House terms

2. No Tenure / No Pension:

A congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security:

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund moves to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, Congress participates with the American people.

4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan just as all Americans.

5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

7. Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the American people.

8. All contracts with past and present congressmen are void effective 1/1/11 .

The American people did not make this contract with congressmen, congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

Transparent? Part II

Wow, do I have the honor of Nancy Pelosi actually reading this blog and taking advice? In a Wall Street Journal article today, Pelosi was quoted as saying that there would be more transparency in the final negotiations regarding the health care reform bill.

Now wait a minute before we begin dancing in the streets about this. Does this mean that C-Span will get to televise our industrious leaders hard at work to hash out this bill before we are force-fed it? Um...nope. How about the promise that BHO made that the negotiations on this bill would be televised? Um...guess again.

It looks like the powers that be are still looking to keep most of this a secret from the American people. After all, they know so much better than we do both what we want and what we need. It doesn't matter that poll after poll now shows the majority of the people are opposed to this bill, the morons keep shoving it through for passage.

So, in typical fashion, the back room deals will continue, promises of favoritism for those on the fence to support the bill will go forward regardless of the wishes of those that elected these morons. Once again, the American people get to bend over and take if from our elected officials. The Socialist regime in Washington is bound and determined to pass this bill no matter what is compromised in the process.

Interesting Web Site

I found this site and love their products. Just the perfect gift for your favorite Right Wing Extremist.

Deliver Us From Liberals

Here are one of their better products... every Texan needs this t-shirt!

Transparent and Bi-Partisan?

Where do I start? How about this little debacle that our government is attempting to shove down our throats under the guise of resolving the health care "crisis"?

Let me preface this latest rant by stating that I have been without health insurance for the last 27 months. This is largely by choice as I am self employed and the cost of a policy for myself is staggering. I weighed the financial aspect of purchasing a policy versus the amount I typically spend in a year on medical care. With only minor use of my abacus, I discovered that, barring something catastrophic, I would spend about 10% of what a policy would cost on health care per year. Simple arithmetic told me that I could gamble that I would be able to maintain my relatively good health and save a ton of money by just paying cash.

Funny thing is I found out on my first visit to the doctor, that I actually would receive a cash discount for not using insurance. In other words, I would save even more money over the cost of a policy. By taking a look at what my portion of the cost of my group coverage was costing me previously ($300/mo), and factoring in the co-pay for each doctor visit ($15), the group plan would cost me roughly $915 per quarter with a single visit to the doctor. My doctor charges me $65 per visit before my 15% discount for paying cash bringing my standard office visit to $55.25.

Once again, a bit of bead movement on the abacus told me that I could visit the doctor and pay cash 16 times a quarter and still break even. Now since there are 12 weeks in a quarter, that means I could go visit my doctor every week and still save money. Now where is the crisis?

The Health Care "Crisis"

Today I read a couple of news articles that had very similar content. Each of these stated that the Democrats are planning on foregoing a number of the standard procedural steps to get the two versions of the bill to BHO's desk and signed before his state of the union address in February. This is all to avoid the potential that some cooler heads in our government may prevail and keep the bill from passing.

In that same article, it mentions that a number of the attorneys general are going to challenge the constitutionality of the deal that was made with Senator Ben Nelson from Nebraska to get him to sign on to the bill. I am proud to say, that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot is one of those ready to challenge this deal.

Now I recall one of the cornerstones of BHO's campaign was a more transparent and bi-partisan administration. What I am seeing here is a bill that is split almost exactly along party lines (Let's exclude the sweetheart deal Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson was offered for his support for now). That is hardly bi-partisan in even the wildest imagination. When sweetheart deals are made to gain support and standard procedural steps are circumvented in the name of passage of a bill, then something is rotten in Washington.

This whole bill reeks in so many ways it is pathetic. Being somewhat of a critical thinker I have to ask myself a number of questions that seem to escape the powers to be:

First, if there is indeed a health care "crisis", then why will the bills not go into effect until 2013 or 2014 and the taxes will start immediately. So, let me get this straight, our government, deeply in debt right now, is telling me that I need to start paying for something today that I will not receive for four or five years? Why, if there is a "crisis" doesn't the bill take effect immediately to resolve this issue? Could this be just a disguised tax increase that will swell the coffers to allow for doling out more pork projects? Now we all know full well how poorly our government acts as a steward for our money. Recent bailouts indicate that this administration will already spend money that it does not have. What will happen to this money that is to be earmarked to resolve this "crisis"?

Now second, let's question the constitutionality of this bill. I read through the whopping four pages of the document that set up this great country. No place in that document is the power to dictate health care granted to our government. If we expand the search to include the the Bill of Rights, there also is nothing that grants the government that power. In fact, the Tenth Amendment clearly states; "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people". In other words, under the Constitution, the government does not have the power to force us to purchase anything. This includes a government run/mandated health care plan.

Since 1884, our leaders have taken the following oath upon assuming their duties as our representatives: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

In a previous post, I mention the oath that I took when I enlisted in the U.S. Navy. That oath also cited the defense of the Constitution as one of my obligations. I still feel that I am bound by that oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Now I ask, why can't our elected officials stand by the promise that they made to each of us to protect and defend our rights while they are still in office? Since the powers are not granted to the government, then the bill is not constitutional and is therefore illegal.