1. In 1968, Professor Paul Ehrlich, Vice President Gore's hero and mentor, predicted there would be a major food shortage in the U.S. and "in the 1970s ... hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." Ehrlich forecasted that 65 million Americans would die of starvation between 1980 and 1989, and by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6 million. Ehrlich's predictions about England were gloomier: "If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." World-wide “population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” FALSE!
2. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.” Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day 1970. FALSE!
3. “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University, 1970. FALSE!
4. “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” Life Magazine, January 1970. FALSE!
5. “Air pollution is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich in an interview in Mademoiselle Magazine, April 1970. FALSE!
6. Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "... civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind." That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned, in Look Magazine, that by 1995 "... somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." FALSE!
7. “By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half,” Life Magazine, January 1970. FALSE!
8. “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970. FALSE!.
9. At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind." FALSE!
10. C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said, "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed." FALSE!
11. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970. FALSE!
12. In 1972, a report was written for the Club of Rome warning the world would run out of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin by 1987 and petroleum, copper, lead and natural gas by 1992. FALSE, FALSE, FALSE and FALSE!
13. Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book "The Doomsday Book," said Americans were using 50 percent of the world's resources and "by 2000 they [Americans] will, if permitted, be using all of them." FALSE!
14. “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
15. In 1975, the Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning, "The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000." “We have about five more years at the outside to do something.” Kenneth Watt, ecologist. FALSE!
16. “We are prospecting for the very last of our resources and using up the nonrenewable things many times faster than we are finding new ones.” Martin Litton, Sierra Club director, 1970 FALSE!
17. “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
18. “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, 1970. FALSE!
19. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
20. "The Sky is falling" said Chicken Little, undated. FALSE!
Let's not forget the man-made global warming hoax of the last decade with the poster boy Al Gore who has already has made about $500 million promoting and investing in "green energy" schemes and betting on carbon trading.
Many of the false predictions about man-made global warming by film producer, Nobel Prize winner and profiteer Al Gore and by the corrupt climatologists who have promoted this hoax have been exposed.
1. 1995 was the warmest year in the past 15 years, cooling has occurred over the last decade.
2. Prof Phil Jones, the coordinator of the global warming prediction admitted his record keeping was "not as good as it should be" and he "may have lost" (conveniently)the data from around the globe used to show the infamous "hockey stick" curve that showed temperature flat for hundreds of years and recently rising sharply. (This curve is what Al Gore and numerous climatologists used to reach the so-called "overwhelming consensus" that man-made warming was occurring),
3. Prof. Phil Jones admitted that the Earth was warmer in medieval times than it is now (not previously admitted by man-made warming advocates and not shown in the hockey stick plot)
4. Prof. Phil Jones admitted that the Earth has gone through "natural heating periods"
5. The two latest warming periods, 1910 to 1940 and 1975 to 1998, could be explained by naturally occurring events and man may have had nothing to do with it (like solar flares affecting cloud formation),:
6. The U.N.'s IPCC 2007 Nobel Prize prize winning report made false claims that the Himalayan glaciers are melting (the claims were traced to media hype, false quotes attributed to the scientist who studied the Himalayan glaciers and no actual data,
7. The IPCC made false claims about sea levels rising in the Netherlands, now refuted by scientists in the Netherlands
8. The IPCC used faulty data from China to "prove" global warming.
9. Last week, the president of the Royal Statistical Society in England, said that the graph shaped like an ice hockey stick that has been used to represent the recent rise in global temperatures had been compiled using “inappropriate” (statistical) methods. “It used a particular statistical technique that exaggerated the effect [of recent warming]”.
Again, Happy Earth Day; it's good for a few laughs.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Thursday, April 22, 2010
ObamaCare Highlights and the "No New Taxes" Hype
Everything in the ObamaCare bill is not fully exposed or understood as yet but some of the highlights can now be listed by year as they kick in. ObamaCare is supposed to be coming to you with "no new taxes" from Washington if you are gullible enough or ignorant enough to believe that. This is a sneaky concept because it plays on words that don't count fees, fines, secondary taxes that will be passed along as costs, insurance premium increases and mandated state tax increases as "new taxes" from Washington. It doesn't count taxes that will automatically increase if the Democratic Congress does nothing and lets current tax rates expire (the so-called Bush tax cuts) and revert to higher rates.
Over a period of a few years, $500 billion will be cut from Medicare, while millions more "baby boomer enter Medicare, which will eventually lead to rationing of some diagnostic tests and surgeries; it happened in Canada and in the U.K.
ObamaCare creates 58 or so new federal agencies or bureaus; a massive new bureaucracy with so many government worker and rules that it cannot help but get between health providers and patients.
ObamaCare has thousands of pork projects that have to do with 'wellness", exercise facilities, inner city health food stores, and on and on, all directed to route pork to those who support the Democrats.
Here are a few of the specific highlights of the health insurance reform aspects:
2010: Establishes a requirement to provide coverage for non-dependent children up to age 26 to all existing health insurance plans starting six months after enactment (citizens over he age of 18 or at least 21 used to be adults, now they are children again in the "nanny" state).
2010: Health insurance companies will be banned from excluding coverage for pre-existing conditions for children. Adults with pre-existing conditions will be eligible for coverage into high risk health insurance pools until future health care exchanges are up and running.
Health insurance companies will be prohibited from levying annual limits and lifetime limits on coverage. All new health insurance plans must provide coverage for preventative services with no out of pocket cost (all health plans will be forced to comply by 2018). Those companies that offer health benefits for early retirees ages 55 to 64 will receive assistance from a temporary reinsurance program. All new health insurance plans will have to comply with new regulations that lay out an appeals process for when health insurance claims are denied. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts that insurance premiums will increase by $1000 per individual or $2100 per family (but this is "no new taxes").
2011: Increases the additional tax for Health Savings Account withdrawals prior to age 65 that are not used for qualified medical expenses from 10% to 20%.
2011: Everyone earning more than $200,000 as an individual or $250,000 for those who file married filing jointly will have their Medicare payroll tax increased from the current 1.45% to 2.35%.
2012: Reduces the benchmark payment for Medicare Advantage plans that cover 20% of all seniors.
2013: Imposes a 2.3% excise tax on all medical device manufacturers. (Ooops, this looks like a new tax that will certainly be passed on to the consumer).
2013: A $2,500 annual cap will be placed on all contributions to flexible spending accounts (amount indexed for inflation each subsequent year). (This will penalize everyone who has a FSA with higher limits but "no new taxes").
2013: The current tax deduction that employers receive for subsidizing the prescription drug costs of their employees who are eligible for Medicare Part D will be done away with. (Guess who will pay for this with lower raises or fewer benefits? But "no new taxes").
2013: The minimum threshold for being able to claim an itemized deduction for health care expenses increased from 7.5% to 10% of AGI although those over the age of 65 can stay at the 7.5% threshold through 2016. (Wait a minute!! What happened to the "no new taxes? Well, this is after the next presidential election.)
2013: The hospital insurance tax will increase .09% for those who earn more than $200,000 ($250,000 for those married filing jointly).
2013: Additional requirements on health insurance companies to implement uniform standards for exchanging health care information, electronic communication, and other measures to reduce insurance company administrative costs. (Sure to drive up premiums more as administrative costs go up, but "no new taxes".)
2014: All US citizens will be FORCEDto have health insurance coverage considered acceptable by the US Government or else pay a fine of $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, $695 in 2016 (capped at 2.5% of AGI). All of the fines are per person per year except for families have a cap on the total fine of $2,250 and the fine amount for children is half of the adult fine. (This smells like a new tax but they call it a "penalty"! )
2014: Businesses with 50 or more employees will face a fine of either $2,000 or $3,000 per employee for not offering health insurance coverage. (here we go again with a "fine" but "no new taxes".)
2014: Eligibility standards are implemented for newly formed health care exchanges. (This is a code word for government deciding what needs to be in every policy and that you will have to pay for it whether you want that coverage or not.)
2014: Health insurance companies are prohibited from using an individual’s health status to issue a policy or renew a policy. All pre-existing conditions must be covered and higher health insurance rates cannot be levied because of health, gender, etc. (Higher premiums for all, but "no new taxes".)
2014: The eligibility standards for Medicaid will be changed to 133% of poverty for those who are not considered elderly. (Expect higher state taxes to cover this Medicaid increase, but the federal government can claim "no new taxes" from them.)
2014: New annual fees will be levied on all health insurance providers based on an insurance companies market share and whose total premiums exceed $25 million. (Now, who will eventually pay for these "annual fees? Not the companies!)
2017: States may allow businesses with more than 100 employees to buy insurance on their exchange.
2018: The “Cadillac” health insurance plan tax will kick in. A 40% excise tax will be levied on all employer provided health insurance plans costing more than $27,500 for families and $10,200 for individuals. (Watch the unions slip by with an exemption beyond 2018 if Democrats are in control.)
IF ANYONE THINKS THIS WILL REDUCE THE DEFICIT THEY HAVE LOST CONTACT WITH REALITY. ONCE OBAMACARE IS IN FULL SWING, AROUND 2013-2014, INDEPENDENT ECONOMISTS FORECAST DEFICITS OF ANYWHERE FROM $200 TO 500 BILLION PER YEAR. WE HAVE THE MODELS FOR SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE AND MEDICAID TO SUPPORT THE FORECAST OF SUCH DEFICITS. THIS WILL DESTROY THE AMERICAN ECONOMY AND STANDARD OF LIVING AS WE KNOW IT TODAY.
Over a period of a few years, $500 billion will be cut from Medicare, while millions more "baby boomer enter Medicare, which will eventually lead to rationing of some diagnostic tests and surgeries; it happened in Canada and in the U.K.
ObamaCare creates 58 or so new federal agencies or bureaus; a massive new bureaucracy with so many government worker and rules that it cannot help but get between health providers and patients.
ObamaCare has thousands of pork projects that have to do with 'wellness", exercise facilities, inner city health food stores, and on and on, all directed to route pork to those who support the Democrats.
Here are a few of the specific highlights of the health insurance reform aspects:
2010: Establishes a requirement to provide coverage for non-dependent children up to age 26 to all existing health insurance plans starting six months after enactment (citizens over he age of 18 or at least 21 used to be adults, now they are children again in the "nanny" state).
2010: Health insurance companies will be banned from excluding coverage for pre-existing conditions for children. Adults with pre-existing conditions will be eligible for coverage into high risk health insurance pools until future health care exchanges are up and running.
Health insurance companies will be prohibited from levying annual limits and lifetime limits on coverage. All new health insurance plans must provide coverage for preventative services with no out of pocket cost (all health plans will be forced to comply by 2018). Those companies that offer health benefits for early retirees ages 55 to 64 will receive assistance from a temporary reinsurance program. All new health insurance plans will have to comply with new regulations that lay out an appeals process for when health insurance claims are denied. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts that insurance premiums will increase by $1000 per individual or $2100 per family (but this is "no new taxes").
2011: Increases the additional tax for Health Savings Account withdrawals prior to age 65 that are not used for qualified medical expenses from 10% to 20%.
2011: Everyone earning more than $200,000 as an individual or $250,000 for those who file married filing jointly will have their Medicare payroll tax increased from the current 1.45% to 2.35%.
2012: Reduces the benchmark payment for Medicare Advantage plans that cover 20% of all seniors.
2013: Imposes a 2.3% excise tax on all medical device manufacturers. (Ooops, this looks like a new tax that will certainly be passed on to the consumer).
2013: A $2,500 annual cap will be placed on all contributions to flexible spending accounts (amount indexed for inflation each subsequent year). (This will penalize everyone who has a FSA with higher limits but "no new taxes").
2013: The current tax deduction that employers receive for subsidizing the prescription drug costs of their employees who are eligible for Medicare Part D will be done away with. (Guess who will pay for this with lower raises or fewer benefits? But "no new taxes").
2013: The minimum threshold for being able to claim an itemized deduction for health care expenses increased from 7.5% to 10% of AGI although those over the age of 65 can stay at the 7.5% threshold through 2016. (Wait a minute!! What happened to the "no new taxes? Well, this is after the next presidential election.)
2013: The hospital insurance tax will increase .09% for those who earn more than $200,000 ($250,000 for those married filing jointly).
2013: Additional requirements on health insurance companies to implement uniform standards for exchanging health care information, electronic communication, and other measures to reduce insurance company administrative costs. (Sure to drive up premiums more as administrative costs go up, but "no new taxes".)
2014: All US citizens will be FORCEDto have health insurance coverage considered acceptable by the US Government or else pay a fine of $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, $695 in 2016 (capped at 2.5% of AGI). All of the fines are per person per year except for families have a cap on the total fine of $2,250 and the fine amount for children is half of the adult fine. (This smells like a new tax but they call it a "penalty"! )
2014: Businesses with 50 or more employees will face a fine of either $2,000 or $3,000 per employee for not offering health insurance coverage. (here we go again with a "fine" but "no new taxes".)
2014: Eligibility standards are implemented for newly formed health care exchanges. (This is a code word for government deciding what needs to be in every policy and that you will have to pay for it whether you want that coverage or not.)
2014: Health insurance companies are prohibited from using an individual’s health status to issue a policy or renew a policy. All pre-existing conditions must be covered and higher health insurance rates cannot be levied because of health, gender, etc. (Higher premiums for all, but "no new taxes".)
2014: The eligibility standards for Medicaid will be changed to 133% of poverty for those who are not considered elderly. (Expect higher state taxes to cover this Medicaid increase, but the federal government can claim "no new taxes" from them.)
2014: New annual fees will be levied on all health insurance providers based on an insurance companies market share and whose total premiums exceed $25 million. (Now, who will eventually pay for these "annual fees? Not the companies!)
2017: States may allow businesses with more than 100 employees to buy insurance on their exchange.
2018: The “Cadillac” health insurance plan tax will kick in. A 40% excise tax will be levied on all employer provided health insurance plans costing more than $27,500 for families and $10,200 for individuals. (Watch the unions slip by with an exemption beyond 2018 if Democrats are in control.)
IF ANYONE THINKS THIS WILL REDUCE THE DEFICIT THEY HAVE LOST CONTACT WITH REALITY. ONCE OBAMACARE IS IN FULL SWING, AROUND 2013-2014, INDEPENDENT ECONOMISTS FORECAST DEFICITS OF ANYWHERE FROM $200 TO 500 BILLION PER YEAR. WE HAVE THE MODELS FOR SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE AND MEDICAID TO SUPPORT THE FORECAST OF SUCH DEFICITS. THIS WILL DESTROY THE AMERICAN ECONOMY AND STANDARD OF LIVING AS WE KNOW IT TODAY.
No New Taxes
If Obama and the Democrats do NOTHING for the remainder of 2010, then taxes will increase for 100 % of Americans. Here is how it will happen. If there is no legislation to continue the Bush tax cuts, then the tax rate will go up for all income tax brackets: wealthy, middle class, lower class. Obama will claim these are not "new taxes" just the reinstituting of "old taxes" which Bush should never have cut (the old "blame it on Bush" manta of Obama and the Democrats.) Also, corporate taxes, capital gains, dividends and inheritance taxes will incease. With ObamaCare, health insurance premiums will start to go up, but of course, Obama will blame the "greedy" insurance companies and not admit that his health plan forced premiums to go up (an indorect tax). Many other fees and indirect taxes will start to appear as passed along to the consumer as a result of ObamaCare. State income taxes will have to increase as ObamaCare forces states to increase the rolls of those on Medicaid. This is easy to blame on the states, so once again slick Obama thinks he can claim he did not increase your taxes. In the longer term, the huge budget deficits and increased national debt will devalue the dollar, causing inflation that will hit everyone; and once again Obama will blame Bush or someone else for inflation and claim he did not raise taxes although the standard of living for most Americans will decrease. Only the most ignorant and blind Obama puppets will fall for these excuses.
One More Nail in the Global Warming Hoax Coffin
A key piece of evidence in climate change science was slammed as “exaggerated” on last week by the UK’s leading statistician, in a vindication of claims that global warming skeptics have been making for years. Professor David Hand, president of the Royal Statistical Society, said that a graph shaped like an ice hockey stick that has been used to represent the recent rise in global temperatures had been compiled using “inappropriate” methods. “It used a particular statistical technique that exaggerated the effect [of recent warming],” he said.
Goldman-Sachs is the Boogeyman to Justify Takeover of Financial Industry by Obama
Goldman Sachs was probably negligent, if not complicit, in the huge losses incurred by its investors. Meanwhile, there can be no doubt that the timing and method of pursuing a redress in this matter is politically motivated by Obama to once again create a boogeyman that can help ram through a piece of legislation designed to give government huge control over the financial industry and maybe even over other corporations deemed "too big to fail". It's part of the Obama-Democratic playbook to create a boogeyman. Next, we can expect those who oppose Obama's financial regulatory reform to be labeled "racists".
1. Goldman-Sachs and the entire investment banking industry needs better regulation with regard to highly leveraged instruments such as derivatives based upon risky mortgages. The problem is just as much ENFORCEMENT as it is REGULATION. The SEC, the bond rating firms and every board of directors of investment banks were highly negligent or incompetent leading up to the 2008 credit crisis. They had the authority and the means to head off the economic crash but didn't do their jobs; it was not a lack of regulatory rules that caused the crisis.
2. Hedge funds have very little activity in hedging against the market going either up or down at various times; "hedge" is a misnomer to what these funds do. The hedge funds have turned into big gambling ventures dealing in highly leveraged financial instruments much more often betting with the direction of the market than "hedging " against it. Hedge funds need to be regulated, the leverage of any instrument needs to be reduced and more importantly, regulations need to be ENFORCED in an timely manner, not just after a disaster.
3. The biggest financial gambling houses, with virtually no enforcement of regulations and, worse yet, protection by politicians, are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These are government entities that have accumulated far bigger losses than any private Wall Street banks. Many politicians had as much or more effect in causing the financial crisis of 2008, one person who stands above all others in causing the meltdown is Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) for leading the effort to force banks to make highly risky loans and then blocking all attempts at regulation of Fannie and Freddie for 15 years. His buddy, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) aided in the effort to block all regulation of Fannie and Freddie; now like all two-faced lying politicians, Chris Dodd is leading the effort in the senate to ram through Obama's financial regulatory reform which is not as much reform as it is a vehicle for the government to take over and run the entire investment and banking industries.
4. There are a few simple actions that could be taken to reduce the risk of future financial meltdowns without giving the government the power to take over these industries, such as: (a) reducing allowed leverage ratios, (b)re-instituting the separation of commercial banking and investment banking; under Bill Clinton in 1999 the Glass Steagall Act was repealed which allowed commercial banks who were supposed to deal in low risk loans to get into competition with investment houses and offer high risk instruments such as mortgage backed securities and collateralized debt obligations, (c) increase the tax on stock trades to dampen the volume of day trading which has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of companies, (d) do not give any financial institution cover through bailouts as "too big to fail", and (e) lower the tax rate on long term capital gains and dividends and (f) put immediate limits on Freddie and Fannie with no more risky loans so "poor people" can own houses and have a plan to turn these government entities into private sector institutions.
5. These simple changes do not require a 1000 page financial reform act as proposed by Obama and will not increase the size of government but they would dampen speculation, the level of outright gambling, the opportunities for fraud or negligence and would encourage safe long term investments in the private sector.
1. Goldman-Sachs and the entire investment banking industry needs better regulation with regard to highly leveraged instruments such as derivatives based upon risky mortgages. The problem is just as much ENFORCEMENT as it is REGULATION. The SEC, the bond rating firms and every board of directors of investment banks were highly negligent or incompetent leading up to the 2008 credit crisis. They had the authority and the means to head off the economic crash but didn't do their jobs; it was not a lack of regulatory rules that caused the crisis.
2. Hedge funds have very little activity in hedging against the market going either up or down at various times; "hedge" is a misnomer to what these funds do. The hedge funds have turned into big gambling ventures dealing in highly leveraged financial instruments much more often betting with the direction of the market than "hedging " against it. Hedge funds need to be regulated, the leverage of any instrument needs to be reduced and more importantly, regulations need to be ENFORCED in an timely manner, not just after a disaster.
3. The biggest financial gambling houses, with virtually no enforcement of regulations and, worse yet, protection by politicians, are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These are government entities that have accumulated far bigger losses than any private Wall Street banks. Many politicians had as much or more effect in causing the financial crisis of 2008, one person who stands above all others in causing the meltdown is Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) for leading the effort to force banks to make highly risky loans and then blocking all attempts at regulation of Fannie and Freddie for 15 years. His buddy, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) aided in the effort to block all regulation of Fannie and Freddie; now like all two-faced lying politicians, Chris Dodd is leading the effort in the senate to ram through Obama's financial regulatory reform which is not as much reform as it is a vehicle for the government to take over and run the entire investment and banking industries.
4. There are a few simple actions that could be taken to reduce the risk of future financial meltdowns without giving the government the power to take over these industries, such as: (a) reducing allowed leverage ratios, (b)re-instituting the separation of commercial banking and investment banking; under Bill Clinton in 1999 the Glass Steagall Act was repealed which allowed commercial banks who were supposed to deal in low risk loans to get into competition with investment houses and offer high risk instruments such as mortgage backed securities and collateralized debt obligations, (c) increase the tax on stock trades to dampen the volume of day trading which has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of companies, (d) do not give any financial institution cover through bailouts as "too big to fail", and (e) lower the tax rate on long term capital gains and dividends and (f) put immediate limits on Freddie and Fannie with no more risky loans so "poor people" can own houses and have a plan to turn these government entities into private sector institutions.
5. These simple changes do not require a 1000 page financial reform act as proposed by Obama and will not increase the size of government but they would dampen speculation, the level of outright gambling, the opportunities for fraud or negligence and would encourage safe long term investments in the private sector.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Obama gathered leaders of about 50 nations to talk about ways of safe-guarding weapons grade plutonium and uranium. Obama blathered on in generalities about non-proliferation and reducing nuclear arsenals with some ideal vision of a nuclear-free world. Unfortunately, Obama's prepared remarks did not specifically mention Iran or North Korea or that these rogue dictatorships with strong ties to terrorists could soon be able to supply nuclear weapons to Islamic Terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah, based either upon common ideology (Iran) or for money (North Korea). Why did Obama avoid these hot issues in his remarks? The answer is simple, Obama has no answer for the undeterred continuing development of nuclear weapons by Iran and North Korea. All of Obama's sweet talking, alternating with threats of sanctions and isolation, have had absolutely ZERO IMPACT ON IRAN AND NORTH KOREA. The leaders of these rogue nations are not charmed by Obama as were the throngs of Europeans when Obama apologized for America. Iran and North Korea continue to laugh at Obama's naive approaches.
Examine the "nuclear weapons club" of eight nations. Does anyone think that Russia or China are the big nuclear threats to the United States? Does anyone believe that India, England or France will wage nuclear war? As for Pakistan, the biggest threat is whether Islamic radicals will take over the government at some point and supply Islamic Terrorists with weapons; but it is not realistic to expect Pakistan to dismantle all of its weapons so the best policy is to support the Pakistani government against the Islamic radicals. Finally, some Islamic nations like Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia came to the conference pandering to the Islamic radicals by complaining about Israel's nuclear capability. However, this is just political grandstanding. It is not believable that the leaders of these countries actually think Israel is a threat to them; in reality they would be at much greater risk of being incorporated into a greater Persian empire if Iran developed into nuclear weapons power.
So, once again, with his nuclear non-proliferation policy, Obama reveals that he is either too naive to set foreign policy or is intentionally weakening the United States as part of a "spread the power around" global philosophy. Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, the Palestinians and others walk all over Obama at every turn as do other nations. Obama endangers our allies and panders to dictatorships and leftist governments, the modern Jimmy Carter, although more dangerous because Obama has power.
Examine the "nuclear weapons club" of eight nations. Does anyone think that Russia or China are the big nuclear threats to the United States? Does anyone believe that India, England or France will wage nuclear war? As for Pakistan, the biggest threat is whether Islamic radicals will take over the government at some point and supply Islamic Terrorists with weapons; but it is not realistic to expect Pakistan to dismantle all of its weapons so the best policy is to support the Pakistani government against the Islamic radicals. Finally, some Islamic nations like Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia came to the conference pandering to the Islamic radicals by complaining about Israel's nuclear capability. However, this is just political grandstanding. It is not believable that the leaders of these countries actually think Israel is a threat to them; in reality they would be at much greater risk of being incorporated into a greater Persian empire if Iran developed into nuclear weapons power.
So, once again, with his nuclear non-proliferation policy, Obama reveals that he is either too naive to set foreign policy or is intentionally weakening the United States as part of a "spread the power around" global philosophy. Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, the Palestinians and others walk all over Obama at every turn as do other nations. Obama endangers our allies and panders to dictatorships and leftist governments, the modern Jimmy Carter, although more dangerous because Obama has power.
Extending Jobless Benefits - The Down Side
Congress is debating whether to extend unemployment benefits for another 20 weeks. This is an unending path of people staying unemployed and Congress, led by Democrats and supported by the Obama administration, trying to play the "compassionate" role and handing out more money. Meanwhile, there are some facts that get tossed aside by the Democrats.
First, they pledged to move to a "pay as you go" budgeting system; but this was all political rhetoric on the of part of the Democrats with no intent of actually having the revenue to pay for the expense. There is NO PLAN to fund the $90 billion jobless benefits through any increase in revenue.
Second, there are so many PORK PROJECTS in the phony Stimulus bill and in in ObamaCare, that hundreds of billions could be available for jobless benefits but are not available due to the irresponsible spending and the $1.4 trillion deficits being run up by Obama and the Democrats. If Obama wanted to decrease unemployment he would have reduced corporate, capital gains and income taxes. But he is more interested in making history with major social legislation, not something mundane like creating jobs.
Third, one study after another has shown that extending jobless benefits gives people an incentive to remain out of work. For example, one of Obama's own economists, Alan Kruger, concluded in a 2008 study that "job searches increase sharply in the weeks prior to benefit exhaustion". Obama's own White House economic advisor, Lawrence Summers wrote in 1999 in the Concise encyclopedia of Unemployment that "The second way government assistance programs contribute to long-term unemployment is by providing an incentive NOT to work. Each unemployed person has a 'reservation wage' the minimum wage he or she insists on getting before accepting a job. Unemployment insurance and other social assistance programs increase the reservation wage, causing an unemployed person to remain unemployed".
Fourth, giving people an additional incentive to stay out of work puts them at long term risk for remaining out of work as they lose critical skills and contacts. Options such as changing type of job, relocating to different cities or states and retraining get passed over as the unemployed remain comfortable with jobless benefits until it is too late to rejoin the workforce.
It's ironical, that the Democrats think they will appear as the compassionate party by extending jobless benefits but in the end this will help keep unemployment higher and therefore work against them in the election.
First, they pledged to move to a "pay as you go" budgeting system; but this was all political rhetoric on the of part of the Democrats with no intent of actually having the revenue to pay for the expense. There is NO PLAN to fund the $90 billion jobless benefits through any increase in revenue.
Second, there are so many PORK PROJECTS in the phony Stimulus bill and in in ObamaCare, that hundreds of billions could be available for jobless benefits but are not available due to the irresponsible spending and the $1.4 trillion deficits being run up by Obama and the Democrats. If Obama wanted to decrease unemployment he would have reduced corporate, capital gains and income taxes. But he is more interested in making history with major social legislation, not something mundane like creating jobs.
Third, one study after another has shown that extending jobless benefits gives people an incentive to remain out of work. For example, one of Obama's own economists, Alan Kruger, concluded in a 2008 study that "job searches increase sharply in the weeks prior to benefit exhaustion". Obama's own White House economic advisor, Lawrence Summers wrote in 1999 in the Concise encyclopedia of Unemployment that "The second way government assistance programs contribute to long-term unemployment is by providing an incentive NOT to work. Each unemployed person has a 'reservation wage' the minimum wage he or she insists on getting before accepting a job. Unemployment insurance and other social assistance programs increase the reservation wage, causing an unemployed person to remain unemployed".
Fourth, giving people an additional incentive to stay out of work puts them at long term risk for remaining out of work as they lose critical skills and contacts. Options such as changing type of job, relocating to different cities or states and retraining get passed over as the unemployed remain comfortable with jobless benefits until it is too late to rejoin the workforce.
It's ironical, that the Democrats think they will appear as the compassionate party by extending jobless benefits but in the end this will help keep unemployment higher and therefore work against them in the election.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Obama Gets to Appoint Another Supreme Court Justice
Republicans are calling for Obama to appoint a "mainstream" judge to the Supreme Court replacing the retiring Justice Stevens
Obama and "mainstream" is an oxymoron.
Obama has spent his life surrounding himself with, and adopted his political-social philosophy from, far left radicals, criminals, racists and America-haters like Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Louis Farrakhan, Michael Pfleger, Van Jones, Rashid Khalid, Bernadine Dohrn, Harold Koh, Mark Lloyd, Cass Sunstein, Tony Rezko, Saul Alinsky, Henry Louis Gates Jr, Frank Marshall Davis, Susan Rice, Eric Holder and on and on.
Many of these have made it into the Obama Administration. If you don't know who they are, check them out with Google.
Now, why would anyone expect a centrist nominee for the Supreme Court?
Obama has stated clearly that he intends to "transform" America. His first supreme Court appointee, Sotomayer, has a record of ignoring the Constitution and being reversed many times as a lower court judge.
We can expect another Sotomayer at best, and perhaps someone even more radical who wants to set social policy from the judicial bench.
Obama and "mainstream" is an oxymoron.
Obama has spent his life surrounding himself with, and adopted his political-social philosophy from, far left radicals, criminals, racists and America-haters like Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Louis Farrakhan, Michael Pfleger, Van Jones, Rashid Khalid, Bernadine Dohrn, Harold Koh, Mark Lloyd, Cass Sunstein, Tony Rezko, Saul Alinsky, Henry Louis Gates Jr, Frank Marshall Davis, Susan Rice, Eric Holder and on and on.
Many of these have made it into the Obama Administration. If you don't know who they are, check them out with Google.
Now, why would anyone expect a centrist nominee for the Supreme Court?
Obama has stated clearly that he intends to "transform" America. His first supreme Court appointee, Sotomayer, has a record of ignoring the Constitution and being reversed many times as a lower court judge.
We can expect another Sotomayer at best, and perhaps someone even more radical who wants to set social policy from the judicial bench.
Value Added Tax (VAT) -What Are the Prospects?
The Value Added Tax (VAT) like in Europe is essentially a consumption tax attached to the price of everything you buy. In Europe it is 15% or higher and despite promises by politicians, income taxes have not been reduced by the VAT. Lying politicians? What a surprise! One of Obama's economic advisors has floated the idea that a VAT in the United States is the only way to combat the growing debt. Naturally, ideas like cutting spending, even for entitlement programs, and cutting taxes to grow the economy and thus increase tax revenues don't occur in the minds of the leftists in the Obama administration. Many of Obama's actions and statements reveal that he wants to create a socialistic economy of the European style or worse.
A VAT would push the United States well down the path to socialism. The one bright spot is that if Obama and Democrats passed a VAT, it might be the best way to wake up those puppets still fawning over Obama. It would be painful for all, until repealed, but all other hidden taxes, fees, health insurance premium increases, eventual impact of inflation, ObamaCare forcing states to increase taxes to cover Medicaid adds and so on are subject to demagoguery by Obama; it will always be someone else's fault. However, a VAT, is "in your face" and even those that don't pay income taxes will get hit by a VAT. Obama and the Democrats know this will hit many of their base, so they will probably hold off until after 2010 and even after 2012, before trying to pass a VAT. This is one more reason why it is so important to take Congress away from the control of the leftists in 2010 and 2012 and to defeat Obama in 2012
A VAT would push the United States well down the path to socialism. The one bright spot is that if Obama and Democrats passed a VAT, it might be the best way to wake up those puppets still fawning over Obama. It would be painful for all, until repealed, but all other hidden taxes, fees, health insurance premium increases, eventual impact of inflation, ObamaCare forcing states to increase taxes to cover Medicaid adds and so on are subject to demagoguery by Obama; it will always be someone else's fault. However, a VAT, is "in your face" and even those that don't pay income taxes will get hit by a VAT. Obama and the Democrats know this will hit many of their base, so they will probably hold off until after 2010 and even after 2012, before trying to pass a VAT. This is one more reason why it is so important to take Congress away from the control of the leftists in 2010 and 2012 and to defeat Obama in 2012
Poverty Affects Children of All Races in the United States
WHEN YOU HAVE DUG YOURSELF INTO A DEEP HOLE, THE WAY OUT IS NOT TO KEEP SHOVELING.
Massive government programs to make poor people into wards of the state, started with the Great Society and have been added to ever since with Obama making all previous "nanny state programs" look paltry. These types of programs have destroyed family values, destroyed education, destroyed incentive, motivation and individual responsibility. These types of programs have rarely provided a path out of poverty for any racial group. It is the exceptional child who works out of poverty despite the government programs to keep a status quo with housing subsidies, food stamps, welfare checks, Medicaid, etc.
As of 2008 in the United States, there were 14 million White children living in poverty, 4.3 million Black children, 4.4 million Hispanic children and 0.5 million Asian children; with the minorities in poverty being at about 2.5 times the rate for Whites. Blacks being in poverty as victims of racism is the kind of simple lazy theme we always get from the leftists media and "race baiters" like Al Sharpton or Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post. However, the causes and cure are clearly far more complex and we have 50 or more years of experience to prove that the government cannot spend the way out of poverty through direct subsidies.
Massive government programs to make poor people into wards of the state, started with the Great Society and have been added to ever since with Obama making all previous "nanny state programs" look paltry. These types of programs have destroyed family values, destroyed education, destroyed incentive, motivation and individual responsibility. These types of programs have rarely provided a path out of poverty for any racial group. It is the exceptional child who works out of poverty despite the government programs to keep a status quo with housing subsidies, food stamps, welfare checks, Medicaid, etc.
As of 2008 in the United States, there were 14 million White children living in poverty, 4.3 million Black children, 4.4 million Hispanic children and 0.5 million Asian children; with the minorities in poverty being at about 2.5 times the rate for Whites. Blacks being in poverty as victims of racism is the kind of simple lazy theme we always get from the leftists media and "race baiters" like Al Sharpton or Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post. However, the causes and cure are clearly far more complex and we have 50 or more years of experience to prove that the government cannot spend the way out of poverty through direct subsidies.
The Flap Over Michael Steele as Chairman of the RNC
It's a shame that the issues raised about Michael Steele revolve around race and petty stuff like attending strip clubs.
As an independent conservative, I almost always wind up voting for the Republican candidate as the lesser of two bad choices.
I was hoping for some fresh new leadership and ideas from the RNC and some passion as shown in town hall meetings and by the Tea Party.
Michael Steele seems to be a follower and not a leader; his positions come out well after they have been formulated and expressed by others.
For most of the past year he has had a wimpy approach to criticizing the lies and socialistic policies of Obama.
Steele is bright and articulate but not inspiring and generally too timid. I'm not looking for a lying out-of-control crazy like the Democrat's had with Howard Dean, but someone who is out front with ideas like Newt Gingrich.
As an independent conservative, I almost always wind up voting for the Republican candidate as the lesser of two bad choices.
I was hoping for some fresh new leadership and ideas from the RNC and some passion as shown in town hall meetings and by the Tea Party.
Michael Steele seems to be a follower and not a leader; his positions come out well after they have been formulated and expressed by others.
For most of the past year he has had a wimpy approach to criticizing the lies and socialistic policies of Obama.
Steele is bright and articulate but not inspiring and generally too timid. I'm not looking for a lying out-of-control crazy like the Democrat's had with Howard Dean, but someone who is out front with ideas like Newt Gingrich.
Public Education in Washinton D.C. - The Worst In The Country
The public school system in Washington D. C. ranks 51st among all the states and D.C.
One of the few bright spots in D.C. has been the "DC Opportunity Scholarship Program" where low income families (average $23,000 income) get vouchers for private schools. The kids who attend these are predominantly Black by a large margin and poor but selected because they are highly motivated and good learners. The cost per student is about one-half that of the city-run public school system. Yet, Obama and the Democrats are PHASING OUT the DCOSP because the teachers union opposes vouchers to non-union schools and is afraid of comparisons of achievement between these successful voucher schools and the pitiful public schools where no standards are imposed for teachers or students. While Obama paid lip service to supporting Charter schools, another bright spot for D.C. kids, his education reform package is more focused on punishing those districts that don't comply with providing the same education for everyone and on taking over the college student loan program where everyone can go to college no matter what their capabilities or motivation. More examples of Obama's hypocrisy, pandering to special interests and socialist thinking of educating to the lowest level of quality in order to include everyone in a government controlled education system. By his actions, Obama shows that he doesn't actually care about the Blacks in D.C. (he'll get their votes no matter what) but rather on repaying special interest unions and centralized control of the education system. It's disgusting!
One of the few bright spots in D.C. has been the "DC Opportunity Scholarship Program" where low income families (average $23,000 income) get vouchers for private schools. The kids who attend these are predominantly Black by a large margin and poor but selected because they are highly motivated and good learners. The cost per student is about one-half that of the city-run public school system. Yet, Obama and the Democrats are PHASING OUT the DCOSP because the teachers union opposes vouchers to non-union schools and is afraid of comparisons of achievement between these successful voucher schools and the pitiful public schools where no standards are imposed for teachers or students. While Obama paid lip service to supporting Charter schools, another bright spot for D.C. kids, his education reform package is more focused on punishing those districts that don't comply with providing the same education for everyone and on taking over the college student loan program where everyone can go to college no matter what their capabilities or motivation. More examples of Obama's hypocrisy, pandering to special interests and socialist thinking of educating to the lowest level of quality in order to include everyone in a government controlled education system. By his actions, Obama shows that he doesn't actually care about the Blacks in D.C. (he'll get their votes no matter what) but rather on repaying special interest unions and centralized control of the education system. It's disgusting!
Revisting How ObamaCare Got Passed in Congress
Voting their conscience, and taking into account the will of large majority of the people they represent, has nothing to do with how the Democrats in the Senate or House voted on ObamaCare.
If it weren't for:
- arm twisting about campaign funds from the DNC,
- promises of help in raising money for the next election,
- outright bribes like the Louisiana purchase, Gator aid, Cornhusker kickback and more
- hundreds or thousands of earmarks that get hidden in the Health Bill and in other bills like the Stimulus funds,
- pressure for what office, committees and budget each congressman gets, and
- promises of ambassadorships or other future jobs if they lose the next election
THEN OBAMACARE WOULD HAVE BEEN DEAD IN THE SENATE AND WOULD HAVE BEEN DEAD IN THE HOUSE.
If it weren't for the sneaky Chicago tricks of misusing the "budget reconciliation" process for major social legislation in the Senate, then ObamaCare would never become law.
We have never had such a collection of liars, cheats, and corrupt leaders as Obama, Pelosi and Reid and so on in the history of the United States.
NOW THAT THIS ABOMINATION OF OBAMACARE PASSES, IT IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF A BATTLE WILL GO ON FOR YEARS TO GET RID OF EVERYONE WHO VOTED FOR IT, TO BLOCK ALL FUNDING AND FURTHER MODIFICATIONS AND EVENTUALLY TO ELECT A PRESIDENT WHO WILL SUPPORT A REPEAL OF THIS DISASTER.
If it weren't for:
- arm twisting about campaign funds from the DNC,
- promises of help in raising money for the next election,
- outright bribes like the Louisiana purchase, Gator aid, Cornhusker kickback and more
- hundreds or thousands of earmarks that get hidden in the Health Bill and in other bills like the Stimulus funds,
- pressure for what office, committees and budget each congressman gets, and
- promises of ambassadorships or other future jobs if they lose the next election
THEN OBAMACARE WOULD HAVE BEEN DEAD IN THE SENATE AND WOULD HAVE BEEN DEAD IN THE HOUSE.
If it weren't for the sneaky Chicago tricks of misusing the "budget reconciliation" process for major social legislation in the Senate, then ObamaCare would never become law.
We have never had such a collection of liars, cheats, and corrupt leaders as Obama, Pelosi and Reid and so on in the history of the United States.
NOW THAT THIS ABOMINATION OF OBAMACARE PASSES, IT IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF A BATTLE WILL GO ON FOR YEARS TO GET RID OF EVERYONE WHO VOTED FOR IT, TO BLOCK ALL FUNDING AND FURTHER MODIFICATIONS AND EVENTUALLY TO ELECT A PRESIDENT WHO WILL SUPPORT A REPEAL OF THIS DISASTER.
Monday, April 5, 2010
U.S. Allies Must Be Wondering: If Israel Can't Trust Obama Then Who Can?
The United States and Israel have remained strong allies for 60 years through Democratic and Republican administrations. At times, there have been disagreements on one matter or another, but the United States has always stood by its ally in the face of external threats and Israel has remained the beacon of freedom and hope in the Middle East. Even as Jimmy Carter sold out to Arab monetary contributions after his presidency and as Bill Clinton did the same, the security of Israel remained an unwavering aspect of the United States' foreign policy.
Now, Obama, with his cronies Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Susan Rice, have refused to stand by Israel against the nuclear threat from Iran. In fact, Obama has not only failed to deal with Iran but has made it clear that the United States would not support military action by Israel against the nuclear facilities in Iran. Obama has gone even further to pander to the Muslim world by demanding concessions from Israel to the Hamas led Palestinians, with no guarantees that Israel would get peace in return.
This issue is not just an Israel vs. United States diplomatic impasse. The implications are far greater. First, in the Middle East and neighboring nations, the message must be clear and very troublesome. If the United states will not stand by it's close ally Israel in a time of danger, how can any nation trust the United States during the Obama regime? What must the leaders of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and "friendly" Arab nations like Jordan, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia be thinking? Perhaps they should strike the best deal they can with the radical Islamic forces because the United States cannot be trusted as an ally.
Second, the uncertainty must extend beyond the Middle East. We already saw how Obama double-crossed Poland and the Czech Republic on the missile defense shield and how Obama backed the would be dictator Zeyela of Honduras over those protecting the Honduran constitution. How can South Korea and Japan trust the United States under Obama with respect to aggression from North Korea. how can any former Soviet block country trust the Unite States under Obama with respect to Russia trying to resurrect the Soviet Union.
Obama is worse than than inept in foreign policy, he has shown the world that he lies and cannot be trusted.
Now, Obama, with his cronies Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Susan Rice, have refused to stand by Israel against the nuclear threat from Iran. In fact, Obama has not only failed to deal with Iran but has made it clear that the United States would not support military action by Israel against the nuclear facilities in Iran. Obama has gone even further to pander to the Muslim world by demanding concessions from Israel to the Hamas led Palestinians, with no guarantees that Israel would get peace in return.
This issue is not just an Israel vs. United States diplomatic impasse. The implications are far greater. First, in the Middle East and neighboring nations, the message must be clear and very troublesome. If the United states will not stand by it's close ally Israel in a time of danger, how can any nation trust the United States during the Obama regime? What must the leaders of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and "friendly" Arab nations like Jordan, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia be thinking? Perhaps they should strike the best deal they can with the radical Islamic forces because the United States cannot be trusted as an ally.
Second, the uncertainty must extend beyond the Middle East. We already saw how Obama double-crossed Poland and the Czech Republic on the missile defense shield and how Obama backed the would be dictator Zeyela of Honduras over those protecting the Honduran constitution. How can South Korea and Japan trust the United States under Obama with respect to aggression from North Korea. how can any former Soviet block country trust the Unite States under Obama with respect to Russia trying to resurrect the Soviet Union.
Obama is worse than than inept in foreign policy, he has shown the world that he lies and cannot be trusted.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
"Haters" Come In All Flavors
Liberals who cry "racism" and "haters" when White people criticize Obama's policies should check out the 'HateWatch List of the Southern Poverty Law Center which is a very "liberal" organization (the group that busted the KKK with law suits). They will find mnay White Supremists and presumably White militia groups on the list, but not the Republican Party, FOX news, the Tea Party groups, talk radio networks or other Conservative organizations on this list. However, Liberals will find that hate groups come in all colors" and the HateWatch List also includes:
1. Nation of Islam (and Obama's buddy Louis Farrakhan)
2. New Black Panthers (with their protector Eric Holder)
3. United Nuwanbian Nation of Moors
4. Nation of Yahweh (SPLC)
One nevers hears a peep from the Liberal media about any of these groups; it's too touchy a subject and doesn't fit their preconceived notions.
Or how about calling out some of those that truly spread hate, fear and disrespect, such as:
1. Rosie O'Donnell
2. Michael Moore
3. Louis Farrakhan
4. Jeremiah Wright
5. Sean Penn
6. Huffington Post
7. MoveOn.org
8. Jean Garafalo
9. Bill Maher
10. Nancy Pelosi
11. Keith Olberman
12. CodePink4peace.org
1. Nation of Islam (and Obama's buddy Louis Farrakhan)
2. New Black Panthers (with their protector Eric Holder)
3. United Nuwanbian Nation of Moors
4. Nation of Yahweh (SPLC)
One nevers hears a peep from the Liberal media about any of these groups; it's too touchy a subject and doesn't fit their preconceived notions.
Or how about calling out some of those that truly spread hate, fear and disrespect, such as:
1. Rosie O'Donnell
2. Michael Moore
3. Louis Farrakhan
4. Jeremiah Wright
5. Sean Penn
6. Huffington Post
7. MoveOn.org
8. Jean Garafalo
9. Bill Maher
10. Nancy Pelosi
11. Keith Olberman
12. CodePink4peace.org
"Equality" is Not an Entitlement to a Free Ride
"All men are created equal" does not mean they get an equal amount of stuff through government mandates. It means "equal" in opportunity and in the eyes of the law; all mean have an equal opportunity to succeed or fail at any particular endeavor. It does not mean that the government is to spread the wealth so that everyone gets an equal home, food, clothing, car, household goods or healthcare. As things stand the government already makes sure that almost everyone has a minimum level of food, clothing, shelter and healthcare at what is defined as the "poverty level".
After that, you are on your own in "the land of the free". This "free" does not mean free housing, free food, free college education, or free healthcare. Obama and the Liberal-Progressive-Socialists-Leftists (whatever name they are hiding behind this year) do not seem to grasp these concepts of "equal" and "free".
After that, you are on your own in "the land of the free". This "free" does not mean free housing, free food, free college education, or free healthcare. Obama and the Liberal-Progressive-Socialists-Leftists (whatever name they are hiding behind this year) do not seem to grasp these concepts of "equal" and "free".
Liberals and Education
Watch the legislation under Obama-Pelosi-Reid and the policies of the Department of Education. This is a very precarious time for American education and the direction of education under Obama is bound to degrade the academic and intellectual power of the United States with undesirable consequences for the economy and standard of living.
1. Liberals want to CONTROL THE CONTENT to impose their version of history, justice and economics.
2. Liberals want to "level the playing field" by discouraging achievement of more motivated and intelligent students to bring them down to the LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.
3.Liberals PANDER TO THE TEACHERS UNIONS, in return for political support; these unions are generally opposed to hiring and firing of teachers based upon ability and generally oppose standards for teachers.
4. Liberals use dispersing of PUBLIC EDUCATION FUNDS as one more opportunity FOR FAVORITISM AND BRIBES such as in construction, of schools, buying books, cafeteria services, busing services, etc.
5. Liberals will use government controlled student loans to promote EMPLOYMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR after graduation over employment on the private sector by excusing loans for those going into the public sector.
THE RECENT CUTTING OFF OF FUNDING OF SELECT SCHOOLS FOR SPECIALLY MOTIVATED KIDS IN WASHINGTON D.C. (THE WORST PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM IN THE NATION) AND THE OPPOSITION TO CHARTER SCHOOLS AND A VOUCHER SYSTEM ARE MANIFESTATIONS OF OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS PLAN FOR EDUCATION. EDUCATE EVERYONE TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR!
1. Liberals want to CONTROL THE CONTENT to impose their version of history, justice and economics.
2. Liberals want to "level the playing field" by discouraging achievement of more motivated and intelligent students to bring them down to the LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.
3.Liberals PANDER TO THE TEACHERS UNIONS, in return for political support; these unions are generally opposed to hiring and firing of teachers based upon ability and generally oppose standards for teachers.
4. Liberals use dispersing of PUBLIC EDUCATION FUNDS as one more opportunity FOR FAVORITISM AND BRIBES such as in construction, of schools, buying books, cafeteria services, busing services, etc.
5. Liberals will use government controlled student loans to promote EMPLOYMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR after graduation over employment on the private sector by excusing loans for those going into the public sector.
THE RECENT CUTTING OFF OF FUNDING OF SELECT SCHOOLS FOR SPECIALLY MOTIVATED KIDS IN WASHINGTON D.C. (THE WORST PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM IN THE NATION) AND THE OPPOSITION TO CHARTER SCHOOLS AND A VOUCHER SYSTEM ARE MANIFESTATIONS OF OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS PLAN FOR EDUCATION. EDUCATE EVERYONE TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR!
The Dangers to Gen-Y and the 21st Century Generation
EVERY GENERATION has had its OWN STUPID TIME-WASTING FADS AND PECULIARITIES; so tattoos, living with parents, facebook, twitter and digital gaming are not any worse than comparable signatures of previous generations.
The real dangers for Gen-Y (Millenniums) and those born in the 21st century (Gen-Debt) are:
- a decline in engineering and science education at every level when the Untied States has led the world in economic growth and standard of living for a hundred years through science and engineering in a free market system,
- teachers unions driving mediocrity in education and opposing such advance as charter schools which particularly help inner city kids,
- the welfare system expanding under Johnson that has created a perpetual poor class,
- the potential for government run socialized medicine promoting mediocrity and rationing of health care with huge annual increases in national debt,
-the out-of -control growth of government jobs, benefits and pay relative to private sector jobs, benefits and pay again promoting mediocrity and more national debt,
-the swing toward government backing the majority of mortgages, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, started under Carter, enhanced under Clinton and being the dominant mode of financing under Obama, again promoting defaults and more national debt,
- the de-regulation of the banking investment industry under Clinton and then Barney Frank and Chris Dodd blocking reform for a decade, promoting economic chaos and leading to the economic meltdown in 2008,
- the corruption in Congress, particularly for the past decade, that has made deficit spending, bribery and pork a way of life creating more national debt,
- the potential government takeover of all energy production and costs which would essentially mean a takeover of the entire economy by government which has never run anything successfully, which is destined to decrease the standard of living and increase taxes,
- the "spread the wealth mentality" of the socialist Obama which is a killer of innovation, individual responsibility, investment for job growth and risk taking by entrepreneurs, leading to perpetual high unemployment and a decline in standard of living,
- the deadly threat from Islamic Terrorism which the current administration fails to acknowledge that could bring disaster to the United States.
NONE OF THIS IS BEING CONTROLLED BY GEN-Y OR THE GEN-DEBT; THEY WILL JUST HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES.
The real dangers for Gen-Y (Millenniums) and those born in the 21st century (Gen-Debt) are:
- a decline in engineering and science education at every level when the Untied States has led the world in economic growth and standard of living for a hundred years through science and engineering in a free market system,
- teachers unions driving mediocrity in education and opposing such advance as charter schools which particularly help inner city kids,
- the welfare system expanding under Johnson that has created a perpetual poor class,
- the potential for government run socialized medicine promoting mediocrity and rationing of health care with huge annual increases in national debt,
-the out-of -control growth of government jobs, benefits and pay relative to private sector jobs, benefits and pay again promoting mediocrity and more national debt,
-the swing toward government backing the majority of mortgages, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, started under Carter, enhanced under Clinton and being the dominant mode of financing under Obama, again promoting defaults and more national debt,
- the de-regulation of the banking investment industry under Clinton and then Barney Frank and Chris Dodd blocking reform for a decade, promoting economic chaos and leading to the economic meltdown in 2008,
- the corruption in Congress, particularly for the past decade, that has made deficit spending, bribery and pork a way of life creating more national debt,
- the potential government takeover of all energy production and costs which would essentially mean a takeover of the entire economy by government which has never run anything successfully, which is destined to decrease the standard of living and increase taxes,
- the "spread the wealth mentality" of the socialist Obama which is a killer of innovation, individual responsibility, investment for job growth and risk taking by entrepreneurs, leading to perpetual high unemployment and a decline in standard of living,
- the deadly threat from Islamic Terrorism which the current administration fails to acknowledge that could bring disaster to the United States.
NONE OF THIS IS BEING CONTROLLED BY GEN-Y OR THE GEN-DEBT; THEY WILL JUST HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES.
Americans Are Becoming More Skeptical of Global Warming
The scandals around the claims of man-made global warming have reshaped the thinking of many Americans; AGW now seems to stand for "Al Gore Warming" and not the scientific term "Anthropogenic Global Warming". The majority of Americans now are skeptical or outright don't believe that man-made global warming is real and that even a short period (perhaps 10 to 20 years) of natural (not man-made) global warming has passed or is near its cycle end.
While most Americans cannot follow the detailed technical arguments of the climatologists, they can smell a hoax when some facts are brought out and they can see Al Gore and others as simply profiteers who have created a huge scam for personal gain (something like the Bernie Mad off of climate).A recent Gallup poll showed that Americans rank global warming dead last among eight environmental issues to be very worried about . The following are eight environmental issues and the percentage of people who said they are very worried are:
Pollution of drinking water, 50 percent
Pollution of rivers, lakes, and reservoirs, 46 percent
Maintenance of the nation’s supply of fresh water for household needs, 45 percent
Contamination of soil and water by toxic waste, 44 percent
Air pollution, 38 percent
Loss of tropical rain forests, 33 percent
Extinction of plant and animal species, 31 percent
Global warming, 28 percent
WORRY ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING PEAKED IN 2007 AT 41 PERCENT AND WAS AT 40 PERCENT IN 2000.
This turn of opinion of the American public may not deter Obama and his cohorts from trying to jam through a Cap and Trade bill, or at least some aspects of such a bill, in order first, to appease the environmental extremists who supported Obama and second, to financially benefit political allies like Al Gore and the General Electric Company at the expense of the taxpayer.
While most Americans cannot follow the detailed technical arguments of the climatologists, they can smell a hoax when some facts are brought out and they can see Al Gore and others as simply profiteers who have created a huge scam for personal gain (something like the Bernie Mad off of climate).A recent Gallup poll showed that Americans rank global warming dead last among eight environmental issues to be very worried about . The following are eight environmental issues and the percentage of people who said they are very worried are:
Pollution of drinking water, 50 percent
Pollution of rivers, lakes, and reservoirs, 46 percent
Maintenance of the nation’s supply of fresh water for household needs, 45 percent
Contamination of soil and water by toxic waste, 44 percent
Air pollution, 38 percent
Loss of tropical rain forests, 33 percent
Extinction of plant and animal species, 31 percent
Global warming, 28 percent
WORRY ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING PEAKED IN 2007 AT 41 PERCENT AND WAS AT 40 PERCENT IN 2000.
This turn of opinion of the American public may not deter Obama and his cohorts from trying to jam through a Cap and Trade bill, or at least some aspects of such a bill, in order first, to appease the environmental extremists who supported Obama and second, to financially benefit political allies like Al Gore and the General Electric Company at the expense of the taxpayer.
Pelosi Shatters the Glass Ceiling
For those that didn't already know, Pelosi showed that a woman can be just as corrupt, underhanded, adept at bribery, intimidating, coercive, threatening and able to look you in the eye and lie, as any man. A real step forward for equality!
The Media Plays along with the "Violent Haters" Theme From Liberals
Liberals cannot defend the destructive spending and "redistribution of wealth" under their idol Obama. So, with their puppets in the media, they all spout the Democratic Party line that anyone who opposes ObamaCare and the overall move to a nanny state under Obama, must be a racist or a violent hater. The Left leaning media such as NBC, MSNBC, Washington Post, New York Times, Newsweek and on and on; everyone knows who they are at this point, have played along with the Liberals phony charges despite the facts.These charges of protesters being "racists" and "violent haters" are nonsense, and are a pitiful attempt to discredit and marginalize any criticism of Obama. Anyone who has attended, or observed a fair view of Tea Party, and not the Liberal media's selective snapshots bent on distorting the image of protest groups, knows that such protests are among the most calm of any in American history. The Tea Party rallies and web sites are respectful, peaceful, polite and have people from all walks of life. By their appearance and demeanor, members are so far from the extreme right wing militia and White Supremists groups to which the Liberals try to couple them. The Tea Party people tend to be older, middle class,quite a few seniors and ARE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT FACTS AND GOVERNMENT. It's the easy way out for the media who don't actually have to examine facts; to just take the Democrat's talking points and put their own little individual spin on it and you have a TV segment or a newsprint column. Easy work for a paycheck but, in politically correct speak, the journalists are either "work motivated challenged"(lazy) or "ethically challenged" (corrupt).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)