 by Dr. DaveWASHINGTON -- The number of people searching for the term “economic depression” on Google is down, says a White House economic advisor. Fortunately, searches for other terms that indicate President Barack Obama’s popularity may be history are way up. Larry Summers, a top economic adviser to Obama, claims that Google searches for “economic depression” have reached normal levels, a sure sign that the economic free-fall has ended. ( Could the White House use anything less tangible and credible and more ridiculous to indicate the Obugger administration’s spending policies aren’t asinine?) “We pledged at the time the Recovery Act became law that some of the spending and tax effects would begin almost immediately,” Summers said in prepared remarks ( does anyone in this administration speak without the use of a teleprompter?). “ Blah… blah… blah the impact of the Recovery Act blah… blah… blah… over time, peaking during 2010 with about 70 percent of the total stimulus provided in the first blah... blah... blah ( even though we know damned well it won’t make a bit of difference, since states are out there using Obugger’s funny money to pay off their deficits and remodel historic properties and build turtle tunnels).” An informal poll by Dr. Dave Reports, however, has revealed a startling spike in several indicators that point to the president’s popularity pretty much going down the toilet, where he’s been dragging the rest of the country for 6 months. Google searches for the terms “ Obama is an ass man” and “ Obama is a thief” and “ Obama is a liar,” fortunately, are WAY up, our informal survey reveals. “This would indicate that more and more people are starting to realize what a buffoonish ass and unprepared, unqualified, unprofessional loon he is,” said Dr. Dave. “ Obama extortion” also appears to be a very popular Google search term these days. “That pretty much clinches it for me,” Dr. Dave said. “I can’t think of a more appropriate term to describe this president than ‘extortionist,’ what with him reading the following threats daily (now) from VTOTUS: ‘we cannot afford to do nothing ... the status quo is unacceptable ... this WILL get passed.’”
by Dacia Nichols
After venturing over to the dark side (The New York Times), we find that today's Times' home page boasts of an article covering lovely new budget cuts under Massachusetts' state health care plan (MassHealth). Who's up for the guillotine? Immigrants. And legal ones, mind you.
Yes, the economic plunge has affected the Mass. budget (shocker), and instead of cutting a few chunks out of some programs that might be worthy of such a cause ($420 million for "other administrative" anyone?), the land of Utopia shall now be denied to those truly pursuing the American dream. Well, most of them anyhow - in general these immigrants pay into the system that helps them rather than purely feed off of it. And we're talking about $130 million in a $32 billion dollar budget here...where's the scalpel that all these "change" candidates were supposed to come in with?
 Click to enlarge So yeah...what does this say on the national scale? Well, you'll have to have a look at where this budget deficit came from - the economy. Tax revenues in Massachusetts are down $2.7 billion...they received stimulus money to help and still have this deficit. They've already cut the $1 billion dollars marked for lottery and the $342 million for "additional assistance"...whatever that is (their definition is a little abstract to say the least), so maybe we can acknowledge that they're at least trying to appear more fiscally responsible. You go boys! Er...and girls! Instead of sitting here however and giving Dacia Nichol's analysis of the Massachusetts budget, we'll just summarize quickly how this carries over as a lesson in what our national government is attempting.
[Apologies in advance for the redundancy...]
The economy stinks. The CBO has attached a very high price tag on health care. The Dems have proposed to tax the rich more (again, shocker), and stick the rest to your employer and health care provider. Oh, and it's going to be an entitlement as well, and we all know how well entitlement programs work out... The Dems have also come up with a nifty energy tax in the name of environmental such and such...except it will do nothing but line the pockets of our friends in the oil industry along with their creative masterminds with their additional profiteering ventures. Anything else we can do to kill the economy and cost more jobs? Give 'em time...Stimulus 3.0 and Amnesty are right around the corner folks.
Again...back to the point. See, Massachusetts is having a problem because the economy has done two things to tank their plans: 1) Decreased tax revenue through less investment and spending; and 2) Brought unemployment numbers that have added hundreds of thousands to the state health insurance rosters. So what happens when we make less money but spend more? We come out with liberal economic solutions. When Congressional Democrats crunch their numbers, we come out smiling and give them a thumbs up. When we look again, and more importantly, give them to a non-partisan reviewer, the Democrats come out with their math deficiency, or rather, optimistic view of the atomic economic bomb surrounding them that they seem to be blind to. Add in a time crunch by Mr. Prez and a threat to delay summer vacation by Her Highness's sidekick Harry, well...taxpayers, it's time to bend over and close your eyes. Seriously.
Massachusetts is the one state that we (and the term "we" is used very lightly) had as validation of any universal coverage argument, and look at what they've done to their own baby. If health care is so important that we the people must pay for everyone regardless of our feelings on the matter, how is it that the Massachusetts liberals cannot even sacrifice enough to make it happen? Does anyone see foul play? In the land of Harvard, MIT, and Boston University...and the money that stinks up the place...is there not a big enough donation bin to help out those immigrants to which they want to grant full amnesty and have single party rule?
by Harrison Price
How many trillions has President Obama doled out in the short time he’s been in office? Looks like there’s yet another needy group of people who might win big if Cap and Trade passes: the very people it’s going to hurt. That’s right… the Democrats are trying to pass one of the most destructive bills ever to the U.S. economy but they want to bribe the people who will be hurt most by it into submission and sock it to the taxpayers all to gain support in the energy industry:
Workers who lose their jobs if the pending climate change legislation becomes law could get a weekly paycheck for up to three years, subsidies to find new work and other generous benefits — all courtesy of Uncle Sam — under a little-noticed provision of the bill.
So let’s look at this for a moment… why the bribe (sorry I mean “assistance”)? Basically because the Democrats know Cap and Trade will be a jobs killer robbing businesses of billions of dollars in profits every year all so they can pay Uncle Sam. How much money are we talking about here anyway?
Adversely affected employees in oil, coal and other fossil-fuel sector jobs would qualify for a weekly check worth 70 percent of their current salary for up to three years. In addition, they would get $1,500 for job-search assistance and $1,500 for moving expenses from the bill’s “climate change worker adjustment assistance” program, which is expected to cost $4.2 billion from 2011 to 2019.
Just how many jobs are going to be lost? Depends on who you listen to here are some estimates (low and high):
While the analysis assumes displaced workers will eventually find jobs, the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution predicts a net job loss of 0.5 percent over the first 10 years that carbon reduction legislation, called “cap-and-trade,” is in effect. The conservative Heritage Foundation found that by 2030 net job losses would top 1.1 million, while the Coalition for Affordable American Energy, an industry group, estimates that more than 3 million jobs would be lost by 2030 as a result of the cap-and-trade system.
Of course, there will be many people put out of work, companies will suffer financially, and the taxpayer (once again) will take it in the painful place as Obama racks up even more debt with the Chinese and other countries as they (for now) are willing to buy our IOUs. The best part of the whole thing is we’ll be waiting until Obama’s term is over until we notice that giant sucking sound:
“I doubt there will be a bunch of people filing for assistance when the bill first launches because it won’t have a huge economic effect for at lease five years,” said James Heintz, associate director for the Political Economy Research Institute at University of Massachusetts at Amherst, who co-authored a study on job creation under the bill.
I think the timing is pretty sweet for the president. He can claim “victory” in “global warming” but won’t have unemployed Americans wanting to vote him out of office when he runs for re-election.
They say every time a bell rings an angel goes to heaven. How much money does it cost us every time Obama opens his mouth?
by Dacia Nichol
First they denied it, then they ridiculed it...now they admit it while dismissing its relevance altogether in favor of a progressive agenda: Obama is not trying to fix the nation, he’s trying to destroy what’s left of American exceptionalism while using the economic disaster as his excuse and opportunity.
This week’s issue of Time Magazine boasted as its cover feature an article titled, “What Barack Obama Can Learn from FDR.” Basically, this means that the final conclusive idolatry has been had: Our great president is trying to emulate the man responsible for ushering in the failing socialist programs that we still fight today for financial breathing room.
The irony behind this article is that it dismisses the very myth that liberals have used as their cushion for years by stating that government spending during an economic crisis does not stimulate recovery, and using FDR’s “New Deal” as proof that it does is an absolute sham. In the author’s own words:
“It’s old news that FDR’s New Deal did not end the depression.”
Is it though? This author [yours truly] has been ridiculed, quite recently actually, for having made that suggestion a few articles back. Perhaps the commenter should take his argument up with Mr. David Kennedy also, the author of the Time article in question, for even he seems to agree on this point. If only Mr. Kennedy would have stopped there with his FDR worship fest. Alas, such was not the case and we must continue here...
An objective view of FDR’s policies would have been more welcome - even one spun in a positive light to ignore the fiscal and constitutional issues at stake with them. That’s expected. Kennedy however takes his suggestions to a level that is so absurd, they make the profanity-ridden Republican hit pieces in the Rolling Stone magazine seem credible.
Here are the most outrageous claims of Mr. Kennedy:
by Harrison Price
Sam Webb is the National Chair of the USA Community Party and he loves Obama. Is this reason enough to dislike the president?
The new conditions of struggle are possible only – and I want to emphasize only – because we elected President Obama and a Congress with pronounced progressive and center currents.
Yes, socialism is our objective and, according to recent public opinion polls, it is increasingly attractive to the American people.
That socialism isn’t on the people’s action agenda, however, doesn’t mean that we should zip our lips. Quite the contrary! We should talk it up and bring our modern, deeply democratic Twenty-First-Century vision of U.S. socialism into coalitions and mass movements. And with the use of the Internet we can reach an exponentially bigger audience than we could in the past.
Propaganda and agitation by themselves won’t bring people to the threshold of socialism. They need their own experience in struggle for their essential (what is essential is variable and expands over time) needs.
The Communist Party has never succeeded anywhere it has tried unless it is accompanied by an army, plenty of guns, and many executioners. This guy is a complete rube if he thinks his organization will have any success in America. Just as the Left accused G.W. Bush of using fear to ram though things like the Patriot Act (which has kept America safe and democratically passed from bill into law) so many of those same people are trading on the fear of capitalism to pass their agenda.
Do two wrongs make a right in their mind?
One thing that is most disturbing is this statement:
And reality strongly suggests that our main task is to bring the weight of the working class and other democratic forces to bear on the reform process with the aim of deepening its anti-corporate content and direction.
Comrade, do you have your waiting-in-line shoes yet?
Yes, it is those evil corporations that have allowed Americans mobility, access to wealth, a high standard of living that most people in the world can only dream of, and other terrible things like grocery stores filled with food and drugs stores filled with medicine.
Mr. Webb seems to address this concern when he says:
Another observation that I want to make is that because of McCarthyism, the Cold War, and the long economic expansion following WW II, the Left has been on the edges of politics for more than a half century. During this time, our ability to impact on broader political processes in the country has been narrowly circumscribed – nothing like the 1930s, nothing like the Left in many other countries.
And why would that be, exactly? Is it because capitalism, hard work, and sound leadership exposed their ideology as nothing more than an irregularity and because the “advanced” Europeans used government spending to mend their peoples after WWII and never quite retreated from this approach because the United States kept them safe from the Soviet Union allowing them to spend on social programs, not on defense.
Perhaps the name “USA Communist Party” carries more weight in people’s minds than it actually does in reality, but I thought this topic sheds light on how the Left is trying to use the recession as their perfect storm to ram through all sorts of strange laws and taxes. They have a very small window in which to operate, as I believe Mr. Webb has acknowledged, and they seem to see Barack Obama as their meal ticket:
Unless the Left – and I include communists – sheds this mentality, it will miss a unique opportunity to grow and leave a distinct imprint on our country’s direction.
Stephen Gordon writes a little more on this subject in his column on the Examiner.com adding:
Generally, the Communist Party spends a lot of time criticizing Democrats running for and holding public office for not being socialistic enough. This appears to have changed since President Obama was elected.
by Thomas Craig
Our Country has certainly underwent an amazing "change". President Obama has accelerated the decline of Capitalism and the degradation of our culture by confusing the notions of equality that the Founding Fathers often spoke of. Americans, as well as all people, are equal in the sense that we all share the same rights. We all are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We are NOT all equal in intelligence, work ethic, and we certainly should not be equal when it comes to the rewards of our hard work.
In what has become a sad and ridiculous culture of socialist values, one school has surely embraced the spirit of mediocrity. Central York High School in Pennsylvania has decided to stop selecting the highest acheiving student of the graduating class to be the valedictorian. The school has actually not had a valedictorian for a few years now, instead they had an awards ceremony to honor the top two students with the highest grades. Not even this ceremony will take place now. The school has decided that having a valedictorian makes the students "too competitive". The school actually thinks that it is a bad thing that their students are competitive regarding obtaining high grades. Instead, now even the laziest, marijuana smoking, class skipping, under-acheiving student will not have to have his feelings hurt by witnessing the accolades for a student who worked harder than every other student in their school. Those students who worked hard for four years are now being told by the school that their efforts don't matter and that they are no better than the students with the lowest grades.
I'm going to assume that the student who should have been the valedictorian is intelligent enough to understand the injustice done to him or her. I'm also sure that their ambitions which led to their high grades were greater than just becoming the valedictorian. I'm mainly concerned with the rest of the students. These students are being taught the liberal philosophy that they don't have to work hard and that people who do work hard and are smarter than they are, should not receive any benefits that they don't receive. It is the core of socialism. No matter what you do, you can not acheive any more than your neighbors do. I have no doubt that the students will go on to have jobs where they demand recognition and rewards for the most menial of tasks. The notion of competition and striving to be better is completely lost to them.
After all, they grew up playing sports where you got a trophy no matter if you won or lost, idolized worthless and meaningless celebrities who are famous not for their talents but for having sex on film, and of course, being told that no matter how little you work in school, you will be rewarded the same as those who really deserve it.
I don't understand why this country has so turned it's back on capitalism. Capitalism is what made our country the wealthiest and most innovative land the world has ever seen. As of late, the idea of capitalism has such a negative context to it. It is truly depressing being alive to witness the decline of American values. I wonder sometimes what the Romans thought as their civilization began their fall. Did they worry as their culture was taken from them by false and misleading men? Did they realize that their Empire would not last if they allowed their government to change all that was right and all that their nation was built upon? Do we?
by Dacia Nichol
There's this myth about FDR's "New Deal" - you know the one where it got us out of the Great Depression? Anyone who's willing to delve into the depths of political incorrectness knows that's a load of you-know-what. The truth? WWII. Despite all the constitutionality and fiscal problems he got us into (and that we're still paying for), FDR did manage to save us from ourselves when he told us "We Can Do It". He went from milk dumping in the streets to remanufacturing the American Spirit - we've all seen that poster of Rosie the Riveter with her guns a blazin'... It's a great exemplary of the attitude of the day that we need to summon now. Let's embrace the industrial spirit from the "good war" and transform it into a spirit to propel us forward into a new generation of prosperity. Oh yeah - and maybe fix that little energy problem we keep crying over while we're at it.
CALL TO ACTION: Let's build 100 new nuclear power plants in 20 years.
If you have not heard or read about U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander's May 27, 2009 speech at the Tennessee Valley Corridor Summit on a nuclear power proposal, you are instructed to go read the transcript ASAP. He outlines some of the usual objections to nuclear power and offers basic rebuttals (you can Google more details). He explains why the various alternative energy proposals being thrown out there are not cost or space effective (read: wind and solar). He even quotes T. Boone Pickens - you know, the oil man that's been pushing a huge alternative-energy agenda lately - when asked if he wanted wind turbines anywhere on his 68,000 acre ranch: "Hell no. They're ugly."
The most important point however, is what his proposal could do for the United States as a whole:
1. Produce 70% of our own energy (vs. using 25% of the world's energy as we currently do) - can we say energy independence?
2. Save the planet - if you're into all the "global warming" hoopla, here's your answer: Nuclear power is clean!
3. Create millions of jobs! Let's get back into manufacturing people! We'll build a nuclear construction industry - it'll outlast any "shovel ready" highway project. Millions of jobs that will last 20 years+...what more can you ask for?
4. Economic recovery! Jobs (AMERICAN jobs I say!), cheap energy, no more oil wars...c'mon now!
You can't say that Obama's "Cash for Clunkers" or throwing billions into global warming research are better ideas. What do we need them for if we have nuclear efficiency? We have the solution, we have the means, and we have the spirit to get it done - let's do it!
After all...Barry wants to oh-so-badly be like France, right?
 by Thomas Craig
President Obama is announcing that he is going to "ramp up" the stimulus spending over the next three months. The improvement in consumer confidence seems to make the President think that his stimulus is working. I happen to think that perhaps consumer confidence in the economy is improving because we no longer are subjected to the President of the United States coming on television every day and declaring that we are in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. (That of course was a lie.) Its amazing how people can have a little more faith that hell has not frozen over when our elected Leaders stop screaming about how the sky is falling. So far, we have spent $2.7 Trillion dollars. That is only what we have spent, not even what we have PROMISED to spend. This amount of debt is unbearable by any means. Let's give the President the benefit of the doubt and say that the stimulus was a great idea and the economy is going to bounce back as a direct result of it. My question now is, how do we go about paying all this money back? I know the President is busy planning even more spending on his universal health care, but how do you suppose he is going to pay off the debt? Well, let's look at our two options...
First, we do nothing and our currency inflates. The influx of money into our system will cause prices to rise more and more. Our salaries, of course, will not rise at the same level. This brings us to a sharp inflation of the dollar and the economy will suffer because of it. This will completely counter the stimulus measures that the President put into place and our economy will be even worse off than it originally was. Let's also not forget the world's confidence in the dollar will crumble. Some of our biggest Lenders will no longer want to gamble on our economy. (China, we're looking in your direction.) We can sit by and watch this happen, or...
We can pay off the ridiculous debt we have accumulated. Once again, let's assume the economy improves under the stimulus. This is all borrowed money that we used and since ignoring it will lead to another economic crisis, we can take the initiative and pay off our debt. We don't want to borrow even more money to pay off our previously borrowed money, so we do the only thing we can do raise the sufficient funds. Raise taxes substantially. (Or possibly set up a stand and sell pies to China.) Nothing can turn an economy flaccid quicker than a hefty tax hike. Unfortunetly, the President is going to have to do more than just tax the wealthiest five percent of the Country. If you took all the money owned by the wealthiest 5%, every last penny of it, it still wouldn't be enough to pay off this debt. We are going to have to have taxes raised on everyone, including businesses already struggling by the current economic crisis.
So as the title puts it, we have two options and neither looks fun. It is a true lose-lose situation, brought to you by the Democrats. The Reagan solution of lowering taxes significantly to stimulate the economy isn't looking so bad now, is it! Always remember, "Change" is NOT always a good thing.
 by Thomas Craig President Obama yesterday made a remarkable speech in the mid-east. His goal was to begin to heal the hatred between Islam and the West. While this goal is an admirable one, it unfortunately was nothing more than a show. Yes, it was praise-worthy for the President to refer to the Koran and use Arabic quotes. This all shows his sincerity to the cause and I am sure many Muslim's appreciated the gesture. I am also sure that as soon as the President stepped down from the podium, all those who watched in the Islamic world went right back to hating America. Although many people in the Islamic world are still living in a "crusades-era" state of mind, where "infidels" are everywhere and the whole world should be run as a theocracy, they are not without intelligence. These people want to see actions more than words. This, of course, will be difficult since the actions they seek are everything from complete withdrawal of American forces from the mid-east to all Israeli's getting on a boat and leaving the Country they built and give it to the Palestinians. It is impossible for us to truly appease these people. Israel is a main source of anger in the Islamic world and the President is taking a hard stance against Israeli settlements. He obviously neglected to mention Palestinian terrorists and their contribution to the conflict. Muslims want to hear the President condemn Israel and it just will not happen, nor should it. Israel is our greatest ally in the middle east and we will not ruin that friendship for the sake of befriending Nations with atrocious human rights records and rampant oppression.
The President also could have taken more time to speak about women's rights. Women in the middle east currently have about as much rights as livestock. This alone should disgust any moral human being. Again, we are dealing with a mentality which is centuries behind us. I know this sounds rather ethnocentric but it is true. We certainly have a road ahead of us when it comes to our way of thinking. (Just read our post: Dick Cheney, Is That Really You?) But we at least recognize many of our faults of the past and acknowledge that race or gender is not grounds for discrimination. Let's be honest here, if the Islamic Nations had not been lucky enough to live on top of pools of oil, the world would have allowed them to destroy themselves long ago. It is their ignorance and absurdity which is why I always support energy independence. The sooner we begin to relinquish our dependence on these Nation's oil fields, the sooner we can take the hard line approach to them and their backwards culture that we should. When we stand by and try to appease these Countries, we condone the way they treat their own citizens and the many abuses which are a way of life over there.
by Dacia Nichol
If there’s anything ironic on the scale of required presidential niceties, it’s Barry Bama, the most communistic president we’ve ever had, sign a bill establishing a board to honor the great man who saved our nation from that very style of oppressive government. It just feels wrong. Cheap. At the very least, a raised eyebrow is quite deserved. Both should be raised now.
Add in the punch that “as much as any president”, Reagan was a guy who made people smile (woot for optimism!) with the agenda-driven comments praising Nancy for her stem cell research support, and it seems we’ve seen Barry’s spin and acting skills at their best. Wonder what the backstage footage was like...
Maybe the guy knows we’re finally regrouping and the backlash that comes every time one party has such sweeping rule is fast approaching. In this light, he’s tossing out breadcrumbs for the political gulls to squabble over.
After all, he did manage to find a Republican congressman to be his Army Secretary - from New York no less!
Apparently they do exist!
Future nominee John M. McHugh was only one of three House Republicans in his district - will we see the same type of hoopla over his seat in the special elections as we did over Kirsten Gillibrand’s when it was up for grabs? Maybe. And when the district falls victim to the 2010 Census...piece of cake.
Note to McHugh: Try not to tick off the Defense Secretary.
|
RSS Feed
