Tuesday, July 10, 2012


Posted by HS


Posted by BH


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Obama: Anti-Founders Debt-Accumulating Spendthrift 

In 2007, when I began writing my New York Times best-seller "Black Belt Patriotism," unemployment was less than 5 percent; the annual federal budget was about $2.9 trillion; the federal deficit was $161 billion; and the national debt was $9 trillion.
Today unemployment is stuck at 8.2 percent; the federal budget is $3.8 trillion; the national deficit is $1.3 trillion; and the national debt quickly is approaching a staggering $16 trillion.
And to add insult to injury, our vassalage to other countries deepens as they bankroll increasing amounts of U.S. debt, and more than 50 percent of our public debt is held by private investors in foreign lands.
Last week, the International Business Times reported: "China overtook Japan as the largest holder of U.S. national debt in 2009. As of December (the most recent data available), it held about 23.1 percent, or $1.15 trillion, of all foreign investment in U.S. privately held federal debt, according to a newly released report by the Congressional Budget Office, or CBO. ... Without monetary policy change, the CBO warned in its 2012 Long-Term Budget Outlook on June 5, the U.S. federal debt could be twice the size of the U.S. gross domestic product by 2037."
The national debt is not merely the result of excessive spending; it is also the result of revenues not being high enough to pay for government outlays. In other words, while the feds have spent trillions of dollars bailing out everyone from automotive businesses to zebra-loving environmental companies, they have done virtually nothing to build up Main Street business productivity. (Disturbingly, just a few days ago, Vice President Joe Biden again called for more government spending.)
When the receipts don't cover the outlays, it should be a sign that the U.S. government is in trouble, but that's just another typical day of federal government operation. When the federal government wastes more than $100 million a year on minting pennies, which cost 2.41 cents each to make, and nickels, which cost 11.18 cents each, it should be the first to recognize that it runs the worst business in the world; but it is the last to admit it. (Between 2006 and 2011, the government's production of pennies and nickels is estimated to have generated losses of nearly $360 million.)
In 2008, the country elected Barack Obama to clean up Washington and lead the economic restoration of our country based upon his following campaign promises:
"Today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office." (Spoken at the opening of the fiscal responsibility summit on Feb. 23, 2009.) 
"We will launch a sweeping effort to root out waste, inefficiency and unnecessary spending in our government, and every American will be able to see how and where we spend taxpayer dollars by going to a new website called" (Spoken in a speech Jan. 28, 2009.)
"There is no doubt that we've been living beyond our means, and we're going to have to make some adjustments. Now, what I've done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut." (Spoken during a presidential debate Oct. 15, 2008.)
"Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase -- not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." (Spoken in September 2008 at a town hall meeting in Dover, N.H.)
Last week, The Fact Checker, a service by The Washington Post, quoted Crossroads GPS' itemization of the Obama administration's fiscal debt record:
"January 20, 2009: The National Debt Was $10,626,877,048,913.08 (Obama Takes Office). (Treasury Department, accessed 5/23/12)
"May 22, 2012: The National Debt Was $15,721,218,607,447.09 (Most Recent). (Treasury Department, accessed 5/23/12)
"Obama Has Been In Office For 1,219 Days (1/20/09-5/22/12). (Convert Units, accessed 5/17/12)
"$5,094,341,558,534.01 (divided by) 1,219 Days (equals) $4,179,115,306/Day."
And people want to re-elect President Obama? Why?
It's tragically unfortunate that President Obama turned a deaf ear to the recommendations of the Bowles-Simpson deficit commission. Instead, while serially blaming his presidential predecessor for excessive spending, he skyrocketed the national budget, deficits and debt by trillions and trillions of dollars and, to boot, strapped upon our backs and those of our posterity trillions more for yet another socialized medicine program, called Obamacare.
Is the White House even listening anymore to anyone or just running amok its own way?
The actions of this White House remind me of an ancient proverb that says, "The way of a fool seems right to him, but a wise man listens to advice."
Next week, I will discuss how the first eight presidents handled national debt and what I know they would say to Obama, whether he wants to hear it or not.




Posted By Woody Pendleton


An opponent of President Barack Obama's health care law demonstrates outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012, before the court's ruling on the law. (AP Photo/David Goldman)
Eighty-three percent of American physicians have considered leaving their practices over President Barack Obama’s health care reform law, according to a survey released by the Doctor Patient Medical Association.
The DPMA, a non-partisan association of doctors and patients, surveyed a random selection of 699 doctors nationwide. The survey found that the majority have thought about bailing out of their careers over the legislation, which was upheld last month by the Supreme Court.
Even if doctors do not quit their jobs over the ruling, America will face a shortage of at least 90,000 doctors by 2020. The new health care law increases demand for physicians by expanding insurance coverage. This change will exacerbate the current shortage as more Americans live past 65.
By 2025 the shortage will balloon to over 130,000, Len Marquez, the director of government relations at the American Association of Medical Colleges, told The Daily Caller.
“One of our primary concerns is that you’ve got an aging physician workforce and you have these new beneficiaries — these newly insured people — coming through the system,” he said. “There will be strains and there will be physician shortages.”
The DPMA found that many doctors do not believe the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will lead to better access to medical care for the majority of Americans, co-founder of the DPMA Kathryn Serkes told TheDC.
“Doctors clearly understand what Washington does not — that a piece of paper that says you are ‘covered’ by insurance or ‘enrolled’ in Medicare or Medicaid does not translate to actual medical care when doctors can’t afford to see patients at the lowball payments, and patients have to jump through government and insurance company bureaucratic hoops,” she said. (SEE ALSO: Jeremiah Wright: ‘White racist alien DNA’ running through synapses of Obama’s brain )

Read more:


Posted By Woody Pendleton


The 8 Most Shameful Moments of Barack Obama's Presidency

Get Hugh Hewit's New Book FREE!
8) "The private sector is doing fine:" Know what hasn't been "doing fine" for a single day since Barack Obama came into office? The private sector. So when Barack Obama bizarrely proclaimed that "the private sector is doing fine" earlier this year, Obama was further out of touch than E.T. was when he wanted to phone home.
7) Obama bows to Saudi king: If Barack Obama had spent his formative years in the United States instead of overseas, he'd know that real Americans don't bow. Moreover, no American, especially the President, should be bowing down to a dictatorial king like the one we had to overthrow in the Revolutionary War. Besides the Saudi king, Obama also continued to humiliate himself and his country by bowing to Japanese Emperor Akihito and the Chinese PM. We're lucky that the SEALs killed Osama Bin Laden as opposed to capturing him or we might have seen pictures of Obama bowing to him on MSNBC by now.
6) Son looked like Trayvon: At a time when George Zimmerman was publicly being threatened with death and white people were being beaten "For Trayvon," there was an opportunity for the President to show leadership and encourage people to calm down. Instead, after making some perfunctory remarks towards that end, Obama added fuel to the fire by noting, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." This was a follow-up to Obama's similarly foolish decision to insert himself into another local situation that didn't concern him. After his friend Henry Gates smashed his own door in and made such an ass of himself that he was arrested when the police arrived, Obama noted that he didn't know the facts, but he did know that the "police acted stupidly." He then followed that up by suggesting racism was probably to blame. Fortunately, he managed to patch over that bit of idiocy with a "beer summit" as opposed to the Trayvon Martin case where he increased the chances that someone would get killed because he was thoughtlessly shooting off his mouth.
5) Refusing to pick up illegals from Arizona: After the Obama Administration refused to enforce federal immigration law in Arizona, the state passed a tough new law that allowed local police to do the job ICE wouldn't do. Disgracefully, Barack Obama held a White House press conference where both he and Mexican President Felipe Calderon ganged up against Arizona for doing little more than enforcing the laws on the book. The Obama Administration then sued Arizona and after it didn't emerge completely victorious, simply refused to pick up illegal aliens that aren't felons from Arizona. In other words, not only is Barack refusing to enforce the law of the land, he won't allow anyone else to uphold the laws he falsely swore to uphold when he became President.
4) Persecuting the Catholic Church: Obama spat in the face of the Catholic Church and violated its constitutionally-protected 1st Amendment religious rights by demanding that it provide birth control and abortifacient drugs in its hospitals. Unless this policy is stopped, millions of Americans will pay the price as the Catholic Church closes its hospitals rather than violate its deeply-held religious beliefs in order to cater to Barack Obama's whims.
3) Passing Obamacare: Health care reform was opposed by the Republican Party and the American people despite endless lies the Obama Administration told about what a wonderful program it would be. The Obama Administration lied when it said everyone could keep their health insurance, that it wouldn't increase the deficit, when it said there were no death panels in the bill, when it said it wouldn't increase taxes, and when it said abortion wouldn't be funded with your tax dollars. All of these lies were for a program that took 500 billion dollars out of Medicare to fund a new entitlement program that will cause large numbers of doctors to quit, dramatically reduce the quality of care, and force Americans to deal with the IRS just to get health care. It's one of the single worst bills in America history that delivers an incredibly expensive new entitlement program at the point in American history where we can least afford it.
2) Obama's lawless attempt to pass the Dream Act by Fiat: After the DREAM ACT failed to make it through Congress, Barack Obama illegally decided to implement it anyway. After instructing the Department of Justice to stop following the law in regard to illegals under 30, Obama decided to issue work permits for illegals. That's an illegal act that directly contradicts the existing immigration law. It also makes little sense to give somewhere between 800,000 and 3 million foreigners work permits when every job they take will keep another American out of work in tough economic times.
1) Eric Holder held in contempt of Congress after Obama uses executive privilege: On Barack Obama's watch, the Department of Justice helped put guns into the hands of Mexican cartels and these guns were used to kill hundreds of Mexicans along with American Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Did Eric Holder know about this beforehand? Did Barack Obama? We don't know for sure because they've been engaged in a Nixonian cover-up. They've dragged their feet, stonewalled, and when they couldn't hold off any longer, Obama declared executive privilege in an attempt to hide the truth about how deeply his administration is tied to the deaths of 300 plus people. Obama's behavior was so sleazy that 17 House Democrats felt compelled to vote with Republicans to find Eric Holder in contempt of Congress. Say what you want about Watergate, but at least no one was killed during the scandal, which is something that can't be said about Obama's Fast and Furious debacle.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


A hearing is scheduled before the Michigan Court of Appeals on Wednesday in a fight by the state Department of Human Services to forcibly administer more cancer-causing drugs to a child who was diagnosed with Ewing sarcoma, but following an earlier round of treatments has been declared either “in remission” or cured.
The case could be a foreshadowing of the decision-making process that soon will become mandatory under Obamacare.

WND reported several months ago when the state agency filed a lawsuit insisting that the child endure a dangerous course of medication because it was what some doctors wanted for him, despite a series of scans that indicate an absence of any cancer in the child.
The case is being fought on behalf of Ken and Erin Stieler and their son Jacob by attorneys with the Home School Legal Defense Association.
The organization concerns itself with home school rights, responsibilities and restrictions but also intercedes in cases that could have a significant impact on child and parental rights.
The organization reported today that HSLDA Chairman Mike Farris is traveling to Lansing, Mich., to represent the Stielers before the Michigan Court of Appeals on Wednesday.
At issue is the state’s demand to administer chemicals such as ifosfamide, etoposide and doxorubicin even though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration states that for ifosfamide and etoposide, the “safety and effectiveness in pediatric patients have not been established.”
The warning for doxorubicin is stronger, stating, “Pediatric patients are at increased risk for developing delayed cardiotoxicity.”
Farris told WND that the facts of the case are important, because Jacob underwent treatment for cancer and has been clean on the last four scans over the last year.
Further, the treatment demanded by the state, which insisted that prosecutors bring a medical neglect case against the parents, is not guaranteed to help and not even guaranteed to be safe.
Lower courts have ruled against the state, and Farris explained earlier, “If they succeed they will force Jacob to resume chemotherapy despite the fact that the drugs in question are not FDA approved (either for children in general or for this particular cancer). Moreover, these drugs do not promise anything close to a guaranteed cure. And, the FDA requires the drug manufacturers to disclose that these drugs cause new cancers to form, heart disease in children, failure to sexually mature, and many other serious side effects in some cases.”
Farris told WND that there is concern about the outcome of the case, as the state’s argument is that the drugs are demanded in the “national standard of care” for the condition.
That’s the same type of concern that has been raised by many organizations and individuals about Obamacare.
Officials from the state did not respond to WND’s request for comment.
In the brief to the appellate court argument against the state’s demands, HSLDA said the state misrepresented the facts in the case in its appeal.
“One glaring example of the erroneous nature of the statement of facts relates to the statement that ‘Dr. Beth Kurt could testify that Jacob’s tumor is not surgically respectable (sic).’ Since Jacob’s PET scans are clear, and have been clear since July 6, 2011, there is no evidence that Jacob has a tumor – resectable or not. No one – not even Dr. Kurt – would or could claim that Jacob currently has a tumor. His tumor was surgically removed and he is free from any objective signs of cancer. … The department’s statement of facts falsely represents the presence of a tumor as a current reality.”
Further, the treatment being demanded by the state would be experimental.
“While there is some dispute about the meaning of the lack of FDA approval, it is undisputed that this drug regiment, on the whole, has not been FDA-approved as safe and effective for the treatment of juvenile Ewing’s sarcoma. It is also undisputed that patients who received these drugs – particularly young children – face a risk of very serious side effects, including the capacity to cause secondary cancers, heart disease, or to inhibit proper sexual development,” the brief said.
Meanwhile, the family has set up a series of periodic scans to monitor Jacob, and have made plans for further treatment should circumstances develop that it is needed.
It was Erin Stieler who explained why the family made its own plans, and rejected the state plans.
“There is no doubt that I would continue to have Jacob treated with the recommended conventional therapy if the doctors could assure me that there was current evidence that he has cancer, that he would die without the treatment, that the treatment was safe and effective for his condition, that the treatment would cure him, and that there were no dangerous side effects,” she said.
Further, the state’s own agency investigator said procedure would be to close the case, but that officials from high in the department were applying pressure to force the treatment.
Farris said that the state’s plan is to follow the “standard” treatment, which has been described as dangerous.
“If we are put in a position where national standards are established, whether by practice or the government, it comes out the same,” he said. “This case may well shape parental rights principles for the long haul. We believe that parents, not doctors, should make tough decisions like this.”
The HSLDA earlier reported how Jacob was diagnosed with Ewing sarcoma, a dangerous bone cancer, and he had surgery to remove a tumor and then chemotherapy to follow up.
“The treatment was incredibly difficult, and Jacob’s mom, Erin, told me that when she looked her son in the eyes, she knew in her heart that he simply could not survive many more rounds of these drugs,” Farris reported.
They tapped into a prayer network and were joined by hundreds to pray for their son’s recovery.
“After all of these rounds of chemotherapy were completed, there was a PET scan done to check on the status of the cancer. There was no evidence of cancer detected in Jacob’s body. Jacob’s family and friends rejoiced in his healing – praising God for this wonderful outcome,” Farris said.
Farris said the treatment physician even testified that the drugs were safe and had been approved by the FDA as effective for children when they, in fact, carried a warning that they had not.
A warning accompanying another drug demanded by the doctors, vincristine, was typical of those in the case, he said.
That warning said, “Patients who received chemotherapy with vinchristine sulfate in combination with anticancer drugs known to be carcinogenic have developed second malignancies.”
He said the project is being supported by the organization’s Homeschool Freedom Fund.

 by  wp :   Having gone through this kind of experience with one of my sons I deeply pray for this family.  As with my son it got to the point where some of the doctors just wanted to test different types of drugs on him to see what kind of reactions they would get.  Sadly the Oath to do no harm does not carry much weight with some doctors.   We thank GOD for guiding us to a pediatrician with compassion, caring and a standard of providing the best for his patients.  Our son died at the age of 6 years of age but he died with dignity and at peace.

Monday, July 9, 2012


Posted by BH


Posted by BH

Glenn and his family went “off the grid” over the 4th of July week, heading to a farm in the middle of the country without internet, television, or cell phone service. How were they able to survive?
“Barely came back from vacation. We went up to some farmland and we herded cattle, we rode horses. I’m going back up in a couple of weeks and we’ll have chickens and lambs,” Glenn said.
“I contend that the problem with our society is that we have gotten away from cows. We have gotten away from nature. We’ve gotten away from the farmlands,” he explained.
“I contend that because we’ve gotten away from the farms, we no longer see nature in practice. We never see. My son doesn’t understand. He saw something naturally happening in front of him. Instead, what we see off the farm, what we see in our cities, what we see in our schools, what we see every night spilling into our houses is what we think is natural on television, which is completely unnatural. We see all these TV shows and everything else that are not real. They’re not based in anything that’s real.”
“Because we’ve gotten away from nature and we are just taking other people’s words for it, we also are for things like green energy. That’s the biggest pile of bullcrap I’ve ever seen, and I have been ‑‑ I’ve spent ten days with bullcrap. Not all the actual bullcrap, but the wind‑power and solar power. We have a farm that is off the grid and it’s wind‑power and solar power. That’s bullcrap.”
Glenn explained that the solar and wind power was not enough to keep the electricity on the farm running. Even the small refrigerator, powered by propane, could only get to fifty-one degrees.
“If we still lived down on the farm and we would listen to people who were actually using it, well, then we’d know it’s a pile of crap. It’s nice to augment, but by Thursday of last week, we just had the generators running the whole time.”
Stu added, “When countries try to implement this sort of power in a large sense, that’s exactly what happens. The wind‑power isn’t running all the time, the solar power obviously at night isn’t running all the time and they have to augment it with good old fossil fuel.”
Pat said, “If solar worked great, we would all be fine with solar. That would be great.”
“We’ve just disconnected from reality and sanity because we’re so far away from it,” Glenn said.
“You know, I went to church yesterday in this small town. There’s about 400 people who live in this town. I think about 390 of them, I haven’t met all of them, but I bet about 390 of them I would wish I could be. The people that I met were all rock solid people and they’re the people that honestly that if you go to New York, they are the people that on, you know, Central Park would make fun of, mocking. Mock them. Guarantee it. Guarantee it. Because they’re all people that work with a tractor. They’re all people that really work for a living. You never think you work for a living? I mean, I played on a tractor last week. I played on it. I didn’t work. I mean, yeah, I herded some cattle. Really? And if it didn’t work, I could call somebody and go, ‘The cattle won’t listen to me. Can you come get them?’” Glenn said.
“These are people who actually work for a living. And it’s because of that, their children are different,” Glenn said.
“I saw a difference in my children within three days. Within three days. No Internet, no television, no phones, no texting. Unfortunately no electricity, which kind of made the ice cream a little soggy. That one we have to fix. The rest of it… they change. We’ve changed as a culture because we no longer see nature in action. And when you see nature in action, you see the patterns of life. Because we’re no longer close to anything that’s not ‑‑ that you don’t plug in, we don’t see the patterns in life, we don’t see the pattern of the family in life. And the more we plug in, the more we tune out and the weaker we become as people.”
“Go find yourself some farmland. Go vacation. In some town that you probably would have made fun of when you were a kid. This is exactly the kind of town that I would have made fun of as a kid. This is exactly the kind of town that I would say no way that I would ever live there or want to live there. I do now.”


Posted by BH

The White House has pulled out all the stops in their efforts to defeat Mitt Romney. They’ve used some odd fundraising tactics, like asking people to donate to the campaign in lieu of wedding gifts, and now they are running campaign ads with blatant lies in them. The lies are so bad that they’ve been debunked by multiple sources like and PolitiFact. But when Obama advisor Robert Gibbs was grilled on the ads, he double downed on the lies.
Mediaite reported, “On CNN’s State of the Union today, Candy Crowley grilled Obama campaign advisor and former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on a recent attack ad released hitting Mitt Romney for outsourcing. Crowley ran the ad, pointing out that The Washington Post rated it false (“four Pinocchios”), and challenged Gibbs to explain why this is still being used as a line of attack against Romney.”


Posted By Woody Pendleton


If Not Now . . .

“At what point do we hold our side accountable? Contrary to what some of you want to think, it was not the Democrats who got us to $16 trillion in national debt. It was bipartisan.
Despite making clear that I was not advocating a third party, but rather recognizing that one will spring up if the Republican leadership does not pay attention to the state of its own party, many not only assumed wrongly my advocacy, but resorted to the worn out argument of the Republican leaders over several generations — “we must fight the Democrats first” or the variant “the top priority is beating Barack Obama.”
The problem with this argument is it never ends. How many more trillion dollars must we add to the national debt before the “wait and focus on the other side first” crowd wakes up to what they have enabled?
When George Bush decided to pass Ted Kennedy’s No Child Left Behind plan as his own, conservatives were told they needed to rally and help the President, given his victory while losing the popular vote. We needed unity.
After steel tariffs for Pennsylvania, “hush,” we were told because we were trying to set the stage for a re-election.
Then came the prescription drug benefit and we better not challenge the President because … 9/11 … patriotism … build the party.
He nominated Harriet Miers and more than half the conservative establishment beclowned themselves standing with him.
Then came immigration reform and those who disagreed from the right were racists. Solidarity!
TARP . . . the General Motors bailout . . . still Republicans told Republicans we couldn’t hold our own side accountable because we needed to fight the left “and oh my goodness litmus tests!!!!!”
Earmarks? “Litmus tests!!!!” and “pshaw, they’re just a little teeny-tiny piece of the budget.”
That was some time around $10 trillion in national debt.
Then the GOP began cutting deals with Barack Obama. “Trust them,” others said, “they have a plan.” The tea party led them to victory and the tea party congressmen started voting just like their leadership. The debt ceiling increased, spending expanded, Pledge to Nowhere pledges were breached, and still we hear “we have to fight the other side first.”
And then there was the Senate variant, “Oh Mitch McConnell had to do that or else Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins and . . . and . . . and . . .”
Friends, at what point do we hold our side accountable? $20 trillion in debt? $50 trillion in debt? Contrary to what some of you want to think, it was not the Democrats who got us to $16 trillion in national debt. It was bipartisan. Some of it legitimate, much of it not, and all to the tune of “let’s focus on the Democrats instead. They’re the real bad guys here.”
The leaders of the GOP give lip service to smaller government but just last week shut down legitimate private businesses to feed the leviathan more tax revenue. Republicans in the House of Representatives are now urging candidates not to sign the ATR tax pledge and Republicans in the Senate are cutting deals that will boost revenue because — deficits. And still they add to the debt.
So if not now, when? Not until we’re all speaking Chinese apparently.
If the conservative movement cannot fight on two fronts, we’re screwed. But some of you will be okay with that as long as its an elephant and not a donkey screwing you.

 by  wp
 WE are screwed and WE are doing it to ourselves because WE refuse to see and admit that it is the majority of both parties in Washington who are playing the distraction games while feathering their own nests at OUR expense.  WHEN or better yet if, WE will wake up and face reality, WE might have a reasonable chance of cleaning this mess up.  But it is going to take a lot of house cleaning, hard work and a lot of time to turn this disaster around.       YOUR CHOICE, AMERICA.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Maybe We Really Do Need a Third Party

“The problem for the GOP is that it is in danger of fracturing, not because it has moved so far right, but because it refuses to actually practice what it preaches.
Senator Max Baucus of Montana receives campaign donations from the parent company of Phillip Morris. Senator Baucus then puts a provision in the highway transportation bill banning roll your own cigarette operations, a business that does not exist in Montana.
Forty people in Harry Reid’s Nevada and elsewhere will lose their jobs because a transportation bill actively and willfully legislated a legal business out of business by driving up the regulatory burden so excessively. Major cigarette manufacturers championed the legislation and Republicans supported it because it will increase tax revenue without them voting to raise taxes.
Put bluntly, Republicans voted to do exactly what they they accuse the Democrats of doing — shut down businesses by driving up regulatory burdens in an effort to increase taxes.
Max Baucus may have inserted the provision, but it made it through Republican House of Representatives. Maybe we do need a third party to do the job Republicans campaign on doing, but then get to Washington and don’t actually do.
I am not at the point of really advocating a third party. But I know me writing this will get the attention it needs to get.
The Republicans in Washington really have no clue.
For several months members of the media have lusted after a third party candidate — a serious “grown up” to speak the hard truths about the deficit, the need to raise taxes, etc. In fact, pay attention you people in the media, there is a very simple formula I have developed to explain the media these days:

Greater the number of stories about Americans Elect and No Labels
The lower the number of viewers and readers of the media outlet
The media elite who get positively orgasmic about things like No Labels and Americans Elect are convinced they are tapped into the pulse of the American people, but in fact are only tapped into the pulse of their throbbing for people like themselves being put in charge instead of the hicks and rubes from America’s river valleys the tea party types keep agitating for.
A third party could have been successful in the United States this year, but it would have required a populist attack against Washington and spending. Done right, it would have resonated across Tea Party and Occupy circles. But it did not happen.
As media ratings have declined and the talk within Beltway media circles of “serious” “adult” “third party” challenges has increased, Republican leaders in Washington who have more and more in common with the media that covers them and less and less in common with their constituents back home — hell, look at Indiana’s Senator who does not even live in Indiana anymore and consequently got thrown out much to the outrage of Beltway elites — have become less and less like the Party of Reagan and more and more like the Party of John Anderson.
The problem for the GOP is that it is in danger of fracturing, not because it has moved so far right, but because it refuses to actually practice what it preaches.
The Republican Party’s actual policy positions help small businesses and individuals. It is the party of the individual against the collective. But Republican leaders are not willing to actually fight for those values in the face of media criticism.
In fact, the very types of people the media and more senior Republicans and Democrats alike are advocating are the very people who made the compromise decisions to get us to $16 trillion in debt. And, by the way, we spent ourselves there we didn’t tax ourselves there.
This comes full circle.
A Republican Party that has been unwilling to cut spending has now let go through Congress legislation to shut down lawful, legal businesses because cigarette industry lobbyists and a Senate Democrat wanted it done.
We’re not ready for a third party and both this site and I will continue advocating for conservative Republicans, but if the GOP doesn’t finally get a clue, I won’t be surprised to see it implode. By the way, this year fewer and fewer Republican candidates are signing the tax pledge on the advice of Republican members of Congress. This is another warning sign that the Eric Cantor led Republican conference is going far afield from what those who vote Republican actually want.
The GOP better get back to its pro-liberty roots quickly.
One editorial note: to save you all from yourselves, I’m not even going to entertain comments on this post. You can agree or disagree with me on twitter @ewerickson.

 by wp:    The biggest problem WE have is that the concept of two parties in Washington,D.C. is a fallacy.  The Professional Organization of  Politicians in Washington has degenerated into the Progressive Party of take care of ourselves.  They look out for themselves at the expense of WE, THE PEOPLE.  They have abandoned Americas ideals and laws for ones that allow them to line their own and each others pockets using methods WE would face prison for.  THEY are the ELITES and consider themselves ENTITLED to all the perks, high living and dishonest dealing that goes on constantly in Washington.  A third party????    HOW ABOUT ONE PARTY ,MADE UP OF AMERICANS WHO BELIEVE IN HONOR, HARD WORK, HONESTY, PATRIOTISM, THE CONSTITUTION AND A DEPENDENCE ON ALMIGHTY GOD.  LIKE OUR FOUNDING FATHERS DID.  ITS WHAT BUILT THIS NATION AND MADE HER GREAT.  But the pols don't care about that.  It doesn't pay as well.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


More Demands for Global Taxes from the United Nations

Given the kleptocratic nature of international bureaucracies (particularly my good buddies at the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), I’m never surprised when a bad proposal is unveiled.
And since the United Nations has a long track record of supporting global taxation (with the money going to the U.N., of course), I’m even less surprised when that crowd produces another idea for fleecing people in the productive sector of the economy.
Here are some excerpts from a Yahoo report.
The United Nations on Thursday called for a tax on billionaires to help raise more than $400 billion a year for poor countries. An annual lump sum payment by the super-rich is one of a host of measures including a tax on carbon dioxide emissions, currency exchanges or financial transactions proposed in a UN report that accuses wealthy nations of breaking promises to step up aid for the less fortunate.
These people love taxes, perhaps because they get tax-free salaries.
But setting aside their despicable hypocrisy, there’s scant evidence, if any, that foreign aid does anything other than foment corruption in recipient nations. And there’s lots of evidence, by contrast, that free markets and small government do create prosperity.
Yet the United Nations reflexively wants to line the pockets of the political elite in poor nations. And we’re not talking about pocket change.
The report estimates that the number of people around the globe worth at least $1 billion rose to 1,226 in 2012. There are an estimated 425 billionaires in the United States, 315 in the Asia-Pacific region, 310 in Europe, 90 in other North and South American countries and 86 in Africa and the Middle East. Together they own an estimated $4.6 trillion so a one percent tax on their wealth would raise more than $46 billion, according to the report. “Would this hurt them?” it questioned.
You have to appreciate the supreme irony of pampered international bureaucrats demanding that others should surrender some of their money.
I’m also impressed by their ability to come up with new tax schemes.
The document gives other ideas for international taxes, including:
  • – a tax of $25 per tonne on carbon dioxide emissions would raise about $250 billion. It could be collected by national governments, but allocated to international cooperation.
  • – a tax of 0.005 percent on all currency transactions in the dollar, yen, euro and pound sterling could raise $40 billion a year.
  • – taking a portion of a proposed European Union tax on financial transactions for international cooperation. The tax is expected to raise more than $70 billion a year.
…Without commenting on any of the individual taxes proposed, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that if the new “innovative financing” is to become viable, “strong international agreement is needed.”
Let’s close with some good news. Proposals for global taxation from the United Nations are so radical and so far from the mainstream that even the Obama Administration generally is opposed to these crack-pot ideas.
“I’m horribly offended”
Though that may simply be because Obama wants to seize the money for his own class-warfare purposes and doesn’t want to compete with other taxing authorities. Sort of the way hyenas and vultures sometime fight over a carcass. Or how inner-city gangs sometimes fight over turf.
Actually, I apologize for those analogies. I hope the carrion feeders and gang-bangers of the world will forgive me for equating them with politicians.
“That’s an unfair slur”
Hyenas and vultures both have valuable roles in the ecosystem. And gangs sometimes engage in non-coercive activities such as selling drugs to yuppies.
It’s beyond my abilities, however, to say something nice about politicians.

 by wp    BEYOND MY ABILITIES TOO.  They have demonstrated their lack of any good qualities too many times.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


What Hath John Robert Wrought

We must repeal Obamacare! Sign the petition!
State legislative candidates may think they’re in the minor leagues, but a big league issue is coming at them. Over many years of door-knocking and community forums in five runs for Colorado’s statehouse, I’ve practiced diplomatically discussing misdirected questions about federal issues above my pay grade (way above, sadly). But in this critical election, state candidates everywhere have to swing at an urgent fastball delivered by Team Obama-Roberts: Should your state throw in with the president and significantly expand the Medicaid program as part of his make-over of U.S. healthcare?
Of course, Team Obama-Pelosi didn’t intend to call state lawmakers into the game on that question. But reliever Roberts threw the pitch straight at them when he revised the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to save it from a 9th inning run-down. Congress’s original play required states to significantly expand Medicaid benefits, or lose all of Uncle Sam’s matching dollars for healthcare for the poor. That devastating hit was unthinkable for states struggling with mushrooming costs. Their only option was submission. But Roberts brushed off the play, and said Congress can’t cut all Medicaid funding to uncooperative states; just the increased dollars tied to the expanded new benefits. (Someday, Roberts may have to account to a higher power for where he got the authority to re-write the playbook, rather than simply call balls and strikes, but that’s a different column).
The effect of Robert’s playmaking is that state governments, not Congress, will have the last word on a critical piece of Obamacare—growing the Medicaid program. This pushes the discussion of what to do about the healthcare law to a broader audience. States will have to act one way or the other. Every voter in every legislative district in the country deserves to hear whether candidates think this is a good idea and how they will vote.
Statehouse candidates who think thrusting government deeper into healthcare is exactly the wrong kind of reform, especially as the modern world faces fiscal meltdown under the pressure of public entitlements, have a critical opportunity to make their case and to educate voters. Here are some points they might consider:
Shortly after Medicare’s creation in 1965, Congress estimated the program would cost $12 billion in 1990. In reality, the number was $110 Billion. Virtually every projection the government has made about every facet of Medicaid has grossly understated actual costs.
Medicaid is one of the biggest and fastest-growing parts of the national budget and of every state budget. Pouring public money into a good or service doesn’t make it “more affordable”; it just changes who’s paying. Pouring public money into a good or service doesn’t lower costs; it tends to inflate them.
Public programs lack the discipline of market forces based on supply and demand, so government regulators have to invent alternative ways to try to keep costs down. The most common strategy is cutting the reimbursement rates government allows to providers. But Congress has gone to that well too often, with increasingly harmful results. Already, many providers won’t accept Medicaid patients because of the low compensation. It is increasingly difficult for poor people to find basic care; they’re covered on paper, but not in reality.
When providers lose money treating under-funded Medicaid patients, they have to cover their shortfall by charging their insured patients more. That cost shift, from insured patients to government funded patients—rather than the media’s favorite bogeyman, unpaid ER care--is by far the biggest cost shift in healthcare.
Too, expanding public programs worsens other problems in private healthcare. More generous public options drives a problem called “crowd-out,” When public benefits climb higher up the income scale, they make it harder for struggling employers to justify the cost of providing insurance; their employees will be covered anyway. More companies are succumbing to the pressure to drop coverage.
Crowd-out does damage in all directions. Fewer people pay into the actuarial pool that sustains private health coverage, pressing rates even higher. More people fall into the underfunded public program, raising costs there, causing pressure for provider cuts, driving greater cost-shift, and the death spiral continues.
All these issues are critical for the future path of healthcare and for state and federal budgets. 2012 presents a rare and important opportunity for local candidates to engage crucial national questions. Batters up. 

 by wp   It is a wonderful thing how our nation was working and doing fairly well, yes needing improvement, and WE elected a man who promised change and that He would bring America down to the level of the rest of the third world nations and so many thought :  how wonderfull.  Well here we are and how wonderfull is it???  Over half the workforce working for the government being payed by the taxes the growing majority of the population can no longer pay because their are less jobs available every day due to a growing work force . and no jobs available for them.   SMART THINKING.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Don’t Blame Roberts, Blame Obama

We must repeal Obamacare! Sign the petition!
Don’t Blame Roberts, Blame Obama
Feeling misled? You certainly should. Congress created a law so complex that it occupies between 2,400 and 2,800 pages depending on who says what, almost all of them unread by the people who voted for it. President Obama and his Democratic colleagues told you many things about the law – most of which were either mischaracterizations or outright lies. What Chief Justice John Roberts did was tell the truth, and now we can move forward.
This is all on Chief Justice Roberts. The four liberals who concurred with him don’t believe that the individual mandate is a tax. They firmly believed that the government had the right under the commerce clause to expand the power of the federal government in a sweeping manner. They inherently believe in these matters that the government has few limitations. They were so convinced of that they appeared to be willing to emasculate the commerce clause to expand the federal government’s grip over 18% of our economy. The four signed on to what Roberts wrote and sacrificed the future of their souls for achieving their goals today. But the question remains did they sacrifice anything?
Roberts did do two major things in his opinion. First, he stated the court has limited powers to control the legislative branch. In effect, he told Americans that “You elected these people, they are your representatives, and you have to live with their actions.” Second, he put a stop to the damnable lies about taxes. Politicians lie all the time about the manner in which they extract increasing amounts from your pocket, usually calling them fees, dues, excise fees, duties, levies, or something else. Roberts just confirmed what we all know: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck – it is a duck. Remember this penalty -- which is estimated to hit four million Americans -- is to be collected by the 20,000 new IRS agents. Roberts may have done it for contrived reasons, but elected officials can never again claim that additional money going to government is anything other than a tax.
Even the best and brightest are still duped by the verbiage. Charles Krauthammer said that he’s open to fines, but not taxes. What he’s missing is that fines are now much more than mere penalties; a parking ticket that used to cost $20 is now $50 – and is used to balance the city budget. A “fine” levied against a corporation by the SEC doesn’t go to the aggrieved stockholders, but to the coffers of the federal government; what was once $500,000 has become $5,000,000. States love delinquent taxpayers because they rake in huge fines that get increased with every budget shortfall. Fines are nothing more than a duck not called a duck.
But now we can have an honest debate about the value of the Affordable Care Act, which, frankly, is a complete fraud. Its supporters tout that children up to 26 years old can remain on their parents’ plans, but never mention that the parents must then pay for comprehensive insurance plans that cost substantially more than healthy young adults can obtain on their own. They applaud the elimination of lifetime caps on payments by insurance companies without pointing out the obvious consequence that premiums will increase significantly to cover these costs. And these are just two of many misleading claims.
Now we must convey how deceptive this law is at its core. If you don’t believe me, believe Obama’s Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. He stated “The ACA represents the largest set of tax law changes in more than 20 years and presents a major challenge to the Internal Revenue Service.” It includes 20 new taxes (now 21 after Roberts’ ruling), few of which have gone into effect and most of which are deviously imposed on us by raising them on third parties. For example, there is a new tax on medical devices that will be passed through to insurance companies – and then, of course, to policyholders (you). Democrats have already imposed a new tax on pharmaceutical companies, which raises the cost of your prescriptions through higher premiums or larger out-of-pocket costs. Americans need to familiarize themselves with these 21 new taxes and realize that when our medical costs and insurance premiums costs soar, it is ultimately ObamaCare that is responsible. Furthermore, these tax rates will inevitably increase, with the overwhelming portion of the burden squarely on the shoulders of the middle class. That’s because that’s where the money is.
We have to inform the American people that there are 157 commissions and boards that will start going into effect in 2013. These will be filled with government wonk types convinced that they know how the health care system should operate. They will write thousands of pages of regulations and make decisions for every one of us. Your health care will no longer be determined by you or your doctor.
We now have a moment of clarity. The mandate is what everybody, except the lawyers for the President, was unwilling to call it. ObamaCare is a huge tax increase that will hit every working American – specifically the working class upon whom Obama promised not to raise taxes. The law will put a stranglehold around the neck of all Americans, and ultimately centralize every decision about health care in Washington.
Democrats have created their mantra – this is over, let’s move on. Mr. Romney must, with the help of all of us, communicate to the electorate that ObamaCare is a disaster. Justice Roberts has given us that opportunity. If we cannot accomplish this goal, we deserve to lose the election – a loss that would put an end to the America we know.

 REGARDLESS as to who is to blame the ultimate blame must fall on we, the American People.  WE elected the idiots that drafted this abomination into office, and WE have allowed them to run rogue with the checkbook and wealth of our nation.  It is time WE took back the checkbook and cleaned out the cesspool WE allowed to develop in OUR nations capitol.     by wp


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Backwards President

The June jobs report was disappointing for the third consecutive month – just 80,000 new jobs created. And, yet the President said "that's a step in the right direction."
Two new workers are being added to the population for every one job that is created. The only direction Obama has the economy moving is backward.
A quick look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics report shows that the Civilian Labor Force grew by 156,000 workers in June – nearly twice the number of new jobs.
Just to keep up with population growth, on average our economy needs to be adding about 125,000 jobs per month. To dig out from this deep sustained recession, replace the 8 million jobs lost and keep pace with population growth, economists tell us that we need to be creating at least 250,000 jobs monthly for about five years.
However, over the last three months the size of the work force population has increased by 75,000 more than the total number of people with a job. Obama's economic policies don't even have us treading water, much less moving forward.
In addition to the phony "right direction" claim last Friday, Obama touted the creation of "4.4 million new jobs over the past 28 months." It actually has been 30 months, but close enough considering the source.
But, what Obama chooses to ignore is that the population total increased by 7.3 million over those same 30 months, according to the Labor Department. Using a normal Labor Force Participation Rate of 66.5%, slightly more that 5 million new jobs would have been necessary just to keep pace with population growth.
Not only has Obama failed to lead us to a strong economic recovery, the numbers from his own Labor Department suggest we're still losing ground. 
 What we should do is send all federal politicians back to school so they can learn how to do math correctly.  IT IS QUITE OBVIOUS THEY NEVER LEARNED EVEN THE BASICS.   by wp

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...