Barack Obama’s new budget is a $1.5 trillion tax increase
Apparently Barack Obama feels as if only rich people smoke or use tanning booths because he is still clinging to his claim that he has not raised taxes on a majority of Americans, so it was with great anticipation that we awaited Barack Obama’s latest budget proposal to see exactly how much Barack Obama felt that the average American taxpayer should have to “sacrifice.”
According to this article, an analysis of Barack Obama’s new budget shows that it includes over $1.5 trillion in tax increases over the next ten years. According to the article linked to above, here are the tax increases which were included in the budget that Barack Obama unveiled earlier today: Read more…
Freshman Republicans hold the leadership’s feet to the fire
Two days ago I wrote a post about the Republicans’ proposed appropriations bill which would eliminate or reduce dozens of government programs and cut $74 billion from the federal budget. In that post I wrote that this represented a good starting point, but not everyone agreed–including some of the conservative commentors here. And as it turns out they were not alone because the freshman Republicans also felt that these cuts were not deep enough, especially in light of the promise included in the “Pledge to America” to cut $100 billion from the budget.
So the freshman Republicans called for an “emergency meeting” with the establishment Republicans and emerged from that meeting with a new appropriations bill which would meet the promised cuts in the budget of $100 billion.
The freshmen, who obviously are just in their first month of serving, want to make sure that this is a Congress that can earn the respect of the people that sent them here,” said House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.). “And first thing’s first and that is to earn the trust. And that means to deliver on your promises and that’s what we do by this bill
Arizona files a countersuit against the federal government over illegal immigration
As most people in the United States already know, last year Arizona passed a new “controversial” immigration law which is being challenged by the federal government. During this challenge the court ruled that Arizona must stop enforcing the most “controversial” aspects of this law. And up until yesterday there had been no new developments to this story.
But yesterday that changed when Arizona Governor Jan Brewer filed a countersuit against the federal government, claiming that the federal government has failed to control Arizona’s border from the “invasion” of illegal aliens. Arizona’s reasoning for passing the original bill that started this controversy was their belief that the federal government was not living up to expectations when it came to enforcing immigration law and yesterday Jan Brewer finally acted on that belief stating:
Because the federal government has failed to protect the citizens of Arizona, I am left with no other choice
74 Democrats ask Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from the healthcare reform appeal
74 Democrats have sent a letter to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas asking him to recuse himself from the healthcare reform appeal if and when this case makes its way to the Supreme Court. My first visceral reaction to this news was that this was nothing but a ploy by Democrats who know in their hearts that the healthcare reform law is in real trouble to ensure the overturning of the recent Florida decision which ruled that the healthcare reform law was unconstitutional.
And I still feel that Democrats fear that the healthcare reform law is unconstitutional but they may have a point about Clarence Thomas and a potential conflict of interest in this case. Clarence Thomas’s wife–Virginia–started a lobbying group that opposes the healthcare reform law and there is the possibility that this group could profit from a Supreme Court ruling that deems this law unconstitutional. However, Virginia Thomas has stepped down from this organization and is no longer involved with the group, so would this conflict of interest still exist, or is this a political ploy? Personally I do not think the conflict still exists (and there is no recent history of a Supreme Court justice recusing himself because of a spouse’s possible conflict of interest) but this is a question that only Clarence Thomas can answer and if he ends up recusing himself from the healthcare reform debate what exactly will the effect be on this ruling?
House Republicans propose $74 billion in spending cuts
How often do we here from left leaning politicians that during these tough economic times it is time for Americans to sacrifice? We hear it quite a bit, and the term “sacrifice” is almost always used as a code word for raising taxes. What these politicians are trying to say without saying it is the fact that Americans must “sacrifice” some of their hard earned money to the federal government so that it can be used for the greater good. However these very same politicians are not always willing to “sacrifice” themselves (a great example would be John Kerry docking his yacht out of state to avoid taxes), they just expect us to “sacrifice” so that they can keep their entitlement programs fully funded.
But there is another sacrifice that could be made in lieu of raising taxes and that would be a reduction in the spending of federal dollars–however, this is a sacrifice that would have to be made by the politicians in Washington and we all know that they are averse to this notion. Republicans ran on the promise that they would cut $100 billion from the federal budget and they were attacked by the left because they did not offer specifics. Well, today they offered specifics with the unveiling of an appropriations bill which would cut $74 billion from federal programs–cutting the funding for some while eliminating others.
In the crosshairs of this overhaul would be such organizations and as the EPA, Amtrak, NASA, NEA, and AmeriCorps. While this falls short of the Republican goal of cutting $100 billion it still represents a great start. Democrats like to talk about sacrifice and now it is time for them to start sacrificing a little bit themselves–in the form of cutting back on the out of control spending which got us into this problem in the first place. Make no mistake about it–this spending problem is not only a Democrat problem, the Republicans have been just as guilty over the years, but it is the Democrats who constantly tell us that the time to sacrifice is now so it will be interesting to see how they respond the sacrifice they are now being called on to make.
Obamacare is under attack by conservatives, the courts, and a majority of the states and it now appears as if the opposition might be gaining an improbable, and valuable, ally in the fight–moderate Democrats. There is now talk among a handful of moderate Democrats about the possibility of repealing the healthcare mandates included in the healthcare reform law.
According to this article Joe Manchin, Ben Nelson, Claire McCaskill, and Jon Tester–all of whom are up for re-election in 2012–are now exploring the idea of repealing the mandates, claiming that even though the voted for the bill they do not feel as if the mandates were the right avenue to pursue in the first place. While claiming that they are not looking at this through a political prism and are simply doing what they feel is right, I have to believe that this is politically motivated for they had the chance to stop the mandates BEFORE Obamacare became law, yet the voted for it knowing that the mandates were in the bill nonetheless. Now that the bill is seen as widely unpopular they are conveniently changing their position on this bill just before the 2012 election cycle kicks off.
The House will vote to cut off funding for Obamacare next week
While the courts are hearing cases about the constitutionality of Obamacare the Republicans still have one card up their sleeves in the effort to stop Obamacare–the House can cut off funding for the unconstitutional law and they appear to be on the verge of doing just that. Next week the House will take up the issue of the new federal budget and it now appears likely that they will cut off the funding of Obamacare.
When asked about the funding for Obamacare and the impending vote on the budget this is what Eric Cantor had to say:
I expect to see one way or other the product coming out of the House to speak to that and to preclude any funding to be used for that
The House has already voted to repeal the unconstitutional law but that effort came up short in the Senate, so the House is now prepared to implement “Plan B” and cut of funding for this bill. The article that I linked to above states that this move is likely to be struck down by the Senate if it passes the House but as I understand it, it really doesn’t matter what the Senate does because all spending bills must originate in the House. If the House votes to cut off spending there is nothing that the Senate can do about it–unless the brokers some kind of deal with the House–because the House has followed its constitutional rights and the bill will be DOA if the House does not vote to fund it.
There is the very likely scenario that this showdown could result in the shutdown of the federal government and as someone who feels as if the government operates best when it is not operating at all I can’t see how this could be considered a bad idea. It is great to see that the members of the House who were elected on the promise of repealing or defuding Obamcare appear more than willing to do so.
Republicans are now poised to shut down Obamacare in its tracks and considering the fact that the most recent court ruling declared that the whole of Obamacare is unconstitutional it seems that the only responsible thing to do in light of the fact that the Obama regime is willing to ignore the court ruling would be to shut down the law through the constitutional authority granted to them in Article 1 Section 7 of the constitution until the Supreme Court has ruled on this issue.
Until and unless the Supreme Court overturns the Florida decision there is no way that the healthcare reform law should be implemented and if the Obama regime is unwilling to adhere to the ruling it is up to the House to force the adherence to the ruling by using the power of the purse strings.
Barack Obama will ignore the court ruling on Obamacare and will implement the law despite its unconstitutionality
Unless you only get your news from the mainstream media you know that Obamacare was ruled unconstitutional in its entirety by a federal judge in Florida in a case that was brought against the federal government by a majority of the fifty states. While the internet has been abuzz by this ruling the mainstream media has all but ignored the fact that Barack Obama’s signature legislation was ruled unconstitutional.
And speaking of ignoring the Florida court ruling–the media isn’t the only one who has decided to pretend that this ruling doesn’t exist because the federal government still plans on implementing the unconstitutional law.
When Judge Roger Vinson handed down his ruling I was thrilled, yet at the same time I was dismayed by the fact that he did not issue an injunction to stop the Obama regime from implementing the unconstitutional law. But it turned out that Judge Vinson did not feel–rightfully so–that an injunction was necessary because his ruling was an injunction in and of itself: Read more…
February 6th, 2011: Ronald Reagan turns 100
As many of you know today marks what would have been Ronald Reagan’s 100th birthday. There are no words which I can write that would adequately describe this great American, so instead I leave my readers with the following video. Happy Birthday to a great American.
And just for good measure, here is the video which will air just before kick off of the Superbowl later tonight:
When it comes to foreign policy Barack Obama has gone from being woefully inept to being downright dangerous and the latest example of this is the revelation that in order to get Russia to sign the new START treaty, Barack Obama gave away some nuclear secrets of a country that once was our greatest ally–Great Britain. I say once was our greatest ally because this has to have strained the relationship between America and Great Britain.
In 2009 Barack Obama tried to convince Great Britain to give America permission to release information on her nuclear arsenal but Great Britain refused. So what does Barack Obama do? He turns around and ignores the wishes of a sovereign country and gives the information to Russia that Russia had craved for so long. Great Britain did not want Russia to have this information and while Russia may not be the threat that she once was that is not the point. If Great Britain wanted to keep Russia guessing about her number of nuclear weapons then Barack Obama had no business secretly divulging this information. He broke a bond of trust between our two nations and I find it hard to believe that Great Britain is simply going to overlook this; and how is Great Britain supposed to believe anything that comes out of Barack Obama’s mouth in the future?
Barack Obama was played for a fool by Russia during the whole START treaty “negotiations” once he gave up the one true bargaining chip he held in his possession–the missile defense shield–Russia saw that he was weak and they rolled him.
It is beyond belief that Barack Obama could stab our greatest ally in the back like this, but he has made a habit of distancing our allies while bowing to our enemies. Barack Obama loves to go around the world apologizing for America, but this is one time he really should be apologizing for America–or more correctly, his actions.
America's Watchtower 