Hillary Clinton Says America’s Democracy Has Been Around a Lot Longer Than Europe’s Democracy
While Hillary Clinton was in Europe, and in between her fumbling the names of the European leaders in a manner that the left would have skewered President Bush for, Hillary Clinton made another gaffe.
“It is hard enough with two parties to come to any resolution, and I say this very respectfully, because I feel the same way about our own democracy, which has been around a lot longer than European democracy.”
This comment had the people gathered there shaking their heads as it is simply not true. Was this a horrible gaffe that will irrevocably harm relations between Europe and America? Hardly. I only bring it up to compare Hillary Clinton to President Bush for the second time in this post.
It wasn’t all that long ago when the former president said,”as the people of the world’s largest democracy recover from these attacks, they can count on the world’s oldest democracy to stand by their side.” He was referring to America as the world’s oldest Democracy. This drew the usual attacks of “Bush is an idiot,” and so on from the left wing blogs. They were abuzz at the former president’s stupidity and lack of knowledge of history.
But here we have the venerable Hillary Clinton saying basically the same thing as President Bush and I just thought it was worth mentioning. George Bush was stupid, but we are supposed to cut Hillary some slack because as the article says, she was tired.
Towards the end of this article about how President Obama’s radical agenda is hurting the economy comes what many would probably consider the tipping point in the whole American economic system. The Wall Street Journal article that I linked to above starts off ominous enough:
It’s hard not to see the continued sell-off on Wall Street and the growing fear on Main Street as a product, at least in part, of the realization that our new president’s policies are designed to radically re-engineer the market-based U.S. economy, not just mitigate the recession and financial crisis.
As if that wasn’t ban enough the article towards the end has this little tidbit:
New and expanded refundable tax credits would raise the fraction of taxpayers paying no income taxes to almost 50% from 38%
I am one who believes the government should keep their hands out of the pockets of the people so naturally I should be glad that less people are paying taxes, right? Wrong. The fact that 50% of the people will no longer pay taxes is what will be the tipping point in the American economic system that I alluded to at the beginning of this post.
This is potentially the most pernicious feature of the president’s budget, because it would cement a permanent voting majority with no stake in controlling the cost of general government.
Lost in the massive amounts of spending that this president has proposed is the fact that half of America will no longer be paying taxes. Half of the people who vote will have no stake in the government. Half of the voters will be drains on the economy looking to vote to ensure that the cash continues to flow from the producers to the non-producers.
President Obama has managed to do in six weeks what Democrats have been salivating over and planning for years, and that is to increase the government handouts until they reach a majority of non-producers who will vote to keep Democrats in power so that they can continue to live off of the backs of working Americans.
“A permanent voting majority with no stake in controlling the cost of general government,” means a permanent voting block of Democrats. A permanent welfare class leeching off of the government with no hope or desire to better themselves.
This will fundamentally rock the foundation that the American economy is based on. President Obama’s policies have not helped the economy and in truth they are not designed to. He is accomplishing his desired goal as the stock market collapses because his goal is to increase government dependence.
We can sit here and say that this president’s policies haven’t accomplished anything if we assume that his policies were supposed to help the economy. But his policies have accomplished something, they have accomplished their ultimate objection. To subjugate the American people to permanent Democrat rule.
The way that he has accomplished this goal through stealth maneuvering is brilliantly devious. While Americans were worried about the economy and their jobs President Obama swooped in and through stimulus packages, spending, and government programs he managed to quietly make half of the people in the country non-producers.
This is something that the American worker may never recover from, we will have to work harder, longer hours as our taxes increase to pay for those who will now be voting to ensure themselves that they won’t have to.
There was a reason that the founding fathers believed that only land owners should be able to vote. They only wanted people who had a stake in the government, only people who had something to lose, to be able to vote, because they knew that once people who had nothing to lose and every thing to gain in the outcome of elections became the majority that this is exactly what would happen.
And now it is happening.
The last I had heard of the Washington D.C. Voting Rights bill was when it was pulled from the floor and denied a vote. Either it is back on the table or the story about it being pulled from consideration was false. It was rumored to have been removed from the floor because blue dog Democrats were not going to support it. Perhaps it underwent a little change and is now back for round two.
If it was changed and brought back to the floor I can tell you one change that was not made to it. The Fairness Doctrine is still amended to the original bill. It isn’t called the Fairness Doctrine, it has a new name, but the goal is the same.
When asked about Dick Durbin’s amendment, which would “encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest,” Nancy Pelosi said she was in favor the amendment.
“Certainly, I support Mr. Durbin in most things.”
“Diversity in media ownership is very, very, important,”
She openly supports the violation of the first amendment and the right to the freedom of speech and of the media. The FCC will have control over “the public interest” when it comes to the media. What is the “public interest” that Nancy Pelosi and Dick Durbin are interested in controlling in the media? We know the answer to that don’t we? Shutting down the opposition in a Stalinist fashion.
House minority leader John Boehner believes that he will be able to muster enough votes to kill this assault on the constitution.
I think as we get into the appropriations process you will see us continue our effort to make sure the Fairness Doctrine is not put back into place,” Boehner told CNSNews.com at his weekly press conference on Thursday. “And I do believe the votes are in the Congress to make sure that happens.”
Lets hope that is the case and the precedent of suppressing views that Democrats do not agree with is allowed to take place. Once the radio is regulated it will be the internet that will be next. It will just keep spreading out until all opposing views are shut down.
He (or she) who controls the media…….
In yet another embarrassing blow to President Obama, his nominee for surgeon general has withdrawn his name from consideration for the position.
The only reason given is that he wants to spend more time with his family. There doesn’t appear to any problems with his nomination that would lead him to resign although his nomination has met some resistance.
This is an embarrassment to the president, but he must be getting used to embarrassment by now. Between Gupta and the disgraced Daschle, Obama has lost two of his key players in his effort to nationalize health-care. Obama now has to start at ground zero.
Sooner or later Obama is going to have to get serious about his cabinet appointees. He will be running for re-election before he finally fills out his cabinet at this rate.
Another day, another problem with a an Obama administration nominee. If this keeps up I may just have to start writing posts on the days when there are no controversies, to commemerate such a memorable and rare event.
This latest investigation involves Chas Freeman, who has been tabbed by the Obama administration as the chairman of the National Intelligence Council. He is now being investigated for his ties to foreign finances. So far he is refusing to release his financial disclosure forms. These forms are required for those seeking high level cabinet posts. What is he hiding?
Perhaps this:
Among the areas likely to be scrutinized in the vetting process are Mr. Freeman’s position on the international advisory board of the China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC). The Chinese government and other state-owned companies own a majority stake in the concern, which has invested in Sudan and other countries sometimes at odds with the United States, including Iran.
Or maybe it is this:
Mr. Freeman is also president of the nonprofit educational organization Middle East Policy Council (MEPC), which paid him $87,000 in 2006, and received at least $1 million from a Saudi prince.
Or this:
He also has chaired Projects International, a consulting firm that has worked with foreign companies and governments.
Or maybe, and probably, all of the above. This sure as hell seems like a conflict of interest to me. But Hillary Clinton was still approved as Secretary of State even though her husband has made millions of dollars in speaking fees oversees and she will be meeting with the very same leaders that her husband has made the money from. That was a conflict of interest and it was casually brushed aside. So I am sure this will also be judged as no big deal.
Sooner or later somebody has to start paring attention to all of the crooks and conflicts of interest in the Obama administration, don’t they?
The New Hampshire house voted to increase the gas tax by 15 cents over the next three years in 5 cent increments. This will double the gas tax in a relatively short period of time. In a recession the oh-so-caring legislature of New Hampshire have decided to stick it to us one more time.
When people, average citizens, face a budget problem at home we sacrifice. We decide what we need and what we want and then we provide for our needs at the expense of our wants. We do not buy what we cannot afford. We make budget cuts and balance our income with our expenses.
When the New Hampshire government faces a budget problem, a problem that the teflon governor created, does the government sacrifice? Does the New Hampshire government provide for its needs at the expense of its wants? Does the New Hampshire government stop paying for what is can’t afford? Does the New Hampshire government balance the budget with cuts?
The answer to all of those questions is a resounding NO! The government calls upon those same average citizens to sacrifice. The New Hampshire government does not sacrifice, they do not balance their budget by cutting out the wants to pay for the needs, after all they want everything and they are going to get it, DAMMIT!
While Governor Lynch has spent New Hampshire into a deficit the economy has taken a downturn that began under the Bush administration and continues for an extended period of time because of Obama’s proposals. This downturn has resulted in Lynch’s overinflated revenue projections to fall short and now instead of cutting out the programs that he over funded he is going to ask us to sacrifice instead.
Governor Lynch says that he opposes the gas tax increase, he prefers to stick it to us with a $10 increase in the cost of vehicle registration. A tax is a tax and it doesn’t seem to matter to this man and the legislature if New Hampshire residents are struggling, they are going to raise our taxes one way or the other. We are going to sacrifice while the New Hampshire government grows fat at our expense.
But I question whether Governor Lynch really opposes the gas tax. Maybe he does and maybe he doesn’t. But even if he does the question remains, will he actually veto a gas tax submitted to him by his own party? Or will he succumb to the pressure put on him from his party.
If I had to guess, and I will, I think he folds to partisan pressure and signs the gas tax into law, he will say that he opposes it but he has no other choice. But he won’t stop there, he will raise vehicle registrations also, after all he likes this idea.
He will get both taxes and we will get fucked, just like we always do. The budget crisis calls for the state government to sacrifice but in the end we will be the ones who are asked to sacrifice. The government will confuse their needs with their wants and will consider everything a need, making no sacrifices.
It only the state government were forced to budget the way her residents are maybe then we would have responsibility in government. But that is just a pipe dream, it is time for New Hampshire residents to bend over and take one for the team.
Eric Falardeau has been in a Massachusetts jail awaiting trial for murder charges. He beat a man to death outside a bar. A total stranger and family man whose only crime was wanting to have a beer with his brother after work.
Falardeau has admitted to beating the man, he claims that he didn’t mean to kill him. There is no doubt that Faladeau is the man who killed William Beal.
Last week a Massachusetts judge released Falareau, he will never face charges for the murder he committed. Why? Because he was deemed to be too stupid to stand trial. He doesn’t understand the charges being brought against him.
he has an IQ that borders on mental retardation, and said he would never be able to understand court proceedings and assist in his own defense, according to court records.
He wasn’t sent to an institution, there was no program for people who are just stupid so today he is a free man. No punishment for the crime. Here is reaction from the family:
He got away with it, and it’s like telling people out there they can get away with anything, all you have to say is you’re dumb and stupid,” said Beal’s sister, Catherine Ambrose of Lawrence. “It’s ridiculous and it’s not right … Since when was being stupid a defense?”
This murder was not Falardeau first brush with the law, the man has a violent past.
Falardeau has a long history of violent outbursts, and a record of assault and battery charges. He allegedly assaulted a jail guard in 2004, and punched and kicked police and EMTs while they were at his house on a medical call in 2006. Those charges were also dropped this week.
Falardeau has admitted to anger issues and to an attachment to alcohol.
This man has a violent history and he was allowed to walk out of jail a free man. His history tells us that he will have a run in with the law again, what will it take to keep this man behind jail for good?
You would think that Massachusetts would have learned a lesson from the last murderer that was released from prison there. Daniel Tavarez Jr, a convicted murderer was released from prison, he went to Washington and murdered a newlywed couple who had their whole new lives ahead of them.
The father of the new bride said “It’s because of stupidity in Massachusetts that my daughter is dead,” and last week it was because of a murderer’s stupidity that he will not face trial.
There is something horrible wrong with the justice system when convicted and admitted murderers either are released from jail or do not even have to face charges. Somehow the system forgets the victims and paints the perpetrators as the victims.
Justice was not served to the family of William Beal when a judge decided that Falardeau was too stupid to stand trial. He is free to kill again. I feel for the family of William Beal, how must they feel knowing the murderer of their loved one will not face any punishment for his crime? How secure do the feel when they go to bed at night?
And how can the judge, Howard Whitehead, sleep at night? If Falardeau kills again the blood is on Judge Howard Whitehead’s hands.
President Obama is fond of reminding us that he inherited the economic mess that we are currently in. He is correct, to a point. The economy was headed downward when he took office, there is no doubt about that. But there comes a time when you can no longer deflect blame for what is going on around you and now is that time in regards to Obama and the economy.
President Obama has spent his first six weeks in office passing legislation that is supposed to help our faltering economy so what has happened since he took office? The stock market has fallen 3000 points. This amid all of the policies that the president has put in place. One has to begin to wonder how much of the current decline is do to Obama’s policies, and that is what this article does.
As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama’s policies have become part of the economy’s problem.
But after five weeks in office, it’s become clear that Mr. Obama’s policies are slowing, if not stopping, what would otherwise be the normal process of economic recovery.
I have written that I believed once the stimulus bill passed President Obama had taken ownership of the economy. Whatever past problems drove the stock market down were just that, the past. President Obama’s stimulus was so damned important to the economy that no delay was acceptable, remember? We had to pass his stimulus bill or the economy would never recover, yet what has happened since the stimulus bill was passed? The economy just continued to fall, that is all that has happened.
If the stimulus bill failed to have its desired effect, and in fact had the opposite effect, to continue to blame Bush for the still falling economy is disingenuous to say the least. The market reacts to all of this president’s words and actions and so far his policies have had a negative effect on the stock markets. This goes beyond just the stimulus bill, there is TARP II, and the mortgage bailout plan, and the new budget with tax increases. All of these plans are designed to save the economy and yet it gets worse every day.
President Obama may have inherited a recession but he owns it now. It is time to stop deflecting the blame. President Obama’s policies have hurt the economy and he can’t blame Bush for that any longer. It is time for him to look in the mirror and realize that he is responsible for the continuation of the economic downturn.
Much like FDR’s New Deal slowed down the recovery from the depression Obama’s policies are slowing down the current recovery. I just hope his policies don’t lead us into a depression.
When I read this I had trouble keeping a straight face. Timothy Geithner called President Obama’s nearly $4 trillion budget “remarkably fiscally responsible.” If you needed more proof that the Obama administration is incompetent I think that Geithner’s remarks be all the proof that you need.
President Obama’s “remakably fiscally responsible” budget will add $4 trillion to the national debt over the next four years and a total of $7 trillion over the next decade.
As it stands, Obama’s maiden budget contemplates adding $6.9 trillion to the national debt over the next decade–$3.7 trillion of which will be added during Obama’s first term.
Yet Geithner has the balls to defend this budget and call it fiscally responsible. These are the people who are controlling our future, does this give you a warm and fuzzy feeling? Can you image what the budget would look like if President Obama wasn’t so damned fiscally responsible? I shudder to think.
Maybe I am a little sensitive to the term “fiscally responsible” being from New Hampshire. Governor Lynch increased spending in my state by 17.5% in 2007, he paid for this spending with tax increases and justified it with extremely optimistic revenue projections. He called the budget “fiscally responsible,” it wasn’t.
Since that time New Hampshire has fallen into a huge budget deficit as the projections were never realistic and Governor Lynch has no idea how to get us out of it..
And now it appears that President Obama is using the same type of voodoo economics to justify his huge budget increases. I see the same mistakes being made on a national level. Seeing what this type of economic plan has done to the tiny state of New Hampshire first hand, I am extremely leery of seeing them carried out on a much, much larger scale.
President Obama called off a press conference that was to be held with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown because of snow. (Wasn’t it Obama who not long ago ribbed Washington for calling off school because of snow?)
This is not playing well with the newspapers in Britain who see this as a snub to their Prime Minister. The British press was there waiting for the press conference but they were left in the cold.
on this side of the Atlantic the whole business looked pretty demeaning. The morning papers and TV last night featured plenty of comment focused on the White House’s very odd and, frankly, exceptionally rude treatment of a British PM. Squeezing in a meeting, denying him a full press conference with flags etc. The British press corps, left outside for an hour in the cold, can take it and their privations are of limited concern to the public.
As we can read here there are more writers in Britain who feel basically the same.
By 8pm, the press conference – if there’d ever been one planned – was officially off. The White House press schedule stated: “There will be a pool spray of the meeting.” In layman’s language, that means a small collection of reporters and perhaps two or three quick questions. That means something very short and ample opportunity to dodge anything difficult.
This writer even questions whether there was a press conference scheduled in the first place. He is questioning President Obama’s integrity. As well as his unwillingness to expose himself to tough questions.
He then goes on to take another shot at the president:
After all, there are 132 rooms in the White House at least some of which, presumably, are currently free of snow.
And another writer had this to say, picking up on the whole Messiah image of this president:
not the standing podium-to-podium with the Messiah image that Mr Brown imagined.
All through the campaign we were told that America had lost her image in the world and that we needed to rebuild that image. Barack Obama was just the man to do it. Yet in his first meeting with our biggest ally he stubs Gordon Brown drawing the following sentiment:
We get the point, sunshine: we’re just one of many allies and you want fancy new friends. Well, the next time you need something doing, something which impinges on your national security, then try calling the French, or the Japanese, or best of all the Germans. The French will be able to offer you first rate support from their catering corps but beyond that you’ll be on your own.
President Obama didn’t get off to a rip roaring start with the whole repairing America’s image with this arrogant move now did he? Or perhaps Britain just didn’t get the memo that the whole world was supposed to love us now that dear leader was in power.
