Democrats Cool on Global Warming Legislation
The global warming crisis may be over, at least for now. And by the global warming crisis I mean the full court press that the Democrats were going to apply to the people of America in an attempt to separate us from our money. That to me is the only true crisis that was facing Americans in regard to global warming.
It appears that the Democrats are afraid to push their global warming initiative right away because of the bad economy. Finally some of the truth comes about about this hoax. Every initiative that the environmentalists propose either separates people from their money, or businesses from their money. Every initiative that environmentalists propose involves regulating and controlling people and businesses. And because of the bad economy Democrats are unwilling to push more spending legislation down our throats so soon after the $1 trillion welfare handout that they forced on the American people last week.
But this issue is not going away forever. It is too lucrative for them to give up on permanently. Sooner or later the economy will turn around, (probably later after Obama’s stimulus package deepens the recession) and when it does the Democrats will be right there with their hands out looking to take our money and regulate our activities under the guise of saving the planet.
We have received a reprieve from the global warming hoax but this issue will be back. Democrats are going to try to tax and regulate us and businesses and they will succeed eventually. But for now at least, we are safe.
The interesting thing about this is the fact that Democrats by their inaction on this issue due to the economy are admitting that their global warming programs are bad for the economy. If these programs, regulations, taxes, and fees are bad for the economy during bad times, they are bad for the economy during good times as well. But the Democrats don’t care about that, they only care about taking more of our money away from us.
Democrats don’t really care about the economy or the environment, they see global warming as an excuse to raise taxes and that is all they really care about.
Stimulus Money For States Comes With Strings Attached
So far three governors have claimed they are not going to accept the stimulus money targeted for their states. We will see if when push comes to shove they are serious or if this is political posturing.
One member of the house basically said that opposition to the stimulus bill is racially motivated. He claimed that a governor not accepting the stimulus money was equivalent to a “slap in the face to African-Americans.”
But race isn’t the reason why some governors are leery about taking the money. There are legitimate concerns over the stimulus money. The stimulus money is not free, there are stipulations that must be agreed to in order to receive the money. And that is why many governors, even those who are going to accept the money, have concerns.
Different states have slightly different stipulations but the end results are all the same. Some states have to overhaul their welfare programs other states; unemployment. The bottom line is that social programs must be expanded if a state wants the money.The overhauls are to be PERMANENT! Once the money goes away the programs will need to be funded. Where do you think that money is going to come from? Why, us of course. Didn’t President Obama just say yesterday that he didn’t want to burden future generations with our debt? He is doing just that.
Rahm Emanuel once quipped about crisis, “never let a good crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
It appears that President Obama has taken those words to heart. He is using this crisis to expand entitlement programs and left wing agenda items and he is doing it on the backs of future generations. He is trampling on what is left of states rights by forcing them to expand their entitlement programs.
He is using this crisis to further an agenda that otherwise would not be acceptable to the American people. Rahm Emanuel is probably smiling. I am not.
President Obama Holds a Summit on Fiscal Responsibility
Yesterday President Obama held a summit on fiscal responsibility. In his speech he claimed, and I am paraphrasing, that the era of irresponsible spending was over and it was time to get back to fiscal responsibility.
My first reaction when I heard the president speak about fiscal responsibility was…HA! Can he really be serious when he speaks about fiscal responsibility? Does he really expect us to take him at his word about fiscal responsibility and cutting wasteful spending just a week after he signed the biggest spending bill in all of history?
Here is part of what he said:
Contrary to the prevailing wisdom of Washington these past few years, we cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next Congress or the next administration or the next generation
I agree with President Obama on this much, the last administration did spend way too much money. But for him to say that it is time reduce spending so that the future generations won’t have to pay our debts after this man has ensured our children doing just that is hypocritical. Does he really think the American people have forgotten so soon about his massive stimulus bill filled with pork and entitlement programs? And it is pretty damned arrogant of him to think that just because it is he who is spending this money it is okay.
And his spending is far from over as Democrats are going to ask for another $410 billion for this year. Where is the spending going to end? What is next year’s budget going to look like?
President Obama talks a good game, hell that is the only reason he was elected, but his actions many times contradict his words. As he lectures us and congress perhaps he would be better of giving that speech in front of a mirror so that he could see the biggest offender.
Al Sharpton Calls For The FCC to Investigate The New York Post
Today Al Sharpton called for the FCC to investigate the New York Post because of the political cartoon that ran in the paper last week. You have probably heard about the cartoon by now but just in case you haven’t I will recap.
Following the story of “Travis” the chimp, who mauled a woman and ate her face and was subsequently shot and killed by police, the New York Post ran a political cartoon that portrayed the police standing over the dead “Travis” and the caption read “Who is going to right the new stimulus bill now?”
This cartoon has been interpreted by people like Al Sharpton, either 
intentionally or not, as calling President Obama a monkey. That was not the intent of the cartoon. The intent of the cartoon was to make fun of this ridiculous stimulus package that everyone knows is not a stimulus package but a trillion dollar welfare check.
The cartoon was not comparing Obama to a chimp, but somehow intent no longer matters. I will be the first to say that this cartoon was probably a bad idea from the get go. It is surprising that nobody at the Post stopped this cartoon from being published as this misinterpretation was a guarantee.
But there is another problem here, a greater problem. And that problem is the way people are projected who do not agree with Barack Obama’s policies. We are seeing people criminalized and investigated who hold opposing views to Obama. They are trying to silence debate by intimidating their opposition through accusations of racism. This is a feeble and weak-minded approach used by those on the left who are unwilling to debate.
Last week a man was investigated by the secret service for displaying an anti-Obama sign on his car, and yesterday we had Al Sharpton demanding an investigation into a newspaper that ran a cartoon that he didn’t agree with. But this has been going on since the campaign was in full swing.
I have written stories about a Missouri sheriff who was investigated for using Obama’s middle name, the truth squads sent out to threaten television stations who ran anti-Obama commercials, and an anti-Obama writer who was detained in Kenya before he could hold a press conference. And the list continues.
There is a track record here in regards to speaking out against Obama. In today’s America we are not allowed to oppose Obama because of his policies, we are automatically called racists. When word came down that three Republican governors were going to refuse the stimulus money Rep. James Clyburn basically said that this was racially motivated. He called it a “slap in the face to African-Americans.”
A person being in opposition to the stimulus bill can only hold that position for one reason according to Cluburn, because the opponents are racist. It couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that we think that either printing money or borrowing money during a recession is an incredibly stupid thing to do. No, there has to be more to it than that.
This seems to be a theme that we who oppose Obama are going to have to contend with over the next 4-8 years so we are just going to have to get used to it. Once we were told that opposing an administration (any administration) was patriotic (right Hillary?) now we are being told that opposing this administration is racist. We will be under attack for having the audacity (of hope) to debate and criticize the policies of this president. Instead of debating the merits of our arguments they will call us names and have us investigated.
It is really a small minded argument by the left to throw the claim of claim racism out there because we choose to engage in one of the oldest and most time honored traditions in this country; debating politics and government. Instead of debating our positions they would rather attack us on a personal level. I am okay with that, it was to be expected. Some day the left will move beyond race and we will be able to have an honest discussion about all of the political issues without there being a disclaimer. Until then we will just have to keep fighting and put up with their baseless attacks.
But it does do a disservice to two of the greatest Americans, and Republicans, that this country has ever known; Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King.
Obama’s Backdoor Tax Increase (Letting the Bush Tax Cuts Expire)
I hope that you didn’t make too many plans with that thirteen dollar tax break that you are going to receive under the stimulus package. Because you are going to need your thirteen dollar, which will fall to eight dollar, tax break to help pay for the new tax increase that you are going to receive next year.
It was nice of Obama to make the symbolic gesture of cutting taxes on the middle class right before his backdoor tax increase cancels that tax break out. You may be wondering what this backdoor tax increase that I am talking about is all about.
It’s simple, President Obama is going to let the Bush tax cuts expire. These taxes are set to expire in 2010. Contrary to the spin from the Obama administration the Bush tax cuts were not just on the rich. When these tax cuts expire every American taxpayer will receive a tax increase negating his thrifty thirteen dollar tax cut.
Part of the discussion is sure to include the impending tax increases set to hit every American taxpayer when the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010, unless Congress acts to extend them. During the presidential campaign, then-Sen. Barack Obama pledged to repeal the tax cuts.
He is not going to repeal them because then people would see it for what it is, Obama raising their taxes. Instead he will let them expire under the cover of night. It won’t be he who raises taxes but just the expiration of another president’s tax cuts. But it is important to remember what this arrogant man said about the American taxpayer in regards to the Bush tax cuts when he was running for president.
The Bush tax cuts — people didn’t need them, and they weren’t even asking for them, and that’s why they need to be less, so that we can pay for universal health care and other initiatives
He said that we didn’t need them and that we didn’t want them. Why would we want the money that we worked hard for? How arrogant is a statement like that? How can he sit there and say that we don’t need extra money? Money that we earned. He truly believes that he can spend our money better than we can.
But there is another secret buried in the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and it is a secret that the press will not report and it is a secret that Obama will never let out. The Bush tax cuts have been portrayed as tax cuts that were only for the rich but when these tax cuts expires it will not be the rich that is hurt the most. It won’t even be the middle class that is hurt the most. When President Obama lets the tax cut expire the poorest Americans will suffer the largest tax increase of all.
every income tax bracket will rise, with the lowest tax bracket experiencing the largest increase – jumping from 10 percent to 15 percent of income.
The people in the lowest tax bracket will have their taxes increased by five percent. The largest increase of all tax brackets. Yet it is Obama who claims that he is a man of the people. He claims that it is he who will protect middle class Americans.
The great lie about the Bush tax cuts has been repeated so often that now people believe it is true. People believe that only the rich got tax cuts under the former president. Every American got tax relief in the Bush tax cuts and when Obama lets those cuts expire it will amount to a backdoor tax on all Americans. And the hardest hit will be the people who can least afford it.
President Obama Says No to Tax Per Miles Driven
Last week I wrote about Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood’s idea about imposing a federal tax on the American citizens for how many miles they drive. Later that day President Obama’s press secretary Robert Gibbs denied that President Obama supported this idea.
Certainly this is good news for the citizens of America but it does leave us with several questions.
The questions that come to mind are, why would Roy LaHood make a statement saying that a tax on miles driven should be looked into if he knew that President Obama opposed it? Did he know that the president opposed it? Is there miscommunication in the Obama administration? Was there a reason why this idea was leaked? Does Barack Obama truly oppose this tax?
All of these questions are linked and I think that they can be answered together. I think it is entirely likely that President Obama is floating out these trial balloons to see what the public reaction is to these types of proposals. He has his Transportation Secretary leak out the idea of a miles driven tax to see what the reaction is to it. With the public outcry against this idea he is then able to backtrack and deny that he was really looking into this tax. He gets the best of both words.
President Obama and his administration are on the same page, they all know what is going on behind closed doors, so there is no miscommunication here. I just find it too hard to believe that Obama’s Transportation Secretary would introduce an idea that he knew Obama didn’t support. He released this information with President Obama’s support.
This was a deliberate feeling out process to gauge where the American people stood on this issue. And they were not happy.
President Obama was then able to backtrack and claim he never supported this idea when in fact he knew that this idea was about to be floated.
President Obama saw the reaction and reacted to it. He now opposes the idea of a miles driven tax but two questions still remain.
Did he support the miles driven tax before he saw the reaction to it? You have read my answer to that question.
And.
Will he support it in the future? You can probably guess what I think the answer to that question is.
George Washington’s Birthday
In tribute to George Washington’s birthday I give you four videos. The first three are a biography of the greatest founding father, and father of the country, while the fourth is what might be my favorite scene from the incredible HBO mini-series “John Adams.”
Enjoy!
President Obama Helps Bush, Tries to Get Email Lawsuit Dismissed
There are two advocacy groups who are suing the Office of the President, they are trying to recover the lost emails of President Bush. President Bush has been fighting this lawsuit and yesterday President Obama’s administration sided with President Bush.
President Obama wants the lawsuit thrown out also. Needless to say, this isn’t going over very well with the advocacy groups and I would guess with the far left who are still hoping that President Bush will be impeached.
This decision has some on the left up in arms over the fact that Obama promised a more transparent administration and this seems to violate that promise.
Tom Blanton, director of the National Security Archive, noted that President Barack Obama on his first full day in office called for greater transparency in government.
The Justice Department “apparently never got the message” from Obama, Blanton said.
Did anyone really believe that Obama would bring transparency to government? Did anyone really believe that he would change the culture of Washington?
The question that remains unanswered is why is he siding with the former president on this issue? There was no explanation given by the president.
If I had to guess, and I am going to, I would say that he understands there is executive privilege and he is unwilling to violate that privilege. Someday he will leave office and he won’t want any potential lawsuits against his administration to be pursued.
President Obama May Not Replace Tom Daschle as Health Czar
President Obama may not be replacing the disgraced nominee Tom Daschle in the role of Health Czar. As a matter of fact he may be abandoning the idea of the Office of Health Reform.
The decision to abolish the Office of Health Reform probably won’t be announced until after Obama names a new Secretary of Health and Human Services. This process could take a while as Obama is probably going to start vetting his nominees going forward to avoid all of the mistakes he has made with his nominees up until this point.
But I want to go back to the Office of Health Reform and what appears to be Obama’s decision to abandon the idea. If health reform is such an important issue, and it certainly is a high priority of the left, why is Obama going to eliminate the office that was designed to work in conjunction with the HHS office to promote universal health care?
I think the answer to that question can be found in the following statement from the above linked article:
Since then, observers have wondered if the administration would keep an office seemingly custom-tailored for Daschle, or scrap it.
The office was custom-tailored for Tom Daschle. The article goes on to say that no matter what direction the president takes with regards to the Office of Health Reform that an agressive effort” will still be made to “fix the broken health-care system.”
So it appears that this office was unnecessary in the first place. A token position handed out to a longtime Democrat insider. The Office of Health Reform was an act of cronyism the likes of which hasn’t been seen since President Bush’s ill fated nomination of Harriet Myers to the Supreme Court.
Senator DeMint to File Legislation Banning the Fairness Doctrine
President Obama recently said that he is against reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, however the movement for reinstatement in Democrat circles is growing. Even if Obama is telling the truth about his stance on the Fairness Doctrine he will not be able to stop it even if he wanted to if it gains enough support.
Sen. Jim DeMint is using President Obama’s recent statement concerning the Fairness Doctrine to introduce the “Broadcaster Freedom Act,” which will make it illegal for the FCC to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine.
Here is what Jim DeMint had to say about his legislation:
“I’m glad President Obama finally confirmed his opposition to the Fairness Doctrine, which attacks the right of free speech on talk radio, but many Democrats in Congress are still pushing it,” DeMint said. “With the support of the new administration, now is the time for Congress to take a stand against this kind of censorship. I intend to seek a vote on this amendment next week so every senator is on record: Do you support free speech or do you want to silence voices you disagree with?”
Think about the name of this bill for a minute and what it means. The fact that a bill called the “Broadcaster Freedom Act” needs to be passed in order to confirm our fist amendment rights gives us a clear indication of where this country is headed. There should be no additional law required to protect broadcasters because the first amendment is that law.
If this accomplishes nothing else it will at least allow us to get these people on record so that we can see which side they are on.
I believe President Obama when he says that he doesn’t support the Fairness Doctrine, however I also believe that he is playing a semantics game. When the new Fairness Doctrine makes it to his desk, and eventually it will, it will not be called the Fairness Doctrine, it will have a name similar to the name of the Jim DeMint bill. Only it will be the opposite of Jim DeMint’s bill and President Obama will support it. It will be the Fairness Doctrine under a different name.
