[somewhere in White House]
Barry: Why does everyone hate me? Don’t they realize I’m working really hard?
Biden (eating animal crackers): Yeah, it’s been a recovery summer baby!
Barry: I just don’t know Joe. The people seem to be forgetting how totally bad-ass I am.
Biden: Hey, B.O., watch me bite the head off of this horse. Boo-Yah!
Barry: I don’t know…maybe I need a vacation to clear my head.
Biden (fiddling with jack in the box and muttering to himself): why can’t i get this box to open?
Barry: Joe? Hello?
Biden (looks up from the box, startled): Wait, what? Roads! Everyone loves roads! And high-speed rail! Yeah, infrastruture baby, infrastructure!
Barry: But we’ve done that already, and honestly, it didn’t really work. Won’t the people get angry?
Biden: Come on baby, no one even remembers the first stimulus. In fact, we’ve spent so much friggin’ money, no one can even distinguish between the bailout, and the stimulus, and the budget. Just say that we can put people to work on building roads and stuff. And be sure to say “stimulus” a lot. Oh, and don’t wear that bike helmet again.
Barry: I knew it! Michelle told me it was the type of helmet that everyone wears in Paris, and that the American people would love it. -Sigh-
Biden: Nope. You looked like a total LAME-O.
Barry: Well you don’t need to yell. So, do you think Congress will get on board with the building roads stuff?
Biden (sharpening his crayons): Sure. Just give ’em the old “republicans drove the economy into the ditch and more roads will help fill in the ditch or somethin'” speech. That always works. Also, tell ’em you’ll speak at their campaigns. Who could say no to that?
Barry: Big J, I think you’re right. The people need to remember that I’m totally bad ass, and that I’m really really smart too. I mean, I used to organize communities.
Biden (making shadow puppets): You’re the smartest guy I know B.A., and that’s sayin’ something. Well, I’m tired. I think I’ll take a nap.
Barry: Thanks Joe. You’re a big help.
Biden (rummaging through his vice-presidential lunch box): Crap…who ate my fruit roll-up?!
Well, it’s September. I haven’t posted in a while because there’s been nothing going on. August was hot. Congress wasn’t in session. The Tigers’ season has been over for a while now. And I’ve been waiting for football to start.
But NOW, we’re officially into football and election season. WOO-HOO! While I could talk about football forever, this is not a football blog, and I’m not starting one now. This is primarily a political blog, and it’s a political time of year. And I can’t remember an election cycle that has been potentially more important than this one. Let’s review:
The economy still sucks. In fact, it’s worse then it was the last time I posted. Unemployment is up to 9.6%; we’ve lost another 54,000 jobs; and Christina Romer, one of Barry’s chief economic “experts” who is leaving the administration, has recently let all of us know that they’ve had absolutely no idea what they’ve been doing re: the economy.
She had no idea how bad the economic collapse would be. She still doesn’t understand exactly why it was so bad. The response to the collapse was inadequate. And she doesn’t have much of an idea about how to fix things.
That’s disheartening…and also completely obvious. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis has taken to authoring op-eds in the USA Today to try and convince America that the Democrat’s handling of the economy doesn’t resemble a monkey with a rubic’s cube.
The Recovery Act saved millions of American jobs — keeping health care providers in hospitals, teachers in classrooms, and police and firefighters on the beat. But the benefits weren’t just in the public sector. During the past eight months, the economy has averaged 95,000 new private sector jobs.
While I’d love to see her support for that last sentence, it doesn’t really matter. Unemployment will continue to go up until new jobs exceed 120,000/month (population increase). More importantly, there is no doubt that the economy is slowly getting worse.
The “summer of recovery” is followed by the “autumn of reality.” Let’s face it: if the Dems had any idea what to do about the economy, they would have done it by now.
B.O. has recently begun getting rid of the “drove it into a ditch” meme, and replaced it with “it’s taken us 10 years to get into this mess, so it’s unreasonable to think we could get out of the mess in 18 months” nonsense. Did it take us 10 years to get into this? I don’t know. I suppose one could reasonably argue it took one year, or even thirty-three years (the Community Reinvestment Act, which gave birth to the housing boom and bust, was enacted in 1977). I also don’t care how long it took us to get here. What I do care about is what is the current Administration doing about it? Well, it’s been 18 months and the answer is: spent a lot of money for nothing. Things haven’t improved, and the Dems are out of ideas.
So what should be done? Well, first and foremost, vote against the Dems in November. I know, I know…you don’t like the republicans either! O.k. Then go vote for the Green Party and pat yourself on the back for being “principled.” After that you can have your juice box and sandwich with the crusts cut off and take a nap. For the rest of us adults, we’ll choose a candidate with a chance of winning.
Simply put, there is job-creating capital out there waiting to be invested. It’s not being invested because no one has any idea what’s coming from this administration. For example, if you were a business owner with money, would you be spending it to reinvest or hire new employees if you thought your taxes were going to go up in January? Of course not. Doing something as simple as throwing the Dems out of the House would improve the fragile psyche of the economy.
But simply voting Republican isn’t enough. Pressure needs to be applied to those we vote for to do things like extending the Bush tax cuts for everyone. Other taxes need to be cut…payroll and capital gains, for example. Enact legislation which gives people the option to opt out of the slush fund that is Social Security. Limit Medicare to those that need it; not simply those that are old enough to get it. Significantly amend Obamacare and gut Fannie and Freddie.
Until we get the economy back on-track, nothing else matters. And there’s a lot going on that needs to be addressed beyond the economy…like why we’re ignoring Iran’s getting all nuclear and stuff.
It’s September…the kids are back in school, I get to drink new seasonal beer, and I get to watch football. More important, however, is the election coming up. We need to vote the Dems out…and then get ready for 2012, when we can vote out the guy who looks silly riding his bike. And don’t worry…I’ll be posting a lot more than I did in August in an effort to get you through these tough times.
Remember this come November: A vote for any democrat running for a seat in the House of Representatives is a vote for Nancy Pelosi to remain speaker of the house. Why is that a problem? Example:
‘There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded,’ she said. ‘How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we’ve been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City.’
Looking into who’s making this a political issue? How could this not be a political issue? You have a group of muslims trying to build a mosque down the street from Ground Zero, when the majority of New Yorkers, and Americans, don’t want it. Hey Nancy, instead of calling for an investigation into how the opposition is being funded, why don’t you try calling for an investigation into the group that is funding the building of a 13 story “community center” on one of the most expensive pieces of real estate in the world.
I’m sorry, but the mosque isn’t about religious freedom or consitutional rights; it’s about common sense. And yes, I know that the left in this country lacks common sense, which is why they think the building of a mosque near Ground Zero should be celebrated, but investigating those that oppose it? Well I oppose it, so you can feel free to investigate me. I’m not being funded by anyone, but I’m more than happy to give five dollars to someone else to oppose it. Idiot.
Bigger picture: The Speaker of the House is calling for an investigation by the government into American citizens who oppose the building of a mosque. This should frighten you even more than the fact that she is second in line for the presidency.
Yes, I know there haven’t been many posts lately. I’ve been busy. And until someone wants to pay me for this blog, then my job security will need to be priority number 1. No mom, no one has complained.
With all of that being said, can anyone explain to me why we need a mosque near Ground Zero? I know I’ve asked before, but with the recent acceleration of the issue, I’m asking again. And no, I’m not questioning whether one can be built there, obviously it can be. But why should it be built there? What’s the point? Is this really the best place to prove that we, as Americans, are tolerant of everyone?
And what are the motives of the muslims building the mosque? Peace and understanding? B.S. You could have the same peace and understanding if you built it somewhere else. And no, your right to practice your religion is not being inhibited in any way by making you build the mosque elsewhere. Moreover, if your real motivation was truly a thing of butterflies and kittens and pretty rainbows and dew-drops, why give it a name that basically means muslim conquest? I’m not sure that forcing a mosque down the throat of a majority of New Yorkers, and Americans, that don’t want it speaks of tolerance.
And what does this have to do with our esteemed president, you ask? Well, on Friday, he said this:
In his speech on Friday, Mr Obama said: ‘Let me be clear: As a citizen and as President I believe that Muslims have the same right to practise their religion as everyone else in this country.
‘That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community centre on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.’
As one could expect, that went over like a ton of bricks. If the Republicans win back the House (and possibly Senate) this fall, a thank-you letter should be sent to the president.
House minority leader John Boehner’s response,
‘The fact that someone has the right to do something doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to do. That is the essence of tolerance, peace and understanding….’
Say what you want about Boehner (I tend to like him), but he’s absolutely right (except that I don’t think they have the “right” to do it). If the muslims attempting to get this thing built want to show how much they love everybody, then they should share their love elsewhere. The people don’t want it, period; and with good reason. Lest we forget that it was muslims who brought the twin-towers down, in the name of their religion. I don’t care if they were “radicalized.” They weren’t Christians, or Catholics, or Quakers.
Simply put, there’s no justifiable reason for the mosque to go there. In fact, the mere fact that the builders want to put it there reveals their own insensitivity. Of course, I’m not dumb enough to think those building the mosque are doing so with good intentions.
Question: what would happen if, after a small group of Christian Americans set off a bomb in the middle of Mecca because they wanted to start another Crusade, another group of moderate Christians wanted to build a church near the site of the bombing to send a message of peace and love? Well, it’s actually a trick question because non-muslims aren’t allowed in Mecca. That fact notwithstanding, even if the moderate Christians were granted the opportunity to build the church, I would give it about a week before some “radicalized” muslims bombed it into oblivion. And how would the American left respond? Likely how many responded to 9/11: it’s our fault and we should work to understand their grievances. We’re destroying ourselves, and our esteemed president is leading the way.
I’ve been hearing a lot of self-described conservatives say things like “I’m not a Republican…don’t put a label on me…I think for myself” lately. My response to those statements falls somewhere between “congratulations…here’s your medal for being an individual…now it’s nap time” and “you’re right, they’re not perfect,” depending on how well I know the person who’s saying it. Look, people can identify themselves however they want in life, but when it comes time to vote in November, there are only two choices: the party of Paul Ryan or the party of Paul Krugman; and there’s a HUGE difference between the two.
Mr. Ryan hails from Wisconsin, is a member of the House of Representatives, and is a Republican. And contrary to the mindless rhetoric from the Democrats, he has a plan. More specifically, he has a plan to get us out of debt and improve the economy. And he does it by lowering taxes. His “Roadmap,” as he call it, has been met with great disdain from the left because of its radical ideas; namely, cutting government spending. Now, I understand that nowadays, actually cutting back on federal spending is the equivalent of riding a unicorn with the president, but there was once a day when the federal government didn’t employ the entire state of California. The Roadmap cuts spending, decreases taxes for both individuals and businesses (which will create jobs), and simplifies the tax code to some extent. Is Mr. Ryan your typical modern-day Republican? Maybe not. But you will never find a Paul Ryan in the Democrat party.
Paul Krugman. I’ve written about him before. While he identifies himself as an economist, he’s actually just a liberal shill in a tweed sport coat. He believes spending cuts are stupid, or evil, or something. He believes, like all liberals, that “tax cuts must be paid for.” Of course, such a position constitutes lunacy when one considers the fact that those “tax cuts” are not expenditures, but simply less theft. Like many liberals, Krugman believes increased government spending will create jobs by “stimulating” the economy. Of course, he never identifies how much spending is necessary, since it’s never actually worked. His convenient answer to continued failure is “we should have spent more.”
In response Krugman’s recent rambling and nonsensical criticism to his “Roadmap,” Ryan stated,
‘At the core of this is a big ideological fight between those who believe in the Founding principles and the sense of limited government—the American idea—and those who believe in the progressivist welfare state.’
‘The Roadmap is designed to maintain a limited government in the 21st century, and it is the antithesis of the progressivist vision which [Krugman] subscribes to. That’s fine. I understand it violates his vision for a progressivist society.’
In these statements, Ryan has admirably described the foundational difference between conservatives and liberals. Liberals seek control by way of taxation, government spending, and entitlements. Conservatives believe in self-reliance, small government, and opportunity.
The point of all of this is that it matters what Ryan believes vs. what Krugman believes. It matters because, regardless of your feelings on “Republicans” vs. “Democrats,” the simple fact remains: Ryan, and those like him, will never be Democrats, and Krugman and his followers will never be Republicans. For those that want a better shot at more opportunity, fewer taxes, sustained job growth, and smaller government, then vote Republican in November. The only alternative is a vote for liberals like Krugman.
No, that’s not a direct quote. If it were, I would have used quotation marks. But if the rumors are true, it’s not terribly inaccurate.
Main Street may be about to get its own gigantic bailout. Rumors are running wild from Washington to Wall Street that the Obama administration is about to order government-controlled lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to forgive a portion of the mortgage debt of millions of Americans who owe more than what their homes are worth. An estimated 15 million U.S. mortgages – one in five – are underwater with negative equity of some $800 billion.
In other words, our wannabe-dictator of a president is considering ordering Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the semi-private-but-not-really mortgage companies, to bail out homeowners who have negative equity in their homes. Why is he considering doing this? Because his approval ratings are in the low forties so he needs to make those that voted for him think he’s man of the people (while his wife uses our tax dollars for paper-mache in Spain). Also, Congress would take far too long to vote on this, if it ever did, so he’s going all Stalin on us.
As I mentioned above, while Fannie and Freddie are made up of private shareholders, they’re exempt from all sorts of otherwise-annoying stuff: like paying taxes and having to deal with the SEC, for example. Also, while they’re not explicitly backed by the federal government, everyone pretty much agrees they’re backed. So, what’s going to happen when they “forgive” some of the debt owed them? No, not magically sprout wings and fly to the end of the rainbow so they can grab some of the leprechaun’s gold. That can only be done once a year. That’s right, they’ll get/lose/burn more taxpayer money. How do I know this? Because they’re still floundering after receiving more than $135 billion in bailouts they’ve already received.
I’m not going to lie though, I’m kind of impressed by our little dictator. Think about it. He’s devising a way to throw billions of taxpayer dollars at homeowners who don’t even need it (they’re not in foreclosure, just under water) without even going through Congress to do it. He’s a little bit like Parker Lewis. If only he could devise a way to get us all free healthcare, I’d be sold!
Ah checks and balances. Like many states throughout this nation, Virginia filed an action challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare. Specifically, the action challenged whether the requirement that everyone purchase health insurance was appropriate. The federal government recently filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, basically arguing that the mandate constituted a tax, and therefore, could be levied by Congress. This argument made sense…if you’re either retarded or a lawyer. Anyone with a little bit of common sense and a fifth grade grasp of the english language recognizes the difference between a tax and a mandate to purchase a product on the private market. Well, I’m glad to say that a Virginia judge proved he’s neither retarded nor a lawyer.
‘The congressional enactment under review — the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision — literally forges new ground and extends (the U.S. Constitution’s) Commerce Clause powers beyond its current high watermark,’ [Judge] Hudson said in a 32-page ruling.
I’m not going to lie; I feel a little vindicated here. I know, I know, it’s just one judge and the matter still needs to go to trial, but at least Judge Hudson agrees with me that Obamacare’s mandate is unprecedented. I’ve heard from some people for months that it’s just another tax or it’s clearly within Congress’s powers under the Commerce Clause. Well, it appears as though I’m not the only one who thinks Congress has ventured into uncharted waters here.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said the ruling rejecting the Obama administration’s motion to dismiss the case was a procedural step and that the passage of the healthcare reform law has ‘full constitutional backing.’
“Full constitutional backing?” Well that’s a relief. And no Ms. Sebelius, the denial wasn’t simply a procedural step. In fact, I’ll go so far as to say it means the Virginia court will deem the law unconstitutional. That’s just my gut talking though, so we’ll see. In any event, I’ll be shocked if this issue is not ultimately taken up by the Supreme Court at some point.
Now, why does this matter? It’s only one provision you say? Well, it matters because without the mandate, Obamacare is dead. Without everyone being required to purchase insurance, Obamacare will be even more expensive than it is now (yes it is possible), which wouldn’t fly with a Congress that was barely able to pass the monstrosity in its current form and is looking likely to move a lot more to the right come November.