Sep 30

The Last Best Hope: A Rousing Video In Support of the Principles That America Was Founded On

This is another very incisive, hard hitting video exposing the arrogance and corruption of power by politicians, most notably by the Democrats and Obama, and the transformation of our country over decades from the principles that it was founded on to one of an ever enlarging, omnipotent and over taxing government.

It is a battle cry in support of the Tea Party doctrine and can serve to help galvanize greater support to oust the Democrats in November.

The Last Best Hope


Print This Post Print This Post

Obamacare’s Immediate, Predictable and Deleterious Effects

The recent inception of Obamacare has immediately claimed its first victims and proved that what it was touted as was a gargantuan lie just as its opponents had vehemently claimed. Providers of health care insurance have closed their doors as a direct consequence of the mandates. Others have dropped specific plans for the same reasons.

The end result already is more people losing their insurance or even the options of obtaining insurance. Furthermore, the cost of available insurance has risen and will rise for most as a direct result of Obamacare’s regulations.

So summing it up:

1. we will have less private insurance available for Americans to obtain

2. the cost of insurance will rise significantly because of the mandates of Obamacare and independent of other factors. This rise will be far greater than if absolutely nothing were done at all!

Obama and the Congressional Democrats knew that these were the intended and inevitable results of their legislation but lied to the American people in order to pass the extremely unpopular bill.

In November, they will have to deal with the wrath of very angry Americans! Let's all make sure of this.

Reform's Victims
Investor’s Business Daily      09/22/2010

ObamaCare: The first provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act take effect Thursday, and casualties are already piling up. This week's include children who'll have to go without health insurance.

The earliest victim of ObamaCare was nHealth, a Virginia-based insurer that specializes in health savings accounts. It announced in June that "considerable uncertainties" created by the new law would force it to close its doors by year-end. The customers and 50 employees of the once-promising startup will have their lives turned inside out by this decision.

Now, starting Thursday, any health insurance company offering child-only plans has to accept kids — anyone under 19 — with pre-existing conditions. This mandate has the potential to bankrupt insurers, and big carriers WellPoint, Cigna and CoventryOne, Humana, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Aetna, and Golden Rule have reacted by announcing they'll no longer sell new child-only policies.

Some will stop writing the policies at the national level while others will leave markets only in certain states. But it won't stop there. Kansas Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger told the Hill newspaper that she guarantees "it's happening probably in every state."

Not every insurer will quit the market. But those staying will operate in a less-competitive environment, which will hurt consumers.

If parents wait until their kids are seriously ill before buying coverage, as many will, insurers will have no choice but to raise rates on child-only policies to offset the high costs of benefits they'll be paying out. If that option is denied by federal regulators, "then they could be forced to raise rates for adults in the individual market as well," according to Heritage Foundation analyst Kathryn Nix.

The White House says it's unhappy. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs complained that insurers are making "decisions on the backs of children and families that need their help," as if they are charities with unlimited funds.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, meanwhile, is treating insurers as criminal enterprises. She's warned there will be "zero tolerance" for those that pass on "misinformation" about ObamaCare and blame it for their "unjustified rate increases." Carriers she deems in violation of her directives "may be excluded from health insurance exchanges," the heavily regulated and mandated insurance networks coming in 2014.

Wasn't ObamaCare going to cut costs and expand coverage? Instead, costs will be higher and, while some of the uninsured will finally get coverage, many of the insured will lose theirs. Maybe the first victim of the Democrats' health overhaul was the truth.


Print This Post Print This Post
Sep 29

The Magnitude of Reagan’s Wisdom and Insight Can’t Be Underestimated Particularly In Contrast To Contempory Politicians

This video is a collage of Reagan’s prescient conservative philosophies espoused in speeches followed with contrasting clips of the ideologically ignorant, radical and arrogant present day Democratic politicians. It not only reaffirms the wisdom and greatness of Reagan but also how he towers as a giant over even the best known contemporary politicians.


Print This Post Print This Post

The True Level of Our National Debt Far Exceeds What We Have Been Told

Judicious research on the true level of the US national debt reveals a crisis far worse than most people are aware of and far in excess of what the federal government will admit to. Counting real obligations, the number may be in the range of at least 4 – 5 times the presently “stated” amount of $14.3 trillion. This equates to 98% of the GDP – using incomplete numbers!

Thirty years ago, this percentage was 33% and the national debt stood at $909 billion. This represents an astronomical increase in debt which is secondary to unfettered government spending.

This is a financially untenable situation. If spending and obligations are not massively reduced, bankruptcy, prohibitive taxation levels and a major collapse of our standard of living will be inevitable.

These are among the major issues that the Tea Parties are fighting to address … now.

US Government 'hiding true amount of debt'
Gregory Bresiger    NewsCore     September 20, 2010

The actual figure of the US' national debt is much higher than the official sum of $13.4 trillion ($14.3 trillion) given by the Congressional Budget Office, according to analysts cited on Sunday by the New York Post.

"The Government is lying about the amount of debt. It is engaging in Enron accounting," said Laurence Kotlikoff, an economist at Boston University and co-author of The Coming Generational Storm: What You Need to Know about America's Economic Future.

"The problem is we're seeing an explosion in spending," added Andrew Moylan, director of government affairs for the National Taxpayers Union.

In 1980, the debt - the accumulated red ink incurred by the Federal Government - was $909 billion.

This represented some 33 per cent of gross domestic product, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Thirty years later, based on this year's second-quarter numbers, the CBO said the debt was $13.4 trillion, or 92 per cent of GDP.

The CBO estimates the debt will be at $16.5 trillion in two years, or 100.6 per cent of GDP.

But these numbers are incomplete.

They do not count off-budget obligations such as required spending for Social Security and Medicare, whose programs represent a balloon payment for the Government as more Americans retire and collect benefits.

In the case of Social Security, beginning in 2016, the US Government will be paying out more than it is collecting in taxes.

Without basic measures - such as payment cuts or higher payroll taxes - the system could be on the road to bankruptcy, according to officials.

"Without changes," wrote Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue, "by 2037 the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted. There will be enough money only to pay about $0.76 for each dollar of benefits."

Mr Kotlikoff and Mr Moylan agree US national debt is much more than the official $13.4 trillion number, but they disagree over how to add up the exact number.

Mr Kotlikoff says the debt is actually $200 trillion.

Mr Moylan says the number is likely about $60 trillion.

That is close to the figure quoted by David Walker, the US Comptroller General from 1998 to 2008.

He launched a campaign to convince Americans that the federal spending and debt is a greater threat than terrorism.

But whichever figure is accurate, all three agree that the problem has worsened in the last few years.

They say it is because Congress and the Administration, whether Republican or Democrat, consistently overspend.


Print This Post Print This Post
Sep 28

Even Chris Matthews Is Criticizing Obama

You know that things have to be real, real bad for uber liberal Chris Matthews to chide the “president?”. Apparently fed up with Obama’s prevarications and politicization of the expiring Bush Tax cuts, he instructively stated:

‘Stop saying cutting taxes is giving people money – it`s their money!’


Print This Post Print This Post

Update On Dismissal of Charges Against the New Black Panther Party by Atty. General Holder and the Dept. of Justice

The Justice Dept’s dropping of the egregious case of voter intimidation perpetrated by the New Black Panther Party reeked of corruption and racism, both well worn actions of the Obama Administration as evidenced by innumerable examples in the past. We most recently covered this issue in Justice Dept. To Investigate Its Civil Rights Division for Racially Discriminatory Actions And Positions Against Whites .

Updates on this situation reveal that this decision was also a political one: the Obama Administration didn’t want to rattle its staunchest supporter: the “black community”. This finding alone is an outrage and an action that is both despicably depraved and constitutionally illegal (Fourteenth Amendment).

But then again, Obama is concerned with neither … but we MUST be.

Voting in November will be one of OUR constructive responses. We must also exert pressure to have the abominably incompetent, racist and corrupt Attorney General Eric Holder FIRED.

Black Panthergate
Investor’s Business Daily 09/21/2010

Justice: Despite administration denials under oath, documents obtained by a watchdog group indicate that the decision not to pursue a clear-cut case of voter intimidation was indeed a political decision.

It was perhaps the most clear-cut case of voter intimidation ever. On Election Day 2008, New Black Panther Party members King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson were videotaped intimidating voters as they stood, dressed in military garb, outside a Philadelphia polling place.

Their conduct was so egregious that the Justice Department of President Bush charged the three thugs with violations of the 1965 Voting Rights Act through intimidation, threats and coercion. When none of the defendants filed a response or showed up at a subsequent hearing, you'd have thought the Justice Department would have won its suit by default.

But a new administration brought a new, and somewhat jaundiced, perspective. Instead, the Justice Department of President Obama essentially dropped the case in May 2009, letting two of the three walk and issuing a weak injunction against King Shabazz. He was forbidden from showing up at another Philadelphia polling place with another nightstick and intimidating other voters for the next three years, an action that was already illegal. He is presumably free to do the same thing in, say, New Jersey in 2012.

The U.S. Civil Rights Commission wanted to know why the case wasn't pursued and if political considerations were involved. On May 14, Thomas Perez, assistant attorney general for civil rights, testified that there was no "political leadership involved in the decision not to pursue this particular case any further than it was" and it was only "a case of career people disagreeing with career people."

The DOJ stonewalled, claiming that all documents involved in the case were "privileged information," that there was nothing to see and we should all move along. The watchdog group Judicial Watch pursued the case, and a court ordered the DOJ to provide it with withheld documents and an explanation of each privilege asserted.

The information that was unearthed reveals that several political appointees were involved in the decision not to pursue the New Black Panther Party. Of particular note was a list of 58 e-mails to or from Deputy Associate Attorney General Sam Hirsch, formerly election attorney for the National Democratic Party.

Christian Adams, the DOJ attorney who resigned to protest the New Black Panther Party decision, describes Hirsch as "a former Democratic Party operative" who, among other activities, "led efforts to impose racial divisions on Hawaii by creating native classifications and powers." Hirsch is a fierce partisan with experience in racial politics.

In testimony before the Civil Rights Commission that he says his bosses tried to block, Adams said Attorney General Eric Holder's department refused to prosecute what he has called "the clearest case of voter intimidation that I've seen since practicing law."
A dozen or so e-mails went up the chain of political command to Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli. Deputy Attorney General David Ogden was also in on the political deliberations, contributing, according to the e-mails, his "current thoughts" on the matter.

Adams told the commission that DOJ officials "over and over and over" showed "hostility" to prosecution of voter-intimidation cases involving "black defendants and white victims." Adams says Perrelli, a political appointee, himself overruled a unanimous recommendation for continued prosecution by Adams and his associates.

So when Perez testified that the decision was made only by career attorneys, not political operatives and appointees, he was not telling the truth about the machinations of the most transparent administration in history.

The decision not to prosecute the New Black Panther Party was clearly a political decision designed not to offend a key constituency of the Democratic Party and one of the few bastions of support this administration and the Democrats have left.

The New Black Panther Party should have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law. At least one member of this administration is on shaky legal ground as well.


Print This Post Print This Post
Sep 27

Mourning in America – An Ad and Commentary on the Obama Experiment

This is ad based on a positive Reagan-Bush re-election ad in 1984 – except now the material points out the negatives of the Obama experiment.


Print This Post Print This Post

Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats Failed Policies Have Resulted in Record Poverty Levels and Government Payments to Individuals

If you just obtained your news from the “mainstream” media, a de facto branch of the Democratic Party, you wouldn’t know that the poverty level under the Obama Administration and the Democratic controlled Congress is at its highest level since records were kept 50 years ago.

Nor would you realize that dependence on the federal government is at an all time high with federal payments to individuals as a percentage of the GDP reaching 16.4% which also is an incredible increase of 37% just over the last 3 years.

These are but a few concrete examples of failed policies of the Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats. If these politicians and government officials weren’t so ideologically blind and intransigent they could have learned from myriad examples in the past, both here and abroad, that their policies are doomed to failure and which is quite evident.

These policies of failure must be terminated and replaced with those that will succeed.

As a corollary, we must also replace those who are champions of these failed policies.

Oust these Democrats in November and vote in Republicans that will reverse this course.

Policy Of Poverty
Investor’s Business Daily     09/16/2010

Poverty: A new report comes as a punch in the gut for proud Americans: One in seven of us is poor, government data show.

Surprised? Don't be. It's what happens when you kill the most productive parts of a country.

An estimated 14.3% of the population, or 43.6 million people, were considered poor in 2009, up from 13.2% the year before, the Census Bureau reports. This is the highest share living in poverty since the government began keeping records half a century ago.

How can this be in the richest nation on Earth?

Since Democrats took power — Congress in 2007, the White House in 2009 — policies that punish the productive private economy have become the norm.

Meanwhile, government wastes massive sums bailing out failed businesses, purchasing bad loans and rewarding those who borrow too much, make bad economic decisions or belong to unions.

Knowing this, no one should express shock that 15 million Americans don't have jobs, and that perhaps another 14 million or so are working only part time when they'd prefer to be working full time.

Persistent unemployment from misbegotten government policies is why we have this poverty. And it leads, inevitably, to dependence on government. As recently as 2006, federal payments to individuals as a share of GDP — a proxy for welfare — stood at 12%. Now it's 16.4%, a 37% rise in three years and the highest level ever.

Our own IBD/TIPP Poll of 908 Americans across the country, taken last week, shows that 39% of all American households and 22% of all individuals today receive some kind of federal aid.

Why? For three years now, the private sector has been systematically punished for the sins of the federal government with higher taxes and greater regulation. Businesses, though sitting on nearly $2 trillion in cash, won't invest in such an environment.

Washington's response? Spend hundreds of billions more on ill-considered "stimulus" plans and consign millions more to unemployment and poverty.

In the past two years we've witnessed a breathtaking expansion of federal government. And it'll only get worse, with a planned $44.8 trillion in spending over the next decade, an 83% rise. This new spending will add $13 trillion to our debt, pushing the total to $23 trillion by 2020 from just $7.5 trillion as recently as 2008.

Contrary to the repeated assertions of our nation's Keynesian elites in the media, Washington and academia, all this spending and debt doesn't create jobs. It kills them. The money siphoned from the economy destroys investment and consumer spending, leading to slower growth, higher joblessness and lower incomes.

Growing government activism has robbed our economy of its dynamism. Cutting spending is therefore the best thing we could do to reduce poverty, joblessness and dependence right now.

That's not just our opinion. A recent major study by Harvard economists Alberto Alesina and Silvia Ardagna confirms this.

Looking at 107 cases of large fiscal adjustments made in 21 wealthy countries from 1970 to 2007, Alesina and Ardagna found that tax cuts were the best way to boost economic growth. They also found that spending cuts without tax hikes reduced deficits and debt more than those that included tax hikes.

Further, "adjustments on the spending side rather than on the tax side are less likely to create recessions" — a fact that pretty much destroys the Keynesian argument for more spending "stimulus" and tax hikes to boost the economy.

The Keynesian orthodoxy hasn't worked in the past, and it isn't working today. It's brought our nation lower output, higher joblessness, soaring poverty rates and increased dependence on government. The only question is, why does one party remain wedded to such a destructive economic philosophy?


Print This Post Print This Post
Sep 26

L. Brent Bozell III Is On A Mission to Have the News Media “Tell the Truth”

L. Brent Bozell III, the founder and President of Media Research Center, is focusing massive efforts to expose lies, distortions of the truth and overall bias in the media which played a crucial role in the election of Obama. By attempting to expose their far left biases and de facto functioning as a PR and marketing arm of the Democratic Party, he hopes to educated the public to this news sham.


Print This Post Print This Post

The Real Idiot Uncovered

This surely engenders confidence in Obama's common sense, abilities and decision making such as in his position as Commander in Chief and one who oversees complex economic and policy issues.

Yet just another illustration of why the rest of the world has little respect for him.


Print This Post Print This Post