Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama’

« Older Entries

Mitt Romney lets his Mormon Religion impact the rights of Adults to play poker on line.

Tuesday, February 7th, 2012


The Romney campaign symbol:

GOP Frontrunner Mitt Romney Against Online Gambling. Says He Doesn’t ‘Want to Increase Access to Gaming.’
by Brian Pempus

Mitt Romney, the frontrunner for the GOP’s nomination to run against President Barack Obama, told Las Vegas political journalist Jon Ralston last week that he is against online gaming.
When asked if he is a supporter of legalizing the activity, Romney responded: “No, no I’m not. Gaming has a social effect on a lot of people. I don’t want to increase access to gaming. I feel that we have plenty of access to gaming right now through the various casinos and establishments that exist.”

Check out the full Romney interview below.

The former governor of Massachusetts, a Mormon, is not alone in his stance against online gaming among his faith. About a week ago, a Utah lawmaker introduced a bill that would preemptively ban online gaming in the state.

While the federal government mulls over online gaming, some states are considering the industry. Nevada, with regulations already in place and licensing on the horizon, is by far the furthest along.

It’s possible that Romney’s position isn’t all that relevant.

“Ultimately, I don’t think any presidential candidate’s current position on online gaming is going to matter much, since many states are going to take it upon themselves to legalize online gaming within their own borders,” UNLV’s Dr. David Schwartz told Card Player. “Just as with Indian gaming in the late 1980s, Congress will likely be forced to act.”

Tags: , ,
Posted in Poker-Gambling, Political action | No Comments »

What is at stake is the First Amendment and the religious freedom of all Americans.

Wednesday, October 12th, 2011

Did you miss this story?

DOJ: Feds Can Tell Church Who Its Ministers Will Be
By Terence P. Jeffrey

In yet another stunning attack on freedom of religion, President Barack Obama’s Justice Department asked the Supreme Court last week to give the federal government the power to tell a church who its ministers will be.

The case involves a former teacher at Lutheran school, who along with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is pushing a claim that a Lutheran congregation should be forced to restore her ministry position.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State and American Atheists, Inc. have filed briefs siding with the Obama administration against the church.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, and the American Center for Law and Justice are among those who have filed briefs supporting the Lutherans.

In 1999, the Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School in Redford, Mich., hired Cheryl Perich to be a lay teacher on a one-year contract in its kindergarten.

The next year, Perich became a “called” teacher at the school after she became a commissioned minister in the church.

“To receive a call, a candidate must be selected by a local church congregation,” said a brief the church submitted to the Supreme Court that was prepared by lawyers at the Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty and Douglas Laycock of the University of Virginia Law School.

“At Hosanna-Tabor, the school board typically presents a choice of candidates to the congregation, and after prayerfully considering the candidates, the congregation extends a call via congregational vote,” the brief said. “Once the call has been accepted, the candidate is installed in office via the public rite of ‘commissioning,’ and is recognized as a ‘Minister of Religion, Commissioned’ — also known as a ‘commissioned minister.’”

As a minister in the school, Perich taught religious classes, led students in prayer and performed other religious tasks. She was also expected to integrate the teaching of the Lutheran faith into all so-called “secular” classes, including math, science, social studies and art.

In 2004, Perich was diagnosed with narcolepsy and was unable to teach the fall semester. In January 2005, when she could not return, the school hired another teacher to take her place during the spring.

Later that month, according to a brief filed by the Justice Department’s Office of the Solicitor General, Perich informed the school’s principal, Stacey Hoeft, via email that she would be able to return to work the following month.

The principal informed her they had already hired a replacement teacher for the rest of the year.

The congregation then voted to ask Perich for a “peaceful release from her call.”

“‘Peaceful release’ is a religious act by which a congregation and a called minister agree to release one another from the mutual obligations of the call,” says the brief submitted by the church.

“Peaceful releases are common, and they leave the called minister in good standing and eligible for a new call.”

Perich declined to be peacefully released. In late February, she showed up at the school and met with Principal Hoeft.

“Later that day, Perich told Hoeft that if she were not reinstated, she would sue the church,” said the church’s brief. “Hoeft immediately asked Perich if that were what she really meant, because a lawsuit would clearly violate the church’s conflict resolution policy applicable to called employees. Perich repeated the threat.”

The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod explained this teaching in its own brief: “St. Paul teaches in his first letter to the Corinthians that Christians should generally resolve their disputes internally without going to the secular courts for relief.” For this reason, the church has developed procedures for settling internal disputes.

A few weeks after the meeting between Perich and Hoeft, the Hosanna-Tabor congregation voted to “rescind Perich’s call” because she had threatened to sue the church contrary to the church’s teaching.

“The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a complaint against the church under the Americans With Disabilities Act, alleging a single count of retaliation,” says the church’s brief. “Perich intervened, alleging the same retaliation claim and adding a retaliation claim under state law. Neither complaint alleges disability discrimination. Both complaints request an order reinstating Perich to her former position as a commissioned minister, together with back pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and injunctive relief ordering new ‘policies, practices, and programs’ at the church.”

The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod told the court in its brief that its views on the ministry and the settlement of disputes may not be “widely shared” or “widely understood.” “But,” the church said, “they have been the views of orthodox Lutherans for centuries.”

Acting Deputy Solicitor General Leondra Kruger told the court, during oral arguments, that the federal government should be able to trump the church on these decisions.

“Their submission is that the hiring and firing decisions with respect to parochial school teachers and with respect to priests is categorically off limits,” said Kruger. “And we think that that is a rule that is insufficiently attentive to the relative public and private interests at stake, interests that this court has repeatedly recognized are important in determining freedom of association claims.”

Kruger contended this did not mean the government could order the Catholic Church to ordain female priests. But, even then, according to her argument, it would be a matter of the government weighing “the relative public and private interests at stake.”

What is at stake is the First Amendment and the religious freedom of all Americans

http://www.patriothobbits.com

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Political action | No Comments »

Comedian George Lopez all but threw the “Oreo” racial slur presidential candidate Herman Cain

Tuesday, October 4th, 2011

George Lopez: Cain ‘Darker Than Obama, But Whiter On The Inside’

By Matthew Balan

On Monday’s “Fox and Friends,” liberal comedian George Lopez all but threw the “Oreo” racial slur at Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain: “The Republicans do know that he’s darker than Barack Obama…but whiter on the inside.” Lopez also half-jokingly hinted that the Tea Party was racist after host Steve Doocy mentioned Cain had won a Tea Party straw poll: “He wasn’t serving the tea, ’cause that’s crazy”

Lopez poked fun of the Republican presidential field at the bottom of the 8 am Eastern hour of the Fox News Channel morning show, and began by making fat jokes at the expense of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who is rumored to be considering a presidential run: “Should he run, and should he jump in the pool? Not while I’m in there. Let me get out before he cannonballs everybody out of water.”

Watch this racist clip for yourself.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2011/10/03/george-lopez-cain-darker-obama-whiter-inside

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Political action | No Comments »

Obama Rides Bus Made in Canada on Tour

Thursday, August 18th, 2011

Obama Rides Bus Made in Canada on Tour
By David A. Patten

It turns out that President Barack Obama’s multistate tour on jobs and the economy is taking place in a $1.2 million bus that was made in Canada rather than the United States.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus blasted Obama’s choice of a Canadian bus for the tour during a conference call with reporters Wednesday.

“We don’t believe that it is any coincidence that the president is embarking on this sham jobs tour in his Canadian bus,” Priebus said. “He is doing this because this bus tour is nothing but another campaign jaunt for this president, who, as we all know, is absolutely in love with being the campaigner in chief.

“This is an outrage that the taxpayers of this country would have to foot the bill so that the campaigner-in-chief can run around in his Canadian bus and act as if he is interested in creating jobs in our country,” Priebus said.

Priebus also advised the president to spend more time in the White House finding ways to fix chronically high unemployment, rather than “planning his next vacation in Martha’s Vineyard.”

Obama and his family are scheduled to begin their annual vacation in exclusive Martha’s Vineyard after the bus tour. White House officials say the presidency and its responsibilities essentially travel with Obama, no matter where he goes. But Priebus wasn’t buying it.

“Two weeks ago, the president said that his number one focus would be jobs,” Priebus said. “And he promised, like he always likes to do through speeches, to put together a jobs plan. But yet again we have no plan from the president. We have no engagement from the president.”

The White House says Obama will speak to the nation about his job proposals in a post-Labor Day speech.

The New York Post reported Wednesday that Obama is barnstorming the heartland aboard a bus built by Quebec-based Prevost. The VIP H-45 model is a top-of-the-line bus that many rock bands use while on tour. It is equipped with armored doors and has other state-of-the-art security features, as well as Secret Service equipment.

According to the Post, officials ordered two of the Canadian-made buses in July 2010 from a Tennessee firm, Hemphill Brothers Coach. Hemphill Brothers installed custom upgrades to the interior before delivering the buses two months ago.

According to the Secret Service, when the president isn’t using the buses, they will be available to others under Secret Service protection. This could include the 2012 GOP presidential nominee, the Post reports.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Political action | 1 Comment »

Obama’s Stimulus Costs $278K Per Job.

Wednesday, July 6th, 2011

Report: Obama’s Stimulus Costs $278K Per Job
By Martin Gould

A war of words was heating up today over claims that President Barack Obama’s stimulus package has cost taxpayers $278,000 for every job it created.

The conservative Weekly Standard extrapolated the figure from a report issued over the weekend by the president’s own Council of Economic Advisors.

The program “did very little, if anything, to stimulate the economy, and a whole lot to stimulate the debt,” Jeffrey H. Anderson wrote in the Standard article, which has received far more attention than the original report.

House Speaker John Boehner tweeted the Standard story today, saying it shows the “economy would be generating job growth faster if Dems hadn’t passed the ‘stimulus.’”

But the White House claims the Standard has its math all wrong, saying it didn’t take into account construction materials, new factories, and other permanent infrastructure that the stimulus paid for.

The Standard article claimed that the stimulus could have had a negative effect on the economy. “It’s quite possible that by borrowing an amount greater than the regular defense budget or the annual cost of Medicare, and then spending it mostly on Democratic constituencies rather than in a manner genuinely designed to stimulate the economy, Obama’s ‘stimulus’ has actually undermined the economy’s recovery — while leaving us (thus far) $666 billion deeper in debt,” Anderson wrote.

He even claimed that the government could have signed a $100,000 check to everyone the stimulus has helped and still saved $427 billion on what the stimulus cost.

And he said the very fact that the report was issued late on a Friday before a holiday weekend — and therefore received little media attention — was “further evidence that President Obama’s economic ‘stimulus’ did very little, if anything, to stimulate the economy, and a whole lot to stimulate the debt.”

But the White House disputed the Standard’s conclusions. Spokeswoman Liz Oshorn said the article is “based on partial information and false analysis.”

“The Recovery Act was more than a measure to create and save jobs; it was also an investment in American infrastructure, education and industries that are critical to America’s long-term success and an investment in the economic future of America’s working families,” Oshorn saidd.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had confirmed that the Recovery Act “delivered as promised, lowering the unemployment rate by as much as 2 percent, boosting GDP by as much as 4 percent and creating and saving as many as 3.6 million jobs,” she said.

The Council of Economic Advisors is made up of three members nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. It consists of Chairman Austan Goolsbee, Katharine Abraham, and Carl Shapiro.

Their report, the seventh since the stimulus began, insisted the program has played “a significant role in the turnaround of the economy” over the past two years.

“Real GDP reached its low point in the second quarter of 2009 and has been growing solidly since then, in large part because of the tax cuts and spending increases included in the Act,” the report read.

But it admitted that it is impossible to know the real impact of the stimulus as “no one can observe directly what would have occurred without the policy.”

The effects of the stimulus have long been argued. Writing in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, A. Barton Hinkle reported that nobody could seriously argue that it had had no effect on the economy.

However, he likened it to a purse snatcher who took a handbag containing $500 and spent the money on a new television.

“It is categorically undeniable that the theft has created a sale for the TV store. Conservatives who pretend the stimulus has not created any jobs whatsoever stand in the position of an observer trying to deny the TV has been sold,” Hinkle wrote.

“Yet the liberal analysis lacks any recognition that the purse owner now has $500 less to spend on the laptop computer she was going to buy. The theft has generated one sale only by destroying another.

“The first effect is easily seen. The second is not,” Hinkle added. “But only the economically illiterate would conclude that just the first effect occurred, and that therefore the way to increase consumption is to encourage more purse-stealing.”

Tags: , ,
Posted in Political action | 1 Comment »

House Votes to Strike Down FCC Net Neutrality Rules

Tuesday, June 28th, 2011

House Votes to Strike Down FCC Net Neutrality Rules
By Grant Gross

IDG News Service — The U.S. House of Representatives on Friday voted to kill network neutrality rules approved by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission in December, with majority Republicans arguing the regulations amounted to a government takeover of the Internet.

The House voted 240-179 largely along party lines to approve a resolution of disapproval that would roll back the FCC regulations. Two Republicans voted against the measure, while six Democrats voted for it.

The FCC’s rules would prohibit wired broadband providers from selectively slowing or blocking Web content and applications.

Republicans argued the net neutrality rules aren’t needed and would open the door to heavy-handed government regulation of the Internet. “Congress has not authorized the Federal Communications Commission to regulate the Internet,” said Representative Greg Walden, an Oregon Republican and main sponsor of the bill. “If not challenged, the FCC’s power grab would allow it to regulate any interstate communications service on barely more than a whim and without any additional input from Congress.”

President Barack Obama has threatened to veto the legislation, should it pass through the Democratic-controlled Senate. The FCC, in crafting net neutrality rules, sought input from groups on “all sides” of the issue, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) said in a position statement this week.

“The Federal Communications Commission’s rule reflected a constructive effort to build a consensus around what safeguards and protections were reasonable and necessary to ensure that the Internet continues to attract investment and to spur innovation,” the OMB said this week. “Disapproval of the rule would threaten those values and raise questions as to whether innovation on the Internet will be allowed to flourish, consumers will be protected from abuses, and the democratic spirit of the Internet will remain intact.”

Some House Democrats questioned why lawmakers were devoting time to the net neutrality issue when the U.S. government faces a shutdown Saturday if Republicans and Democrats can’t come to agreement on the federal budget. Democrats also argued the bill would allow broadband providers to block any Web traffic.

“At such a moment of grave threat to our economic health, what are we doing on the floor today?” said Representative Henry Waxman, a California Democrat. “The Republican leadership insists on bringing to the floor a bill that will end the Internet as we know it and threaten the jobs, investment and prosperity the Internet has brought to America. This is an outrageous sense of priorities and policies.”

The FCC’s net neutrality, or open Internet rules, have widespread support from consumer groups and Web-based companies, said Representative Anna Eshoo, a California Democrat. AT&T and Comcast (CMCSA) have opposed the bill, Democrats argued.

But the FCC’s actions will hurt the Internet, one of the few bright spots in the U.S. economy, Republicans argued.

“We’re here to put the brakes on runaway bureaucracy,” said Representative Fred Upton, a Michigan Republican. “The FCC has overstepped its authority and is attempting to seize control of one of the nation’s technological success stories.”

http://www.renewable-green-power.com

Tags: , ,
Posted in Political action | 1 Comment »

Bull About Bullying

Tuesday, April 19th, 2011

If you have not seen this article by Thomas Sowell yet you should read it now.

Thomas Sowell
Bull About Bullying

There is a lot of talk from many people about bullying in school. The problem is that it is all talk. There is no sign that anybody is going to do anything that is likely to reduce bullying.
When politicians want to do nothing, and yet look like they are doing something, they appoint a blue ribbon committee or go to the U.N. or assign some Cabinet member to look into the problem and report back to the President — hoping that the issue will be forgotten by the time he reports back.

When educators are going to do nothing, they express great concern and make pious public pronouncements. They may even hold conferences, write op-ed pieces or declare a “no tolerance” policy. But they are still not going to do anything that is likely to stop bullying.

In some rough schools, they can’t even stop the bullying of teachers by the hooligans in their classes, much less stop the bullying of students.

Not all of this is the educators’ fault. The courts have created a legal climate where any swift and decisive action against bullies can lead to lawsuits. The net results are indecision, half-hearted gestures and pious public pronouncements by school officials, none of which is going to stop bullies.

When judges create new “rights” for bullies out of thin air, just as they do for criminals, and prescribe “due process” for school discipline, just as if schools were little courtrooms, then nothing is likely to happen promptly or decisively.

If there is anything worse than doing nothing, it is doing nothing spiced with empty rhetoric about what behavior is “unacceptable” — while in fact accepting it.

Might educators abuse their power, if the courts did not step in? Of course they could. Any power exercised by human beings can be abused. But, without the ability to exercise power, there is anarchy.

When responsible officials are prevented from exercising power, then bullies exercise power.

President Barack Obama has joined the chorus of those deploring bullying. But his own administration is pushing the notion that a disproportionate number of suspensions or other punishments for members of particular racial or ethnic groups is discriminatory.

In other words, if a school suspends more black males than Asian females, that is taken as a sign of discrimination. No one in his right mind really believes that, but it is part of the grand make-believe that pervades our politics and even our courts.

For years, there have been stories in New York and Philadelphia newspapers about black kids beating up Asian classmates. But do not expect anybody to do anything that is likely to put a stop to it.

If these were white kids beating up Hispanic kids, cries of outrage would ring out across the land from the media, the politicians, the churches and civic groups. But it is not politically correct to make a fuss when black kids beat up Asian kids.

None of this is unique to the United States, by the way. The same mushy-minded attitudes have been carried even further in Britain, both as regards criminals and as regards bullies in the schools.

Britain was once one of the most law-abiding nations on earth. But the reluctance of the left to put some serious punishment on criminals has been carried so far there that only 7 percent of convicted criminals actually spend any time behind bars. Britain has now overtaken the United States in various crime rates.

Years ago, there was a book published in Britain titled “Murder in The Playground.” The boy who ended up killing a fellow student on the school playground had previously committed crimes ranging from motorcycle theft to arson that created more than $50,000 worth of damage in school. For the latter, he was given 24 hours’ detention.

People who say that we should learn from other countries almost always mean that we should imitate what other countries do. But one of the most important things we can learn from other countries is to avoid the mistakes they have made.

Tags: ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

The Obama Chicago Thug reality gone federal.

Saturday, June 19th, 2010

BP’s New Deal is a Raw Deal
Yesterday, BP announced that it would “voluntarily” place $20 billion into a government-administered fund to compensate victims of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster and clean up the mess. The oil company also agreed to shell out another $100 million to a foundation that will support oil workers made unemployed by President Barack Obama’s indefinite ban on offshore oil drilling.

Now, no one is disputing that this oil spill is real disaster wreaking enormous havoc on the environment and the economy. And BP should absolutely have to pick up the tab for all efforts to correct this mess. It’s the beauty of the “you break it, you buy it” mentality. But there are right ways – legal and constitutional ways – to go about assigning responsibility, and the Obama Administration isn’t following them.

Heritage Foundation legal scholar Hans von Spakovsky explains the law pertaining to the Gulf Coast situation:

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) sets out exactly what BP and anyone else who caused the spill have to pay for. Under 33 U.S.C. § 2702, BP is responsible for all removal costs; all injuries to real or personal property; damages for loss of subsistence use of natural resources; loss of profits or impairment of earning capacity due to injury, destruction, or loss of natural resources or real or personal property; and damages for the cost of providing increased public services by any state. These categories of damages would cover all of the costs that everyone has been talking about…

But the law says nothing about BP compensating the newly unemployed offshore oil workers. Why and how, then, can BP be liable? Legally, they can’t. “Obama’s moratorium is an unreasonable decision that is supported neither by the states in the Gulf nor experts in the oil and gas industry,” von Spakovsky argues. In addition, the President’s demand to transfer an immense portion of stockholders’ wealth to the compensation fund without any legislation or court decision is extremely worrisome.

So why would BP “voluntarily agree” to these costly measures? Perhaps the company was intimidated by Attorney General Eric Holder’s threat to open a criminal investigation. Perhaps BP is under the impression this agreement places a cap on their costs. (It doesn’t. The White House made clear that the $20 billion was just a down payment and in no way represented a cap on BP’s liability.)

Or perhaps this so-called deal between the White House and BP represents little more than what Heritage’s Conn Carroll calls of “shakedown of Godfather-like proportions.” BP is by no means off the hook with this deal – it has to pay big-time; it is still liable to individual and state claims; and it received no assurances that economic damages would not be higher or that the White House wouldn’t come back demanding more.

But Carroll explains in a separate piece that BP is not the victim in this scenario. The rule of law is.

Wednesday’s ‘voluntary’ deal between BP and the Obama administration was nothing less than a continuation of President Barack Obama’s ongoing assault on the rule of law. Capitalism only succeeds if it is a profit and LOSS system. Well-managed firms should have every right to keep their profits, but mismanaged firms must be allowed to suffer losses… Failure is a necessary component of capitalism. But this administration refuses to allow the rule of law to work. From Fannie Mae to Freddie Mac, from GM to Chrysler, from AIG to Citibank, our government continues to subvert the established rule of law. This lawlessness creates uncertainty in the business environment, and it is a huge reason why our economy is not recovering as it should be.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Political action | No Comments »

The government bailouts must end.

Wednesday, June 16th, 2010

Morning Bell: The Government Bailouts Must End
Posted June 14th, 2010 at 9:37am in Education, Entitlements,

Late Saturday night President Barack Obama sent a letter to the leadership of the House and Senate urging them to approve a tax and spending bill currently being debated in the Senate that already would add $80 billion to our nation’s budget deficit. But coming off of last year’s $862 billion stimulus, President Obama is not happy with just another $80 billion in debt for this year. He also requested another $50 billion in deficit spending earmarked for bailing-out state and local governments. Without this “emergency” money, the President claims thousands of government union jobs would be lost. But even among his own party, the President faces an uphill climb. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told The Washington Post: “I think there is spending fatigue.” “Bailout fatigue” is more like it. And the President’s envisioned spending spree is full of both.

The Government Union Bailout: $23 billion of the President’s additional $50 billion in spending would supposedly go to keep teachers in the classroom. This new spending would be in addition to the nearly $100 billion appropriated to the Department of Education by the President’s $862 billion stimulus bill, of which $34.7 billion in education funds remains unspent. Meanwhile, over the past decade student enrollment has increased only 6% while the number of teachers in the classroom has risen 15.8%. But over this same period, studies found a correlation between reduced class sizes and student achievement. More federal funding is unlikely to increase student achievement and will not provide a long-term solution to states’ budget shortfalls. Another bailout from Washington could even exacerbate states’ fiscal problems by creating disincentives for states to tackle out-of-control spending and make real education reforms.

The Medicaid Bailout: $25 billion of the President’s latest spending spree is set to bail-out state Medicaid programs. This would be the fourth time this decade that Congress has bailed-out state Medicaid programs. The cycle is all too familiar. Between 1990 and 2007, Medicaid spending more than quadrupled from $69 billion to $316 billion. Because of these constant bailouts, states have avoided dealing with their mismanagement of the program. More money from Washington will guarantee one thing: states will continue to spend far in excess of what they can afford, and Congress will treat the federal taxpayers like an ATM machine to cover the shortfalls.

The Obamacare Bailout: The President’s signature legislative accomplishment is just barely three months old, but it already is in need of a $400 billion bailout. In an interview with Politico Sunday, the President said of Obamacare: “I strongly believe that the health care bill was the right thing to do … I think it’s going to help us bend the cost curve in ways that will actually help us deal with the deficit, not add to it.” But just one day earlier during his weekly radio address, the President pleaded with Congress to pass a temporary fix in Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors: “Now, I realize that simply kicking these cuts down the road another year is not a long-term solution to this problem. I’m absolutely willing to take the difficult steps necessary to lower the cost of Medicare and put our budget on a more fiscally sustainable path. But I’m not willing to do that by punishing hard-working physicians or the millions of Americans who count on Medicare. That’s just wrong. And that’s why in the short-term, Congress must act to prevent this pay cut to doctors.” So which is it? Did Obamacare “bend the cost curve” in ways that will help the deficit, or is Medicare still on a fiscally unsustainable path? The reality is that Obamacare’s deficit reduction claims were always a complete fraud, and the President’s pitch for a doc fix funds exposes that fact.

Last week Gallup reported that “Federal government debt” was the issue that most threatened the future well-being of the United States. Our nation’s record deficits are largely driven by the record spending increases of the last decade and the last year in particular. There is a way out of this deficit nightmare: stop spending. If the federal government managed to return to the per-household spending level of the Reagan administration, the budget would be balanced by 2012 without any tax hikes. Or just returning to the per-household spending levels that existed before the current recession would balance the budget by 2019. But first we must stop the bleeding: the government bailouts must end.

Tags: ,
Posted in Political action | 1 Comment »

Is it time to demand Harry Reid have a competency test?

Friday, February 12th, 2010
Reid criticizes lawyers group, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., criticized the American Bar Association on Thursday, saying it should “get a new life” in how it rates prospective federal judges, after one of his choices got a mixed review.  Reid expanded his criticism to include the Supreme Court, whose makeup, he said, consists of “people who have never seen the outside world.”  HELLO HARRY.. you are totally clueless.

“I have asked President (Barack) Obama, ‘Let’s get somebody on the court that has not been a judge.’ They need to do more than thinking of themselves as these people who walk around in these robes in these fancy chambers.”  Does Harry Reid no know we are talking about the COURT.. A good place to have OUR best JUDGES.

The bar shares its ratings in an advisory capacity with the White House and the Senate, which votes on the nominees.  The committee considers a nominee’s “professional competence, integrity and judicial temperament.” It rates each nominee as “well qualified,” “qualified,” or “not qualified.”

Reid was set off by the ABA’s rating of Las Vegas attorney Gloria Navarro, who also appeared before the Senate committee as his choice and Obama’s nominee to become a U.S. district judge in Nevada. According to the association’s 15-member Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, a “substantial majority,” consisting of 10 to 13 members, rated Navarro “qualified,” while a minority rated her “not qualified.”

Based on the poor to incompetent decisions made by REID.  It might be time for him to be removed from his leadership position and set him up for a evaluation for competency.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Political action | No Comments »

« Older Entries