Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama’

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.

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.

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.

Only takes The Obama 5 days to figure out what everyone else already knew!!

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010

Christmas incident was “screw up” – Obama said

Tue Jan 5, 2010 5:59pm EST

WASHINGTON, Jan 5 (Reuters) – President Barack Obama told his security chiefs on Tuesday that the botched Christmas Day plane bombing was the result of a screw up by U.S. intelligence and that the country had barely dodged disaster, according to a quotation released by the White House.

This Obama has his thumb on this terror issue as well as the throat of America. Glad to see this weak President almost act even if it is 5 days late.

Another Washington Prostitute revealed!!!

Saturday, December 19th, 2009

Just another washington prostitute negotiating the fee for fu_ _ing the American people.  Guess who the pimp is?  Barack “ spread it around” Obama.

Nelson, Democratic Socialist-Neb., said Saturday he made his decision after winning fresh concessions from his pimp to limit the availability of abortions in insurance sold in newly created exchanges, as well as tens of million in federal Medicaid funds for his home state that will not go to other states.  Lucky for his state he is not a cheap rollover and beg whore like Bill Nelson from Florida who screwed the people of Florida for CHANGE..

“I know this is hard for some of my colleagues to accept and I appreciate their right to disagree,” he said at a news conference in the Capitol, referring to the abortion issue. “But I would not have voted for this bill without these provisions.” He needs to get paid just like any other prostitute.