Something You Might Like

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Economic Achievements of Barack Obama

President and would-be Marxist/Fascist Dictator Barack Obama has made some progress in his agenda of “transforming America,” if he wants to transform it into a banana-republic type of third world country, abounding in government-dependent and docile citizens. Like Big Brother, he always has some super villain to blame for his failures, e.g., George W. Bush. It is obvious that Obama’s efforts have completely failed if the goal was to promote prosperity, but it’s hard to believe that prosperity has ever been his goal. His objective is government control of everything possible.

When he had Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress, just waiting to rubber-stamp whatever he wanted, what did he use that for? To implement his socialist agenda, not to help the economy. The economy was strictly a back-burner issue except for some self-serving PR efforts. He claims to be trying to help the middle class, but when he’s finished, he will have gone a long way toward eliminating the middle class.

He promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term, but so far, we’ve seen trillion-dollar deficits each year. He has added more to the national debt than all previous presidents combined. And what have we gotten for all this spending and debt?

Unemployment

We have had depression-level unemployment rates for well over 40 months.

We now have record numbers of unemployed and under-employed people. This represents many suffering families who just want an opportunity to earn a living.

Poverty

We are heading toward the highest poverty rate since the 1960’s. According to an Associated Press article,

Census figures for 2011 will be released this fall in the critical weeks ahead of the November elections.

The Associated Press surveyed more than a dozen economists, think tanks and academics, both nonpartisan and those with known liberal or conservative leanings, and found a broad consensus: The official poverty rate will rise from 15.1 percent in 2010, climbing as high as 15.7 percent. Several predicted a more modest gain, but even a 0.1 percentage point increase would put poverty at the highest level since 1965.

(Via GOPUSA)

Out-of-Control Welfare Programs

We have the most Americans on food stamps ever. Over 100 million people in the U.S., including citizens and non-citizens, belong to a household in which at least one person receives federal benefits – largely food stamps and Medicaid – means-tested programs, not including Social Security or Medicare.

(See chart at top of this article. Chart was provided by Republican Senate Budget Committee staff. Via The Weekly Standard).

Green Failures

We have seen numerous green-energy fiascoes costing the taxpayers many millions of dollars, documented by The Heritage Foundation.

Kate Adams, a member of Heritage’s Young Leaders Program, and Heritage’s Rachael Slobodien compiled a list of the 12 members of the Green Graveyard—companies that received taxpayer money for green initiatives yet have filed for bankruptcy.

Abound Solar (Loveland, Colorado), manufacturer of thin film photovoltaic modules.

Beacon Power (Tyngsborough, Massachusetts), designed and developed advanced products and services to support stable, reliable and efficient electricity grid operation.

Ener1 (Indianapolis, Indiana), built compact lithium-ion-powered battery solutions for hybrid and electric cars.

Energy Conversion Devices (Rochester Hills, Michigan/Auburn Hills, Michigan), manufacturer of flexible thin film photovoltaic (PV) technology and a producer of batteries and other renewable energy-related products.

Evergreen Solar, Inc. (Marlborough, Massachusetts), manufactured and installed solar panels.

Mountain Plaza, Inc. (Dandridge, Tennessee), designed and implemented “truck-stop elec QUOT trification” technology…..

[Plus six more, including Solyndra]

Government Takeovers

We have seen takeovers and bailouts of auto manufacturers, and Obama wants to do the same in all manufacturing industries. An editorial in TheWashington Times points out that

At a campaign stop in Pueblo, Colo., on Wednesday, Mr. Obama touted the alleged success of his government-backed takeover of two-thirds of the domestic car business. “The American auto industry has come roaring back,” he said. “Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry.”

The article also mentions that every GM job “saved” cost taxpayers $780,000. GM stock is down significantly since its IPO.

Over-Regulation

There has been the most massive increase in regulations in history, choking out entire industries, with more on the way from such as the worse-than-worthless EPA and other useless agencies.

We have seen a company robbed of millions of dollars by federal authorities in such an episode as the Gibson Guitar raids.

The Administration has continued the disturbing trend of criminalizing more activities and figuring out ways to go after people who have done nothing wrong, simply on someone’s complaint. Obama is ready to take away freedom in the name of copyright protection for his Hollywood and media cronies. There are several efforts underway to take control of the internet.

The Administration has blamed businesses for the bad economic climate, when in fact it is government that has created such an atmosphere of uncertainty that many businesses are unwilling to expand or hire until they know what the rules are going to end up being.

The president appointed a debt commission in order to appear to be interested in dealing with the out-of-control deficits, then promptly ignored their advice.

By the way, commission co-chairman Erskine Bowles, a Democrat and former Clinton chief of staff praised Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), now GOP Vice-Presidential candidate, in 2011:

(Via Start Thinking Right)

President Obama has submitted budgets which no one in the Senate would vote for; yet the Senate itself has failed to produce a budget in three years, despite a constitutional mandate to do so.

Oh, and gas prices are up again, approaching that $4.00 level – about $3.60 per gallon as of now.

Obama has deeply undermined the rule of law in many ways through selective non-enforcement (Defense of Marriage Act, immigration laws, etc.), waivers (Obamacare, No Child Left Behind, for example), and executive orders that undercut statutes. He does not see any need for Congress or the Constitution. He and his little Communist gang members want to rule without interference.

How can unemployed people vote for Obama, knowing that under his presidency, high unemployment is a permanent feature of the economy? He appointed a jobs commission, but never meets with them, since they are only a PR gimmick. His dog and pony shows have accomplished nothing for the economy.

It is time to honestly attempt to evaluate Obama’s intentions in light of his record. In an Obama Administration, there will never be significant deficit reduction. There will always be calls for more taxes, bigger government, and more spending. He will always be OK with the Fed creating any amount of dollars that it pleases. When the inevitable collapse comes, he and his cronies may become even more powerful since people may lack the ability to resist.

The upcoming presidential election is America’s last chance to maintain its position as a world leader, restore freedom and prosperity, and even retain sovereignty. We cannot afford to get this one wrong. A Romney victory will bring some good changes quickly, but it will take time to solve the underlying problems. But with Obama in power, there is no chance short of divine intervention.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Glorifying Government: “You Didn’t Build That.”

President Obama believes no one should take credit for accomplishments in our society because government is ultimately the source of everyone’s success. This is right in step with Marxist theory which decries religion and puts government in the place of God. Obama is trying to spread the false gospel that America’s success has come because of government. The fact is that success for American citizens virtually always comes in spite of government, not because of it. For entrepreneurs as well as established businesses, government is the hindrance and the obstacle that tries to block the path to success. Whether through outright criminal corruption, unconstitutional (hence illegal) government intervention, or ridiculous and unnecessary red tape and bureaucratic regulation, government is the force that must be overcome in order to achieve business success – as if market competition were not enough.

Government acting outside its enumerated constitutional powers hinders; it doesn’t help.

It is government which gives rise to crony capitalism and tries to pick winners and losers. It is government that wants to control everything citizens do and to shape society in the image it desires. Obama is the greatest crony capitalist of modern times, trying to get his fascist hands into as many economic enterprises as possible, in order to extend government control.

He favors campaign donors and pals; it seems not to matter whether any project is likely to be successful. He uses taxpayers’ money to reward his favorites, and when they go bankrupt even after receiving many millions from government, he shrugs it off and spends even more. It’s not about the economy; it’s definitely not about jobs: it’s all about control. There is no other reasonable explanation for such things as the regulatory stranglehold the EPA is putting on American energy, for example.

The greatness of America has come from the hard work, genius, skill, and cleverness of her people. People like Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Alexander Graham Bell, Steve Jobs, and numerous others more or less gifted, have led the way to American success, brought about by great ideas and hard-working citizens, who have not shied away from their responsibilities to support themselves and their families, and who have had the courage to take risks in order to follow their dreams. People who have succeeded, failed, and succeeded again.

Yet Obama would tell them, “You didn’t build that.”

Entrepreneurs, professionals, employees at all levels have contributed to the great success of America. Today, government is contributing much toward her destruction and downgrading.

Those who have built successful enterprises are the ones Obama is going after. He thinks that they owe their success to government and it’s time to pay up through higher taxes and greater regulations. To Marxist/fascists like Obama, government is everything. As Mussolini said, “Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” Obama’s plan precisely. Government growth, government control of every aspect of life from health care to diet to all finances (government feels it owns the money, you see), to control of public discourse, the economy, and whatever else they can think of to control. Instead of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” it’s more like life (if you don’t get aborted or euthanized), the liberty to let the government run your life, and the dedication of oneself and possessions to state control. Oh, and a life of luxury for high government officials and their chosen friends.

It is sad that in the space of a few years, the stable and relatively secure (it seemed) American system has seen its decline accelerated to such a condition as we have now. It’s not simply that we have unemployment at depression levels, and a shaky economy; that’s bad enough. But worse, we have government and central bank system that continues at full speed with the very things brought on the collapses we’ve seen. Peter Schiff should be taken seriously when he forecasts a major collapse that will be worse than Europe:

But much of it could be avoided through some common-sense changes. Get the government out of the economy as much as possible. Restrain the money-creating power of the Fed. Don’t bail out anyone or anything, period. Let failing enterprises fail; write off the debt instead of perpetuating it. Stop trying to stop the recession. The market will correct itself fairly quickly if left alone. Recognize the realities of our economic situation and deal with them instead of kicking the can down the road. Repeal job-killing, capital-destroying programs like Obamacare. Start balancing the budget sooner, not decades down the road (which means never). Reduce the size and scope of government. Only Romney and conservatives offer any hope of any of this. Otherwise, it’s unlimited spending and government control until we are a full dictatorship, and we wake up one morning to find our currency worthless and almost all citizens poor, with no help in sight.

Further reading:

Ben Shapiro, “Shapiro: Our Business-Hating President,” 07/18/12, GOPUSA.

Photo: President Barack Obama tapes the Weekly Address in the Map Room. White House photo by Chuck Kennedy, 07/12/12.

Friday, July 13, 2012

The Obama Personality Cult and the Dearth of MSM Journalism

It is no secret to anyone paying attention that President Barack Obama projects a narcissistic and arrogant style in his public communications. He often says, “It’s not about me,” knowing full well that in his oratory, it’s all about him. He uses the first person singular pronouns more than any speaker I’ve heard. He relates incidents from his past very often, as though only he has ever experienced such things. Yet much of his past remains hidden. He speaks of transparency, but rules a secretive domain.

The Obama personality cult – his idolization by not only his associates, but also the mainstream media, is reinforced every day. The network news and liberal cable outlets exercise a startling degree of selective reporting and non-reporting that betrays their willingness to abandon journalistic standards to serve the messianic figure they worship, i.e., Barack Obama.

He insists on taking personal credit to a degree that far exceeds the standards of past presidents. His willingness to pile lie upon lie (e.g., falsely accusing Mitt Romney of “outsourcing” jobs) makes Bill Clinton look like Honest Abe. He recently claimed credit for inspiring the Lexus hybrid, which was actually begun in 2004.

The president has bragged about killing Osama bin Laden in a way that would have embarrassed Dwight Eisenhower, architect of D-Day, and George Washington, victorious general of the American Revolution – and probably even General George Patton.

Media Research Center, which documents media bias, lists numerous instances of liberal “news” outlets singing the praises of the great, god-like, amazing Obama. In fawning (MRC’s word: slobbering) over the president, they throw journalism to the winds. And further, they either under-emphasize, ignore or distort anything that might be a serious question about Obama’s policies.

MRC elsewhere notes that the morning shows totally ignored the House of Representatives’ vote to repeal Obamacare, and the network news barely mentioned it, and with obvious disdain. CBS News decried the “cost to taxpayers” of dealing with the issue, a cost which is completely irrelevant, since it is incurred regardless of what business the House is considering. If you want to complain about the cost of doing House business, how much do you suppose it cost the taxpayers to pass Obamacare, in terms of paperwork, House session time, secret meetings, bribery sessions, etc.?

(In terms of government costs, taxpayers are charged overwhelmingly for programs, activities, and propaganda that are destructive to them and to our country. But such is the nature of government, at best a necessary evil.)

Journalists used to feel responsibility for holding government to honesty, and honestly questioning its many questionable things. They felt a responsibility to the citizens to report the news accurately and comprehensively. Now, they appear to think that their main responsibility is to make Obama look good, and go on about how ignorant conservatives must be to express distrust or dissatisfaction toward the government. Quite a turnaround, but many today are too young to remember a time when journalists seemed to feel accountable to the public. Now they are accountable to liberal politicians and write largely to impress one another.

While the Obama personality cult may seem harmless enough, it is a sign of dangerous tendencies. With the kind of adulation the president surrounds himself with comes the temptation for him to feel above everything else. He demonstrates that he considers himself above the Constitution, and above the other branches of government, and the states by usurping power on a level not seen since FDR. The history of his administration is one of continual power grabs, massive over-regulation, large expenditures of public funds in “green” projects doomed to failure. Bailouts and takeovers will be a large part of his legacy, but he will be mainly remembered, I believe, for blaming his predecessor for practically everything since the Vietnam War.

All the main dictators we know of built a personality cult, enforced by secret police, and resulting in death and destruction to citizens. Obama’s hasn’t approached that level, but the same temptations are present for him. The end result is paranoia and collapse. Consider Saddam Hussein, who reportedly could not sleep in the same bed two nights in a row for fear of his enemies. Or Nicolae Ceausescu, dictator of Romania, who was executed, along with his wife, on Christmas Day 1989, following a popular uprising against his brutal, wasteful, and murderous regime. Or Benito Mussolini. Or Muammar Gaddafi. What fate do we suppose awaits the likes of Hugo Chavez?

America has accomplished something very important and rare in world history: the peaceful transfer of power. Americans hate political violence, and have developed ways to peaceably accomplish political objectives, particularly a trusted election system. Many people are tired of politics of any kind, and try to insulate themselves from it. Thus they risk their freedom, because behind-the-scenes events are proceeding that chip away at our individual liberty. Too often, we see only that which immediately and personally affects us and do not consider the long-term effects and unintended consequences.

It is sad that our political system has come to encourage kicking the can down the road on important issues that are apt to rise up and do great damage at any time if left unattended. Thus we have unending borrowing and spending, and an economy based too much on debt and consumption instead of saving and building. We are content to leave this to experts who are unwilling to acknowledge, let alone face, economic realities, but are content to pat themselves on the back and present themselves as great personages, while presiding over undeniable decline. This can and must be changed

The 2012 elections promise to be a turning point such as we rarely see. We will turn one way or the other, either to Marxism or else a “return to normalcy” of some kind that will stop or slow these dangerous trends. Democrats will never change the course we are currently on, but will give us ever-increasing debt and ever-decreasing freedom. With Mr. Romney, we can put a stop to this decline and start rebuilding our economy and our future. Even if Mr. Romney wins, citizens must stay engaged and keep the attention on the true issues, not distractions.

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Roberts’ Decision Shows No Entity of Government Can Be Trusted To Protect Liberty

Chief Justice John Roberts, official portrait

What are we to think of Chief Justice John Roberts’ deciding vote in favor of upholding the manifestly unconstitutional and deeply harmful Obamacare law? Was this some kind of legal move that somehow helps conservatism in the long run, or simply a betrayal of our constitutional liberty? After the Chief Justice’s defense of free speech in prior cases, it is surprising and almost shocking that he should come down on the side of socialism and loss of freedom in this instance.

Roberts’ legal gymnastics defy logic and law. He has seemingly made the unconstitutional constitutional. As a constitutional scholar, in this case he showed no more concern about or knowledge of the Constitution than President Obama does on a typical day. The Anti-Injunction Act states that a tax cannot be challenged in court until someone has had to pay the tax. In this case, that would not be until 2014. As Byron York points out,

Roberts’ sleight of hand drove his conservative colleagues nuts. “The government and those who support its position on this point make the remarkable argument that (the mandate) is not a tax for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act, but is a tax for constitutional purposes,” wrote dissenters Alito, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. “That carries verbal wizardry too far, deep into the forbidden land of the sophists.”

It’s either a tax or it isn’t.

Was Roberts intimidated by the media and Obama into the decision he made? Dennis Prager quotes CBS News as follows:

As reported by CBS News:

“Some of the conservatives, such as Justice Clarence Thomas, deliberately avoid news articles on the Court when issues are pending . . . . They've explained that they don't want to be influenced by outside opinion or feel pressure from outlets that are perceived as liberal.

“But Roberts pays attention to media coverage. As Chief Justice, he is keenly aware of his leadership role on the Court, and he also is sensitive to how the Court is perceived by the public. [“The public” means liberal media and academics]

“There were countless news articles in May warning of damage to the Court — and to Roberts’ reputation — if the Court were to strike down the mandate….”

Prager notes that if Roberts voted to strike down Obamacare, this could be seen by liberals as a violation of judicial restraint (as Obama suggested). I say that the Executive and Legislative Branches showed no restraint in writing, passing, and signing this monstrous legislation and, after the Court’s decision, will now show less and less. The Chief Justice ought to be less concerned with how the public views the Court and more concerned with how the Court views the law.

It’s clear to me that something other than legal logic led to Roberts’ decision. Whether it was intimidation, hubris, or something else, he has voted to uphold a bad law, and done it on bad grounds.

Roberts wrote, quoted by Patrick Buchanan in an excellent article called, “John Roberts Makes His Career Move,” “We (the Court) possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”

There are cases where this is correct, but this is a very lame excuse for upholding the unconstitutional.

Buchanan’s evaluation is worthy of consideration: “He does not want Anthony Kennedy, the swing justice, to be making history, while he is seen as a predictable conservative vote.

“John Roberts aspires to be a man of history, to have this court known to historians as ‘the Roberts Court.’ And if there is to be a decisive vote in future great decisions, he wants that vote to be his.”

This episode underscores the fact that no entity of government can be relied upon to protect our liberty. The Court had the power in this case to do something about protecting constitutional liberty, but chose not to by upholding an unconstitutional law. God bless the minority who voted to strike down the law.

At least the Court chose (7-2) to protect states from the over-reaching threat to cut off all Medicaid funds if the state chose not to expand Medicaid as the law provides. But that, although important, pales in comparison to the main decision.

If there is any upside, it is only that the conservative base may be energized enough to be united in support of Mitt Romney, and then hold him to his promise to get Obamacare repealed. They should also get to work on replacing weak-sister RINOs who either support Obamacare or have a defeatist attitude about repealing it.

The final power still rests with We the People. We cannot be silent and acquiescent on this issue. Obamacare must go, or with it we’ll soon get full socialist dictatorship with no one in government to protect us from whatever the authorities want to do to us. The Tea Party is needed more than ever. God help us to correct this massive error and save our freedom and our economy. Both are in grave danger now.

Further reading:

Mark Stein, “The Supreme Court’s ObamaCare Ruling: A Sign of American Decline.”

Robert J. Guenther, “Guenther: Enough With The Silver Linings.”

Thomas Sowell, “Sowell: Judicial Betrayal.”

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Is The Private Sector “Doing Just Fine”? Definitely Not.

President Barack Obama’s statement, later “clarified,” and explained by his faithful MSM spinners as “taken out of context,” created quite a little stir as his GOP opponent, Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, got a nice new point of attack in the presidential campaign. The president apparently was trying make the point that the public sector was suffering more; he wanted to push his idea of bailing our cities and states.

The public sector under Obama has grown greatly, and the private sector (other than some large companies and some Obama cronies) has had, and still has, the worst of it. The May employment figures testify to the continuing trials and struggles of millions of American families. May figures were worse than those of April.

Only 69,000 jobs were added, not as good as the weak 115,000 for April. Over 120,000 per month are needed just to keep pace with population growth. The total number of unemployed persons grew by 225,000 to 12,725,000. The “official” (U-2) unemployment rate rose from 8.1 percent to 8.2 percent. The U-6 measure of total unemployed and underemployed rose by 300,000 to 14,800,000. Teenage unemployment was down slightly, but still very high at 24.6 percent. Overall, a dismal situation, and not improved.

In a U.S. News and World Report article, Rick Newman points out that small business is especially hurting.

Small businesses are reeling. Small business optimism has emerged from the cellar, but it's still at recessionary levels, according to surveys from the National Federation for Independent Business. Spending and hiring plans are extremely weak, which is bad news because small and medium-sized businesses create the majority of new jobs in the economy. Big businesses, by contrast, tend to consolidate employment via mergers and acquisitions and various types of scaling and streamlining. Some pockets of the private sector are actually doing okay. They're just not the ones where most Americans work.

The public sector is, on the whole, doing much better than the private sector, but Obama’s sympathies are mostly with the public sector. He wants more billions of dollars to protect the jobs of teachers, police officers and firefighters, but, as Newman points out, these public employees have fared better than private sector blue-collar workers.

Rush Limbaugh had a very interesting response to the president’s comment, as the following indicates:

Polls such as Rasmussen are showing Obama and Romney about even among likely voters. I would like to see the results of a poll among unemployed people.

While Obama inherited a difficult situation, he has done many things to make it worse. When he had Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress who were ready to rubber-stamp whatever he wanted, his main concern was not unemployment or the economy, but rather getting his socialist Obamacare and cap-and-trade laws passed. He has blamed everyone except himself for his failure to significantly improve things in over three years in office. He doesn’t have the ability to deal successfully with the economy. People are indicating that they trust Romney more than Obama on the economy. It is puzzling that Obama, after his economic failures, foreign policy disasters, multiple race card plays, nanny-state proposals, and serious scandals, still has a chance to win the election.

Romney needs to forcefully articulate conservative principles, educate more people on capitalism, and get the GOP united behind him. If he does, he is very likely to be successful.

Photo: Sculpture of 1930 breadline from FDR Memorial. Via Public Domain Pictures.

Monday, May 28, 2012

Hey, Big Spender . . . America’s on to You!

Dreamstime.com

President Barack Obama’s claim to fiscal responsibility is nothing short of ludicrous, although he makes the claim in seriousness. Based on a report by MarketWatch columnist Rex Nutting, which is based on seriously flawed data, Mr. Obama claims to have presided over a period in which “federal spending, since I took office, has risen at the slowest pace of any president in sixty years.” In fact, the Obama Administration has increased spending at a robust pace, and by the greatest amount ever by far (video here).

According to Brian Darling at Heritage Foundation, while Politifact rated Nutting’s article as “mostly true,”

What Politifact must have missed is a very important data point: President Obama signed most of the spending attributed to President George W. Bush’s last year in office, which was assigned wrongly to Bush in Nutting’s piece. (Heritage’s Emily Goff and Alison Fraser set the record straight on The Foundry.)

Nutting argues that President G.W. Bush’s second term spending bills from Fiscal Year 2006-2009 averaged 8.1% and President Obama’s annualized growth averaged 1.4%. The reason why Nutting included FY 2009 is because it was “the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion.” This assumption is incorrect and dishonest. This flaw in Nutting’s analysis is the reason why the Obama numbers are wrong and Nutting’s whole piece is based on flawed data.

Further, according to the article (citing Congressional Quarterly), Congress delayed the Fiscal 2009 Omnibus, hoping for a Democratic Congress, to avoid George W. Bush’s threatened vetoes, and to gain an opportunity for further bloated spending. So this spending is attributable to Obama’s watch, not Bush’s.

Also, the Nutting article mishandles the fact that TARP spending was under Bush and some TARP recovery happened under Obama.

A Wall Street Journal article dated October 13, 2010 includes a table that indicates that federal spending rose 21.4% from 2008 to 2010, with domestic items leading the way. Unemployment benefits rose 240.4%. Defense spending rose 12.1%.

The outrageous spending increases were a major factor in the GOP Congressional victories in 2010. But with Obama in office and Democrats controlling the Senate, not much has changed, and we are in line for trillion-dollar annual deficits for several years to come unless more serious changes are made. The current situation cannot continue without bringing on another recession at the least, and financial collapse likely later.

The Mitt Romney campaign is correct in saying

“For the last three-and-a-half years, President Obama's liberal policies of wasteful spending and skyrocketing debt haven't lived up to his own promises to control our nation's mounting deficits. As president, Mitt Romney will finally change Washington and stop passing our financial burdens on to the next generation.” -Andrea Saul, Romney Campaign Spokesperson (Quoted in Chicago Sun-Times)

The Sun-Times quotes President Barack Obama in the same article as follows:

President Obama, In 2009: “Today I'm Pledging To Cut The Deficit We Inherited In Half By The End Of My First Term In Office.” OBAMA: “[T]oday I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office. This will not be easy. It will require us to make difficult decisions and face challenges we've long neglected. But I refuse to leave our children with a debt that they cannot repay - and that means taking responsibility right now, in this administration, for getting our spending under control.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks, Washington, D.C., 2/23/09)

But that pledge apparently has expired.

Later, the White House came up with the pathetic excuse that they didn’t realize how bad the situation was when the president took office. I say they needed, and still do need, some competent economists.

What’s needed is not “slower growth” in spending, but rapid and serious cuts. Four more years of Obama in the White House will bring us four more years of out-of-control government in the Executive Branch. It is well established by now that liberals will never cut spending and will always want higher taxes. That’s just the way they are. This cannot be changed.

Recent polls show that voters are increasingly skeptical of Obama’s ability to improve the economic situation, and are more trusting of Mitt Romney. Examples:

Rasmussen, 05/15/12: 58% of likely voters trust Romney more on economy, 39% trust Obama more.

USA Today/Gallup poll 05/15/12:

In the poll, 55% say the economy would get better over the next four years if Romney was elected, compared with 46% who say it would improve if Obama were re-elected. Twenty-seven percent say the economy would get worse in a Romney first term, compared with 37% who say that of an Obama second term.

Mitt Romney definitely has the better economic plan, and now appears to have an advantage on economic issues with Americans.

Sunday, May 6, 2012

No Record to Run on, Just Fear and Loathing among Different Groups

Dreamstime.com

Barack Obama’s so-called "Forward" re-election strategy is the most un-presidential in memory as his policies are the most offensive and anti-constitutional.

The man who seemed to have all the answers in 2008, and convinced enough people that he was going to be the post-racial and post-partisan president, has turned out to be the “most-racial and most-partisan” president (as Rush Limbaugh described him), and he is doubling down on his class warfare themes that the evil rich should be paying a substantially larger share of income taxes, and the not-rich should have perpetual government-paid benefits from cradle to grave, starting with Head Start (which doesn’t work), and ending with Medicare (which he is going to be raiding further for the benefit of Obamacare).

Never mind that there is no mention of cutting anything except defense, with cuts which would gut our defense readiness and leave us more vulnerable in terms of national security. Any dollars cut from defense (or anything else) will never be used to reduce the deficit, but only to increase spending on liberals’ beloved, bloated social programs.

The president’s ideal of American life is pictured in the Obama campaign’s presentation “The Life of Julia” which pictures a woman relying on government help from age 3 onward, as though she could barely function if (shudder!) the awful Romney actually reduced spending on such stuff. She evidently must receive government-(i.e., taxpayer)-paid contraception, education grants, student loans, and healthcare lest she perish for lack of government funding. Obama nowhere hints of self-reliance or independence from the public trough. His ridiculous “War on Women” and “Buffett Rule” propaganda illustrate the class-warfare-based pandering to groups he hopes will support him as they did in 2008.

His support for re-election must come from hardened socialists, radical feminists and environmentalists, and other leftist fringe interests, and people who are not paying attention to economic realities, but like his “sincerity” and think his promises are somehow trustworthy.

President Barack Obama has no record that he can run on. He has empty promises, fear and resentment among various groups, the pathetic pleading of ignorance of the actual economic situation that existed when he took office, and blaming of George W. Bush, bad weather, an uncooperative Congress, etc., etc., for the continued bad economic and business environment characterized by continued massive unemployment and “growth” so slow it still doesn’t look like a recovery. But not to worry, increased government spending, more entitlements, more job-destroying EPA and Dodd-Frank-type regulations are his answer, along with more golf outings and vacations for the First Family.

Unemployment figures for April 2012 according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics include the following: 8.1 per cent official unemployment rate; 115,000 jobs added in April; teenage unemployment rate 24.9 per cent; Number of unemployed persons at 12.5 million; number of people “marginally attached to the labor force” (not counted as unemployed) at 2.4 million (these had looked for work sometime in the last 12 months, but not during the 4 weeks preceding the survey, and their number includes 968,000 “discouraged workers” who had given up looking for work; persons unemployed for 27 weeks or longer at 5.1 million; persons working part time because their hours had been cut or because they couldn’t find full-time work at 7.9 million.

These numbers indicate a great deal of economic difficulty and misery for many American families. The Administration seems to have very little with which to improve this situation, and one must suspect that in the socialist/Marxist world, government dependency is a good thing, and people in economic distress tend to look to government for the help they need. In this case, they would be looking to a government that is more interested in restructuring American society to their socialist/Marxist model than in correcting the economy, which would actually recover quite well if left alone by government.

Mitt Romney is made out to be a villain because he’s (1) “rich,” (2) “out of touch,” and (3) planning to cut spending on some of Obama’s dear socialist programs, (4) and maybe even restore the defense budget so that it won’t be so deeply into the danger zone.

Romney is, politically, our only hope at present for any kind of “return to normalcy,” which we very urgently need. Four more years of Obama? More coddling of “Occupy,” more forced unionism, more illegal immigration, less freedom, and lots more spending until our debt has to be dealt with via cheap, cheap dollars, and savings and investment are all but wiped out, along with our currency. That could make Greece’s present situation look positively desirable by comparison. We won’t get another Reagan, but we can hope for a pretty good non-Obama. If Romney is half as good a president as Calvin Coolidge, we will be immensely better off than if Mr. Obama is re-elected.

With the recent hubbub about Obama’s dog-eating, and Obama’s desperate attempt to be all things to all people of the leftist extreme, I can’t help but be reminded of Benjamin Franklin’s proverb and its potential political applications: “He that lies down with Dogs, shall rise up with fleas.” (Poor Richard, 1733)