Throwing Good Money After Bad

The Labor Department reported that the U.S. economy added 69,000 jobs last month, the lowest number since May of last year. Concurrently, the unemployment rate increased for the first time in eleven months. The “official” jobless rate rose to 8.2%. Additionally, it reported that in the past two months 49,000 fewer jobs were created than originally stated. The Bureau of LaborStatistics also revealed that in America, 766,000 fewer women are employed today than in January 2009, when the current administration first took office.

As a result, the U.S. Stock Market dropped. GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney called the news “devastating” and the White House blamed George W. Bush, claiming they “are still fighting back from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression”. The White House keeps insisting that their economic policies are helping America dig out of “the deep hole caused by the recession”.

Three years and five months into his term, barack obama still has no answers as to how to get America’s economy growing at anything faster than a snail’s pace. That’s bad for America. It could also devastate his re-election chances. That prospect is good for America.

Since he took office all obama has done is sign extreme, far left fringe, anti-business, anti-energy, anti-growth “progressive” legislation into law. Bills passed by the ilk of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd or farmed out to the likes of the George Soros funded Tides Foundation. His only personal efforts were appointment of the Simpson Boles Commission, whose suggestions he summarily dismissed, and his budgets, which for the past two years have yet to receive a single vote in the U.S. Senate, which is controlled by his own Party.

The ‘stimulus”, misrepresented as financing for “shovel ready projects”, was, among other wasteful ventures, redistribution of taxpayer’s money to his political cronies involved in mismanaged “green energy” companies. Or to States deep in debt due to over zealous, business killing regulations and historically discredited tax and spend policies. Those States were in desperate need of revenue to pay the bloated cost of pensions and benefits owed to their unionized government employed political campaign financiers and foot soldiers.

obama overstepped his Constitutionally limited power as Chief Executive by interfering in bankruptcy proceeding for GM and Chrysler. The Harvard Law School graduate “determined” that hundreds of years of bankruptcy court precedent would not sufficiently suit his political needs and thereby dictated that the financial interests of secured bondholders would be seized and transferred to his union supporters in the UAW.

his foreign policy has been an utter disaster. Yes, he was convinced by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta that it would be OK to “get” Osama bin Laden. Something for which obama has been most eager to accept sole credit. But that opportunity was set up by a number of people working within the U.S. intelligence community for close to a decade…not to mention the coordinated effort of U.S. Special Forces and other branches of the military involved in carrying out the operation. Since then, his White House has somehow managed to leak enough information about the top-secret operation to get a friendly Pakistani intelligence operative imprisoned for a few decades. That will certainly provide a most powerful recruiting inducement to potential operatives going “forward”, won’t it? Philosophically driven by a strong desire to shift America’s image in the world away from that created by his predecessor, obama enacted a new doctrine. One that focuses on systematically killing via predator drone rather than capturing the enemy and obtaining useful national security information by submitting them to enhanced interrogation techniques. Better to deprive people of life than to submit them to physical discomfort. Only “progressives” would consider that a move to the moral high ground.

If that’s not enough, his “most significant achievement”, obamacare, is about to be ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The list could go on and on and on…and on, but is it really necessary to list all the committed atrocities about which obama’s opponents are already aware? That his supporters will vehemently deny?

At this point it would be very profitable to play poker with those still donating to obama’s re-election campaign. They seem quite unaware of a mistake that accomplished gamblers vigorously and conscientiously avoid: “Throwing good money after bad.”

Obama’s Budget: More Tax, Borrow and Spend

The White House presented its 2012 budget Monday. A $3.8 trillion proposal which includes $1.43 trillion in new taxes on households whose incomes meet or exceed $250,000 (note: this is the new “progressive” definition of millionaires and billionaires), a fourth straight year of $1 trillion-plus deficit spending (which will require yet more borrowing), and new mandatory spending intended for the Education and Energy Departments.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/72792.html

As has been the case for the past three years, the White House pays lip service to calls for reduced spending. There are no efforts made to reform “entitlement” programs, which make up a sizeable majority of federal spending and will, if continuously ignored, bankrupt the country. The “spending cuts” found in this budget are largely figments of the imagination. Since America’s military is already out of Iraq, and the date for withdrawal from Afghanistan has already been announced, saying that “were the United States armed forces to remain deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan at full troop and equipment levels through 2018″ would cost X amount of money, and therefore not spending that money now constitutes spending cut is at best disingenuous. It’s like announcing that a household’s spending has been reduced by $50,000 over the next five years because they didn’t take out a 60-month loan on a new car. Within a $3.8 trillion budget, claims that reducing the Environmental Protection Agency’s spending to $8.34 billion amounts to meaningful reduction is like saying someone changes the world’s sea level by pouring a glass of water into the Pacific Ocean.

That this budget is part of a campaign strategy is both painfully obvious and not especially noteworthy, especially to voters who are aware of the obvious media bias in America. Those who have actively sought out stories that somehow managed to “escape” coverage by the “mainstream” media have seen this one coming since last year’s announcement that occupy Oval Office is running for re-election. Submitting a budget certain to garner no legislative support intentionally creates an environment which allows the current White House occupant to rail against a “do nothing” Congress. Refusals by Congress to raise taxes on “millionaires and billionaires” (that’s those who make $250,000 a year) means they’re helping the “most fortunate among us” avoid paying “their fair share”. This proposal by the White House sets up one campaign theme after another.

The budget is so bad that, like last year, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell plans to introduce it to a Democratically controlled Senate that hasn’t passed a budget in a thousand days (talk about “do nothing”).

http://news.yahoo.com/mcconnell-presidents-budget-fail-senate-205212280–abc-news.html

There seems to be no satisfying this administration’s appetite for spending. The underlying misconception that government spending stimulates long term economic growth merely stimulates the need for increased taxes to pay for the big government bureaucracies required to process the inefficient, wasteful spending. Since the day this administration took office, they have intentionally driven up spending with borrowed money. Now, they are attempting to institutionalize the spending increases with tax hikes. By stealing money under the threat of fine and/or imprisonment from the private sector that creates the wealth, they are making real economic growth more difficult.

Once again, “progressives” are calling for real, immediate tax increases in exchange for proposed, future spending cut. This is the same deal offered to Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. In both instances, the tax hikes happened, but not the spending cuts. In each case, the tax hikes did nothing to reduce deficits because the spending continued unabated.

“progressives” fondly reminisce about the good old days when Bill Clinton was President. Those were the days when the budget was balanced. Remember those days? That was when tax rates were higher. What “progressive” Democrats selectively fail to remember is that along with those higher tax rates, a Conservative House and a Conservative Senate legislated cut spending to go along with the higher tax rates.

Unless and until there are real, immediate, meaningful spending cuts as part of a budget deal, there should be no tax increases, period.

State of The Union or Wishful Thinking?

The 2012 State of the Union address has come and gone with little change in the White House’s view of the world. This is unfortunate. America needs viable solutions, not more wishful thinking.

Most disturbing is the continued, steadfast insistence that doubling America’s corporate tax rate will somehow create middle class jobs. After repeated failures by the current Administration to productively invest taxpayer’s money in green energy companies like Solyndra, what track record exists to support the assumption that government can invest the people’s money more wisely than those who earned it? Why should Americans trust a White House that said no to the Keystone pipeline, a privately funded project that would create thousands of jobs while reducing American dependence on oil from the Middle East? Especially when the White House is still pushing a multi-billion dollar high speed rail project in California that will never have the projected number of passengers and will become just another taxpayer subsidized failure like Amtrak?

Why insist on ending taxpayer subsides for the oil industry while choosing to “double-down” on clean energy? Why should government subsidize any of the energy industry? Let the energy companies go about their business and may the best, cheapest, most efficient energy be provided to the public.

If the White House truly wants to have “an economy built on American manufacturing”, they should cut taxes on manufacturing so investors have incentive, and reduce regulations that are inflating the cost and reducing the efficiency of starting and growing a manufacturing business. Without the return of manufacturing, any economic recovery in America will be sluggish at best. Why continue to practice policies that discourage growth in this vital economic sector?

Yes, Congress appropriating funds for construction projects is a normal part of doing business. But don’t try to convince us that you’ve suddenly become an expert on recognizing “shovel ready projects”. Everyone who’s been paying attention remembers what a dismal failure your last attempt was with the “stimulus” bill.

Iran’s closer than ever to getting the bomb and you’re still trying for dialogue, while civil unrest runs rampant in Iraq thanks to your failure to secure a Status of Forces agreement before withdrawal. The Arab Spring is becoming a Muslim Brotherhood bonanza, and the Taliban is licking their chops in anticipation of our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Talking with the Taliban is simply allowing them to gain credibility while they stall and await our departure.

Enough with the divisive class warfare rhetoric. Americans aspire to be rich, not get a handout. Besides, the top 10% pays 70% of the taxes in this country. 47% of Americans pay zero income tax. Exactly how do you define “fair share”?

And while we’re at it, the healthcare law you, Pelosi and Reid jammed down America’s throat without our consent is a mass medical tragedy in the making that increases the already monstrous debt we’ll owe for the unfunded Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid mandates.

You’ve had your chance. Your policies have failed. Why don’t you see if Bill Ayers is available to write your memoirs?

obama-Emperor Less Than Zero’s Open Deceit

The current White House occupant is spending taxpayer money (again) flying around the country going to fundraisers (again) extrapolating on his 2012 re-election strategy to blame Republicans for the failure of policies implemented by himself, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi (again).  Now he’s going around a “do nothing Congress” (see the U.S. Senate, controlled by “progressive” Democrats) via Executive Order (again). 

Never mind that when emperor less than zero was a State and/or U.S. Senator, ruling by decree was a gianormous NO NO.  Now that he (a self imagined and self appointed member of the intellectual elite) is in charge instead of that dumb cowboy from Texas, it’s suddenly OK to circumvent the U.S. Constitution and rule by executive fiat ( 97 and counting as of October 6, 2011).

Hey “emperor”, this isn’t the Kenyan banana republic from your father’s dreams.  This is the United States of America.  While it’s painfully obvious to anyone who’s paying attention that the only reason a devout Communist like yourself studied the Constitution was to figure out how to work around it, you might want to re-read it.  If you do, be sure to notice that the document begins with the words “We The People”, not Me The President.  You seem to have somehow missed that tiny little detail.  Congress writes the laws.  The Executive Branch executes them.  Or is that just too simple for your brilliant mind?

Emperor less than zero’s open deceit is, shall we say, “less than presidential”?

Take heart America.  November 2012 rapidly approaches.  While it’s true that we must take nothing for granted, the 2010 mid-term election results give reason for optimism.  With the exception of fringe extremists in “progressive” States, the Tea Party (formerly known as the Silent Majority) outnumbers and surrounds the radicals.  As long as We The People stick together, emperor less than zero is going down.

Voting this openly anti-American dictator wannabe out of office is your Patriotic duty.

In the words of a Democratic President elected before “progressives” co-opted his Party: “Ask not what your country can do for you.  Ask what you can do  for your country.”

Saudis Before Americans?

Based on allegations that there was an Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to the United States, the current White House occupant and his Attorney General chose to take action against Iran.  Since the alleged Iranian plans violated American and international laws, as well as centuries of ambassadorial protocol, one can argue that it was important for the administration to take these actions.  While those may prove to be defensible reasons, there remain underlying questions that are largely being ignored.

While Iran was funding counterinsurgencies and smuggling weapons used to kill Americans into Iraq and Afghanistan, it was OK with the current administration to maintain a policy of engagement with Iran.  Why?  What words, deeds or actions forthcoming from Iran justified that policy?  Why was it OK to talk with instead of getting tough with Iran while they were actively engaged in the killing of Americans and pursuing nukes?

Then, when a member of the Royal Saudi family was at risk, action was required.  Why?  What makes the life of one Saudi citizen more valuable than the lives of American service men and women?  Did it have anything to do with the mindset of an individual sitting in the White House who repeatedly apologized to the world for and openly disavowed belief in American exceptionalism?  Did it have anything to do with the mindset of an individual who bowed to the Saudi King?

It’s both reasonable and responsible to pose such questions.  With the USA’s foreign policies being held in disrespect around the globe, with America’s economy reeling from anti-business big government policies, and with long time American allies wondering where they stand, it’s the duty of all American Citizens to question the motives and actions of the individual currently occupying the desk that once bore the sign “The Buck Stops Here”.