Thursday, April 28, 2011

Photos/Videos of The Terror in Tuscaloosa

And links to reputable charities if you wish to help the survivors!

By now you may have seen the news video from WIAT channel 42 in Tuscaloosa as the monster storm moved over the area. It's frightening from a distance.

But this brave and foolhardy videographer was on the ground only a few hundred yards away as the tornado passed nearby:


The storm tore through Tuscaloosa and the surrounding countryside for miles. Within a hundred yards or so the devastation was total. WIAT sent a helicopter up the next day and tracked the destruction. That video is here.

Photobucket

This aerial photo shows the path of the tornado in Tuscaloosa, Ala. on Thursday, April 28, 2011. The earth is basically scoured down to the soil in many places.

Photobucket

Photobucket

Help Survivors

Conservatives are the most generous givers in America and I doubt the need for the survivors of these storms will go unmet. The Associated Press has put together a list of reputable charities including the Red Cross and Salvation Army.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Last Minute Rumors and Speculation Swirl Around Royal Wedding

Forget the dress, what about the thong?

On Monday, I linked to the full update on the official Royal Wedding web site. You would think that with all that info to digest it would satisfy the most curious Royal watcher. Not so.  Despite 95+ pages of detail on the wedding, the tabloid press in the United Kingdom has been working overtime.

Here's an update:
  • The full scale military rehearsal was held early Wednesday morning in London complete with horse guards, soldiers and carriages. The Sun has a full report along with the movements of the Queen and Kate Middleton.
  • There's still no hint about the dress Kate will wear but speculation is rife that the Queen will loan the priceless Russian Tiara that has adorned the head of Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Ann. Remember the old saying: "something borrowed..."
  • William and Kate will spend their first honeymoon night in a bedroom in Buckingham Palace. To go along with their first night as husband and wife, rumor has it that William bought a pricey hamper of honeymoon treats including scented candles, bath oil, chocolates, a teddy bear and bottle of the most premium Cristal champagne.
  • Kate's wedding night supplies are rumored to be a bit less expensive. She found  "Brazilian-style" lacy briefs (otherwise known as a thong) half price at 3.90 British Pounds. The Sun has a photo of the soon to be royal underwear.
  • The exclusive dinner party for three hundred at Buckingham Palace Friday night will not an affair for the old folks if Prince Harry has his way. The Queen and Prince Phillip are getting out of the palace and off to Windsor Castle following the official reception for 650 guests so as not to put a royal damper on things. Harry has made plans to party till dawn then throw a "survivors party" at 6 AM complete with bacon sandwiches.
  • Among the more bizarre stories is the rumor that Kate is having the jitters in nightmares where she walks the aisle nude in front of the entire Royal Family. But haven't we all had that dream?
Something for Royal Wedding Poo-Pooers

Not everyone is excited about the Royal Wedding and comedian Will Ferrell taps into that mood with his appearance on David Letterman where he french kisses the camera:

Why Now Release Obama's Birth Certificate?

Too many people were starting to believe he was NOT born in the U.S.!

For years, Obama has been unwilling to release the "long form" of his certificate of birth. I suspect that it played into his hands to have a small minority of people out there questioning his constitutional legitimacy to be president rather than have those persons put their energy into opposing his policies on ObamaCare, spending, White House Czars and the rest.

But when Donald Trump decided to make a major issue of the fact that Obama had not released this form, questions grew in the minds of the public. A recent USA Today/Gallup poll showed that only "38% of Americans say Obama definitely was born in the USA." Doubt of that magnitude undermines Obama's ability to lead on other issues (not that he was leading anyway).

The long form certificate from the White House web site is below:
Of course this won't answer all the questions about Obama's eligibility to be president. After years of conspiracy theories, many will look at this document and wonder. But perhaps the issue will no longer be a mainstream worry to Obama and his re-election effort.

Another point that is worth consideration: Obama could have released this certificate a long time ago. He made a political choice not to do so. It shows how totally focused on politics this White House is.

Kudos to Donald Trump for forcing the issue. But this doesn't change my overall opinion of Trump as unsuitable as the GOP nomination for president in 2012. Trump is not a conservative and would govern like one.

And just for the record, I was born in the United States and damn proud of it!

Monday, April 25, 2011

God's Rebuke for Obama's Lies

Easter Sunday lightning strike sends a signal!

As Easter Sunday came to a close in the nation's capital, storm clouds gathered quickly around the White House as a storm seemed to come out of nowhere and direct it's fury at the White House. The scene was recorded by an Obamaton who happened to be on the scene:

Photobucket
Full size image here.

Photobucket
Full size image here.

This final shot must have given the photographer a scare as the camera shakes!

Photobucket
Full size image here.

The message? Obama's lies about the Republican budget plan proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-MN) threatening the lives of senior citizens and young people must have been too much for the Almighty to stomach any longer!

If Drilling for Oil Isn't the Answer to High Gas Prices, Why is a 20-30 year plan for Green Alternatives Considered a Solution?

The answer is proof that this isn't about providing economic energy to the American people!

Radio Talk Show giant Rush Limbaugh made a great point Monday afternoon. We're constantly told by the left that drilling for oil is not the solution to high gas prices as it would take 5-10 years to bring new supplies of petroleum online. Rush is correct in pointing out that if we had drilled 5-10 years ago when the left first raised that objection new supplies which might effect the price would now be coming online.

But Rush went one step further by pointing out that the Obama Administration and the left keep pointing to some vague green energy alternatives as the answer. Yet, everyone knows that it may be decades before these alternatives are economically viable.

Another reason to drill here in the U.S. and drill now: U.S. supplies of oil and gas are available in abundance!

Drill Baby DRILL!

Full Details for Royal Wedding

And a Zombie wedding for those who don't give a hoot!

The official web site for the Royal Wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton has released a 95+ page download in MS Word format with full details of the service including the guest list, Abbey seating plans, times for arrival and procession, the cakes and the ring (William will not be wearing a ring).

Those who are following the wedding may find the information useful.

For those who think the event is total B.S. I have the following photo of the Zombie William and Kate from the Sci-Fi London Festival Easter Parade:

Photobucket

Best Wishes to William and Kate. Zombie or otherwise!

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Happy Easter!

In the Mike's America garden, we say HAPPY EASTER with flowers!

A few years back I received a gift plaque with the inscription: "One is nearer God's heart in a garden. Than anywhere else on earth." And every year in the spring, the promise of resurrection displayed in the life and color of the garden is living proof.

Both photos were taken on Saturday, April 23:

Photobucket
Foxgloves

Photobucket
Asiatic Lilies

HAPPY EASTER!

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Obama's "War" on Oil Profits His Supporters at the Expense of Average Americans

If he really wants an investigation as to why gas prices are so high he should investigate his own Administration and himself!

In response to his cratering poll numbers (RCP average), Obama has been trying to get out ahead of the blame game for high gas prices this past week. Like earlier this month when he told a man with ten kids that he should buy a hybrid van (when no such vehicle exists) to beat high gas prices, this week's performance was another "let them eat cake" moment.

At a town-hall style meeting at a renewable energy plant in Reno, Nevada, Obama repeated his slam against people who drive high mileage vehicles and instead pushed the Chevrolet Volt. "I've been in one of these Chevy Volts. This is a nice car. It drives well," Obama told the crowd. Never mind that he only drove in a Volt for about ten feet in a demonstration last year. Lecturing Americans, millions of whom remain out of work to buy a car that costs about $40,000 and can only go 25-50 miles on a charge before it starts sucking gas is more proof that Obama does not understand the financial challenges facing the average American.

Obama's War ON Oil

Readers may recall the leftie cry during the Bush years about "no war for oil." That was the usual protest cry against any military action in the Middle East. Now, Obama is running an undeclared war ON oil. Here are the words of GOP Senate Leader Mitch McConnell:
Senator Mitch McConnell
Apr 22 2011

...Gas prices have nearly doubled over the past two years. In some parts of the country gas costs more than four dollars a gallon. How did it come to this?

President Obama’s policies certainly haven’t helped. His administration has delayed, revoked, suspended, or canceled many energy development opportunities. No matter how much they say they want lower gas prices, the regulations issued by this administration add up to one thing—a war on American energy production and the jobs that come with it.

President Obama has proposed raising energy taxes of up to $90 billion over the next 10 years—most of which would be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher gas and electricity prices. The taxes could also slow down domestic oil production, enough to put up to 165,000 jobs in jeopardy over the next 10 years.

The administration has issued only 10 permits for deepwater drilling basic exploration projects in the past 11 months. If that current slow pace continues, offshore energy production will decrease by 13 percent in 2011. And fewer deepwater drilling projects mean fewer jobs and billions of dollars lost in investment.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has blocked access to potential offshore resources by refusing to provide permits to explore for oil off the Alaska coast, which holds an estimated 27 billion barrels of oil and would create 55,000 jobs per year.

The administration denied a permit to build a bridge needed to access an oil-producing field in Alaska after the EPA designated a nearby river an “aquatic resource of national importance.”

That same EPA is imposing through regulation what it couldn’t through legislation, the regulation of carbon emissions—despite Congress expressly voting against giving the EPA any such power. These backdoor regulations could increase the cost of gasoline and electricity by 50 percent and destroy more than a million jobs.

And the administration won’t even have a conversation about exploring for oil in a remote, 2,000-acre piece of land in northern Alaska that could bring approximately one million barrels of oil to market per day.

America contains enough untapped oil that we could easily replace our imports from the Persian Gulf for more than 50 years on domestic supplies alone. The problem isn’t that we need to look to foreign countries for energy, as the president has proposed. The problem is that the liberal Democrats in Washington won’t let us use the energy we already have.
How Much Oil is There? More than Enough!

In a November 2010 study, the non-partisan Congressional Research Service released a report describing just how abundant energy resources are in the United States. The report exposes the lie that has been spread that somehow we are running out of oil in the United States or that we don't have enough to meet our needs.

A few charts from the report highlight the issue perfectly:

Photobucket

Photobucket

A 50 year supply of oil. And this doesn't include oil shales and methane hydrates.

And let's not forget coal:

Photobucket

Obama's Renewable Energy Plan Makes His Friends Richer

While Obama is out pushing ever greater federal spending on long term renewable energy projects that won't do anyting in the short term other than enrich his green political supporters/investors, Americans are paying much more for energy than they would if we safely developed our own resources.

In Reno, Obama told the crowd: "We are going to make sure that no one is taking advantage of the American people for their own short-term gain." Yet his green buddies at General Electric recorded record profits this year and paid nothing in federal tax. Don't hold your breathe waiting for Obama to investigate his pal G.E. CEO Jeff Immelt.

I almost feel sorry for Peggy Joseph, Obama supporter in 2008 who said:


If Obama is elected "I won't have to worry about putting gas in my car."

That's right Peggy... Obama will give you a windmill to power your skateboard!

Friday, April 22, 2011

Charles Krauthammer: No Clowning Around in 2012!

The last two years with "hope and change" have been enough of a circus. It's time to nominate a serious, but dull GOP candidate!

The ever brilliant Charles Krauthammer laid out his best bets for the GOP in 2012 in Friday's column in the Washington Post. He proclaims that our best bet to unseat Obama is to select a candidate who can focus on the issue of smaller government and avoid making the race a personality contest between him or herself and Obama.

In developing his thesis he puts forward three "axioms:"
  1. "The more the Republicans can make the 2012 election like 2010, the better their chances of winning."In a straight ideological contest about the size and scope of government Obama loses.
  2. "The less attention the Republican candidate draws to him/herself, the better the chances of winning."
  3. "No baggage and no need for flash. Having tried charisma in 2008, the electorate is not looking for a thrill up the leg in 2012. It’s looking for solid, stable, sober and, above all, not scary."
In short, to win, Republicans should nominate a sound and safe candidate and avoid risky but more entertaining personalities. As Krauthammer in another venue has suggested, we are talking about electing a president to lead the country, not selecting the winner on American Idol.

Krauthammer goes on to give odds on the GOP field:
  • Michele Bachmann 20-1. A longshot but could do well in debates and some early contests. All good for another shot in 2016.
  • Mitt Romney: All the right stuff except the albatross of RomneyCare in Massachusetts. Krauthammer says "Romney is Secretariat at Belmont, but ridden by Minnesota Fats. He goes out at 5-1."
  • Newt Gingrich: " a Vesuvius of ideas...Unfortunate personal baggage. 12-1."
  • Tim Pawlenty: "Up-tempo style, middle-of-the-road conservative content. Apparently baggageless. Could be the last man standing. 5-1."
Krauthammer reserves a special place in hell for Donald Trump:
Donald Trump: He’s not a candidate, he’s a spectacle. He’s also not a conservative. With a wink and a smile, Muhammad Ali showed that self-promoting obnoxiousness could be charming. Trump shows that it can be merely vulgar. A provocateur and a clown, the Republicans’ Al Sharpton. The Lions have a better chance of winning the Super Bowl.
Krauthammer doesn't expect Palin or Huckabee to run. I'm not so sure. Huckabee at least has been making noises in SC and the re-emergence of Sarah Palin in Wisconsin recently might be signs that both are considering a run. Finally, Krauthammer sums up what he calls the "2016 Bench" of solid GOP leaders who are unlikely to run in 2012 but who knows.

One note of difference with Krauthammer: We don't always win by selecting the safe candidate. Readers may recall that McCain was supposed to be the most experienced campaigner who could appeal to the middle ground but he fought the 2008 race with one hand tied behind his back. Before I get too excited about the dull as dishwater "safe" candidates, they'll have to prove they can FIGHT!

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Dump Trump

The last thing the GOP needs is another Pied Piper leading us to defeat!

The last few weeks have been sort of a Trump mania in the news media and on the part of some GOP voters who are looking for a bit more pizazz in a possible 2012 nominee for president. I suppose that is understandable on both counts since the current GOP field, consisting of potential front runners like Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Governor Tim Pawlenty from Minnesota or Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi aren't exactly the most exciting candidates.

In nearly every appearance, Trump tosses out rhetorical red meat to the Tea Party crowd and the conservative GOP base. But scratch beneath the surface and you find a mass of contradictions and troubles that make a viable Trump candidacy problematic at best.

25% Tariff on China NOT a good idea!

Trump talks about imposing a 25% tariff on Chinese goods entering the U.S. On the surface, that sounds fine. China has not been a fair trading partner and the manipulation of their currency remains a major problem in U.S. Chinese relations. But think about that for a moment. Making the everyday products we buy from China 25% more expensive will have a huge negative impact on the American consumer and make the cost of goods that compete with China more expensive as they raise their prices to take advantage of the tariff. Does a trade war with China and massive inflation in the U.S. sound like a good idea?

Obama's Birth Certificate

One of Trump's other big issues is that of Obama's birth certificate. Since Obama has refused to reveal the original document the so-called "birthers" have talked about nothing else. That's right. We had a $trillion Stimulus and ObamaCare rammed down our throats and more in the last two years and a sizeable fringe group of people invest their energy in discussing whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii. Trump is reported to have investigators working on the issue in Hawaii. If he has definitive information, he should bring it forward. If not, why talk about it? Besides, even if Obama were born outside the U.S. the only way to remove him from office in his current term would be impeachment and that won't happen. Does the issue weaken Obama in his re-election bid? Or does the candidate who pushes an unsubstantiated rumor suffer more? You decide.

Take Iraq's Oil?

Another of Trump's bombshell positions is his repeated threat to seize Iraq's oil fields to force them to pay back the money spent to liberate the country from Saddam Hussein. Asked by ABC's George Stephanopoulos if that was stealing, Trump said: “Excuse me. You’re not stealing. You’re taking—we’re reimbursing ourselves.” Wow! In one stroke Trump validated the claim by the anti-war left and Al Queda that the U.S. was out to steal Iraq's oil. While some might find the idea appealing on it's face, again there would be severe consequences. What nation would consent to be our ally in any future military endeavor if we seized Iraq's oil? And without broad based international support, the U.S. would be isolated and treated as a pariah.

The Donald a conservative?

Republicans are a bit leery of electing people who claim to be conservative when running for office but do the darnedest things once they get in.  Some say President Bush and the current GOP House leadership fit that bill. They are wary of buying another "pig in a poke." That's a curious phrase and when I went to look it up online, there was an ad about Donald Trump for president right next to it. What do we really know about Donald Trump? Here's some food for thought:
  •  “Nancy — you’re the best. Congrats. Donald.” A note sent to Nancy Pelosi when she became Speaker of the House in 2007. When asked about the note, Trump responded: “I met her a number of times and I liked her.”
  • Praising Obama: "I think he has a chance to go down as a great president..."I think [Obama's] going to lead through consensus," Trump told  an interviewer shortly after the 2008 election. "It's not going to be just a bull run like Bush did."
  • Universal Health Care. In his 2000 book the America We Deserve, Trump wrote: "We must have universal healthcare...I'm a conservative on most issues but a liberal on this one."
  • Flip Flop on Abortion. From "I support a woman’s right to choose," in his 2000 book to his CPAC 2011 speech: “I am pro-life” and pledged to fight for the reversal of Obamacare, which contains abortion funding loopholes.
Trump Big Donor to Dems

Trump is now a registered Republican, but was at various times an independent and registered Democrat. He endorsed McCain in 2008. He's been all over the map. He gives money to both parties but a sizeable chunk, to Democrats:
  • $7,000 to former Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), the "liberal lion of the Senate."
  • $5,500 to Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) including $2,000 during his 2004 presidential run.
  • $24,750 to disgraced  Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.).
  • $116,000 to Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
 Thousands more for Democrats Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Arlen Specter and RINO Charlie Crist in Florida. Trump may be trying to appeal to the Tea Parties now, but he put his money behind liberals and establishment Republicans over Tea Party candidates every time.  Defenders may say that as a businessman Trump understands that he needs to grease the skids to get things done. But his giving shows a propensity to support liberal Democrats over conservatives every time.

Trump Can't Win

Only one poll, a February Newsweek poll, has Trump beating Obama. However,  recent Rasmussen and Marist matchups give Obama the edge by double digits. Rasmussen explains the Trump problem this way:
Most voters (53%) offer an unfavorable opinion of the reality TV star and businessman, including 29% with a Very Unfavorable view of him. Only 39% offer a favorable assessment, with 10% Very Favorable.
More conventional GOP candidates like Mitt Romney appear to be in a much stronger position; basically tied with Obama.

Trump alternative: GOP candidate with a SPINE!

Much of the attraction to Trump is his no nonsense style. The current crop of more mainstream GOP candidates seem to suffer from a surfeit of cautiousness and focus group tested rhetoric. What a shame we can't take some of Trump's more outspoken qualities and inject them into Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty. But there's still time for top tier GOP candidates to show the fighting spirit voters admire in Trump. But please, don't wait too long!

Monday, April 18, 2011

100% Tax on Rich Won't Solve Fiscal Crisis

But 100% tax on rich WILL kill the goose that lays the golden eggs!

Monday, April 18th, is Tax Day. And while half the country pays next to nothing in federal income tax, The so-called "rich" continue to pay the lion's share. The top 1% of wage earners (approx. $380k) pay 38% of income taxes. The top 10%, those making $113k or more pay 70%. Those below $33k pay less than 3%.

And yet, from Obama and the Democrats all we hear is the sad soak the rich refrain. Obama is still stuck on what he told Joe the Plumber in Ohio in 2008: "spread the wealth around." And in his speech last week raising taxes so he can continue the biggest federal spending spree in history was one reason columnist Charles Krauthammer described the speech as "disgraceful... shallow, so hyper-partisan and so intellectually dishonest."

Not Enough Rich to Pay Obama's Bills

But even if we agreed that Obama's wasteful, damaging spending plans were a good idea, the rich don't have enough money to pay for it. Consider the following chart and analysis from the Wall Street Journal:
Photobucket
Take 100% of the taxable income of those who make more than $114k and you only come up with $3.4 trillion. Not enough to pay for Obama's planned spending of $3.6 trillion this year. Of course you can't take 100% of a person's income and expect them to continue working. The Journal concludes:
The mathematical reality is that in the absence of entitlement reform on the Paul Ryan model, Washington will need to soak the middle class—because that's where the big money is.
Democrats try and claim that higher taxes during the Clinton era didn't hurt the economy. But that ignores the fact that federal spending at the end of the Clinton Administration was HALF what it is today. For all the Democrats who wail about current GOP cuts killing women and starving seniors, did that happen during the Clinton years?

The fact remains that we have a SPENDING problem, not a lack of tax contributions from the wealthy. And when Obama talks about "fairness" and expects the rich to pay more, is it fair for half the country to pay next to nothing? After all, as V.P. Joe Biden once said, paying taxes is "patriotic."

Photobucket

The alternative to higher taxes and ever more wasteful federal spending is the "Path to Prosperity" plan by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-MN). It's time to end the tax and spend gravy train! It's a road to disaster!

Saturday, April 16, 2011

Michelle Bachmann Visits Mike's America

Photobucket
Michelle Bachmann: "Hello South Carolina"
Photo by Mike's America
Her visit is the Lowcountry kickoff for the GOP 2012 nomination fight in SC!

Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) made her first foray into the Lowcountry on Friday with a fundraiser at a private home in the woods of Bluffton, SC before a series of larger public meetings in Bluffton on Saturday. It was the first event of the 2012 GOP presidential nominating process to be held in the area and Bachmann did not disappoint.

While not ready to declare herself an official candidate Bachmann told the large crowd assembled outdoors under a tent that she is "praying on the matter" with her family and would listen to her "heart" before making a final decision whether to run.

But it sure sounded like she is a candidate eager to run. After greeting the crowd, she reminded them why many were there. As she punctuated the air with her finger the crowd spoke the words along with her: "we're here to make sure Barack Obama is a ONE...TERM...PRESIDENT!"

Rep. Bachmann then proceeded to speak for approximately 45 minutes without notes, in an eloquent, passionate outpouring of facts mixed with conservative beliefs and a description of  her background. She told the crowd she was eager to debate President Obama and would "not need a teleprompter." The woman clearly needs no prompting to say what she believes.

Assessing a Bachmann Candidacy

Michelle Bachmann is clearly a darling of the Tea Parties. Christian conservatives will love her as well. But can she appeal to Independent voters? Bachmann points out that she's won election and re-election in liberal Minnesota, despite being the number one target for defeat in 2010 by the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi.

Yet, it's important to note that no Congressman has been elected President since James A. Garfield who had served nine terms in the House. Bachmann is only serving her third term in the House and is a relative unknown outside conservative circles. She faces an uphill battle in the mainstream media which paints some attractive and aggressive conservative women in a negative light.

But Bachmann says it's "time we had a fighter in the White House" and she signaled that if she enters the race, she's "in to win." What could propel her from the relative obscurity of second tier GOP candidates is a smart strategy and a bit of luck.

Win Iowa and SC and You're the Frontrunner!

Bachmann was born in Iowa, which borders Minnesota. She's already well known in that state and earlier this month hired former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee’s former Iowa political director. Readers will recall that Huckabee's upset win in Iowa in 2008 propelled him to the front of the pack and he very nearly upset McCain in South Carolina. If Huckabee does not run in 2008 Bachmann will have some strong support in Iowa and may win over Huckabee's evangelical supporters in upstate SC.

The big obstacle to a Bachmann win in Iowa is Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty who is also well known across the border and has hired several top Iowa campaign operatives, including another former top Huckabee aide (1,2). Pawlenty is widely viewed as a somewhat more moderate candidate than Bachmann which might broaden his appeal to independent voters but may not help as much in Iowa and SC contests where conservatives tend to dominate.

You could have a scenario where Bachmann wins or places second in Iowa, loses New Hampshire but comes to South Carolina and wins. Admittedly, that still a longshot, but it's entirely possible.

Meanwhile, expect to hear more from Michelle Bachmann as she edges her way up the pack. If she plays her cards right she may make it to the top. And Lowcountry residents will be able to say "I was there at the beginning!"

Friday, April 15, 2011

The Prosser Warning

Tea Parties nearly outdone by permanent progressive political machine!

I know this story is nearly two weeks old, but it's an important one, so please pay attention.

Typically, a race for the state supreme court doesn't attract a lot of attention. But in Wisconsin, the race for a seat on that state's supreme court became a proxy for a fight between progressives and tea party conservatives nationwide and the progressives almost won. That's all the more surprising since in the February primary, the incumbent Republican Justice Prosser got 55% of the vote and the Dem challenger, Kloppenburg only 25%. That 30% gap evaporated in the wake of the bill backed by Governor Walker to reign in the teacher's unions. The left declared war and decided to make the April 4th vote a referendum on Walker. A Kloppenburg victory would also have shifted the balance of power in the court to the Democrats with the likely result that Walker's bill would be nullified.

The usual suspects on the left poured in money and help to push Kloppenburg along. Millions poured into the state, largely from left wing groups. And that's not all:
“Republicans have awoken a sleeping giant in the electorate which will be felt in upcoming recall elections in Wisconsin and in 2012 elections nationally,” boasted Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee[.] Members of Green’s group made nearly 97,000 telephone calls urging Wisconsinites to vote for Kloppenburg, and the group has been raising money for recall campaigns. “This is only the beginning,” Green asserted.
...
And Democracy for America, a group founded by former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, which is working with the PCCC in Wisconsin, sent out a fundraising email within minutes of the unofficial tally asserting “We have the momentum — now it’s time to shut them out! … we need to hit them hard — right now — while the energy is highest and deal a fatal blow.”
Initial election results showed a very narrow loss for Prosser. But an error was discovered in Waukesha County where they failed to record the results from city of Brookfield. Prosser ended up ahead by a thin margin of 6,744 votes out of nearly 1.5 million cast.

It never should have been that close.

When are we going to learn?

Reflecting on the lessons learned from the November 2010 election, I wrote the following on December 1, 2010: "Don't Congratulate Ourselves Too Much for 2010 Election Win: 2012 Won't Be So Easy.Democrats well funded permanent political infrastructure gives them huge advantage over GOP/Tea Party volunteers and ad hoc organization!" In that post, I analyzed the reasons why we lost a number of close senate races in states like Nevada and Colorado where the polls showed us with an edge. The bottom line? Republicans rely on an outdated model of volunteer activists. Democrats have a well funded PERMANENT progressive political infrastructure using paid operatives. Every two or four years GOP volunteers fold their tents and go home. Progressives never stop organizing.

The Wall Street Journal ran a piece in November 2008 showing that Democrats had hired up to ten times the number of professional field staff as the GOP to work in key battleground states.

Here's the chart from that article:


Conservatives simply cannot afford to keep fighting with one hand tied behind our backs and relying on volunteers to get the job done. As I said in that December post we need to develop a more permanent grass roots political infrastructure which includes funding an army of activists in key states.

Business as usual won't work in 2012. Let's take a page from the progressive playbook and upgrade our grassroots efforts now while there is still time. Waiting until 2012 will be too late!

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Enough Boehner Bashing Already

Budget deal remains a good FIRST step!

There seems to be a persistant drumbeat of criticism for the budget deal inked by Speaker Boehner among those on the right. Much of the criticism is understandable because the total amount of the cuts was much smaller than many had hoped would be possible. But as I said in 1, 2 previous posts, the good outweighs the bad significantly.

However, a number of misconceptions or myths have sprung up about the budget deal. Again, much disinformation has been spread in an effort to split the Tea Party from Boehner and GOP leadership. Who is behind that effort? What's your guess?

On his blog, Speaker Boehner has a factsheet separating myth from fact. While it may be enticing to some disappointed with the size of the deal to instantly accept the criticism of the deal, it would behoove them to hear Boehner's side of the story.

One of the persistant myths is being propagated by the news site Politico. They report that the Congressional Budget Office tallies the real impact of the cuts for this year at $352 million. A very disappointing figure. Boehner's response follows:
MYTH: “The CBO says this bill only cuts $352 million in spending this year.”

FACT: Despite misleading reports to the contrary, H.R. 1473 cuts nearly $40 billion in spending. This means the federal government will spend $78.5 billion less than what the President requested for 2011. Over ten years, the bill saves taxpayers an estimated $315 billion. The confusion is over the terms used by the CBO – and how they’ve been mangled by liberals determined to keep their spending binge alive. Democrats are spinning a number referred to as budget “outlays” – or how quickly money is spent – to claim the cuts are smaller than they are. But in appropriations bills, Congress determines “budget authority,” or how much to actually put in federal bank accounts. This is the number that matters: the only way an agency can spend money is if Congress fills up its account (provides “budget authority”); here, Congress is taking away tens of billions of dollars. By any reasonable standard, taking money away from someone so they can’t spend it is a cut – in this case, a cut of nearly $40 billion. Read “Budget Confusion” by The Weekly Standard for more.
Visit Speaker Boehner's blog for the full fact sheet countering the negative spin regarding this deal.

For those curious who wondered why the mainstream media was so eager to build up Speaker Boehner after the deal was signed last Friday, the answer is clear: they built him up so they could tear him down. Let's not play that game. Yes, keep our leaders accountable and push them for MORE CUTS. But don't cut the rug out from under them after they succeed in this first, small step!

Obama's Failed Opportunity to Move to the Center on Spending

Wednesday's speech was a "hyperpartisan" campaign address. Not serious policy to deal with spending and debt!

Remember how Obama was billed as the man who would move beyond partisanship and do what is right for the American people. Little more than a year ago, he went to Baltimore to speak to the GOP retreat and lectured them on bipartisanship:
Bipartisanship -- not for its own sake but to solve problems -- that's what our constituents, the American people, need from us right now. All of us then have a choice to make. We have to choose whether we're going to be politicians first or partners for progress; whether we're going to put success at the polls ahead of the lasting success we can achieve together for America.
...
I would just say that we have to think about tone. It's not just on your side, by the way -- it's on our side, as well. This is part of what's happened in our politics, where we demonize the other side so much that when it comes to actually getting things done, it becomes tough to do.
On Wednesday, Obama gave a speech in which he outlined his latest plan (Obama 2.0) on how to deal with the federal budget. It was a golden opportunity for Obama to rise above partisan politics and triangulate to the center and show the American people he takes fiscal matters seriously and is willing to work for real solutions. Instead, we got another major dose of the same old attack politics that have done so much to polarize the political debate and prevent progress.

In his speech, Obama describes the Paul Ryan plan this way:
I believe it paints a vision of our future that is deeply pessimistic. It’s a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can’t afford to fix them. If there are bright young Americans who have the drive and the will but not the money to go to college, we can’t afford to send them.
...
It’s a vision that says America can’t afford to keep the promise we’ve made to care for our seniors. It says that 10 years from now, if you’re a 65-year-old who’s eligible for Medicare, you should have to pay nearly $6,400 more than you would today. It says instead of guaranteed health care, you will get a voucher. And if that voucher isn’t worth enough to buy the insurance that’s available in the open marketplace, well, tough luck -– you’re on your own. Put simply, it ends Medicare as we know it.

It’s a vision that says up to 50 million Americans have to lose their health insurance in order for us to reduce the deficit. Who are these 50 million Americans? Many are somebody’s grandparents -- may be one of yours -- who wouldn’t be able to afford nursing home care without Medicaid. Many are poor children. Some are middle-class families who have children with autism or Down’s syndrome. Some of these kids with disabilities are -- the disabilities are so severe that they require 24-hour care. These are the Americans we’d be telling to fend for themselves.

And worst of all, this is a vision that says even though Americans can’t afford to invest in education at current levels, or clean energy, even though we can’t afford to maintain our commitment on Medicare and Medicaid, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy. Think about that.
So much for the lecture about demonizing your opponents. Obama's scaremongering and class warfare rhetoric set a new low. And his solution to our fiscal problems is the same old soak the rich plan that Democrats trot out every few months rather than deal with the real problem which is spending.

One good thing to come from Obama's remarks is that his high profile attack on Paul Ryan's plan, The Path to Prosperity, raised Ryan to the same status of Obama in the discussion. So, it is fitting we turn to Paul Ryan's response to Obama:
“When the President reached out to ask us to attend his speech, we were expecting an olive branch. Instead, his speech was excessively partisan, dramatically inaccurate, and hopelessly inadequate to address our fiscal crisis. What we heard today was not fiscal leadership from our commander-in-chief; we heard a political broadside from our campaigner-in-chief.

“Last year, in the absence of a serious budget, the President created a Fiscal Commission. He then ignored its recommendations and omitted any of its major proposals from his budget, and now he wants to delegate leadership to yet another commission to solve a problem he refuses to confront.

“We need leadership, not a doubling down on the politics of the past. By failing to seriously confront the most predictable economic crisis in our history, this President’s policies are committing our children to a diminished future. We are looking for bipartisan solutions, not partisan rhetoric. When the President is ready to get serious about confronting this challenge, we'll be here.”
On the House Budget Committee web site, Ryan goes point by point through the weaknesses of Obama's proposal.

Reaction by conservative media was equally harsh. An editorial in the Wall Street Journal called it "The Presidential Divider. Obama's toxic speech and even worse plan for deficits and debt." Charles Krauthammer, called the speech "a disgrace" and summed up Obama effort this way:
"I rarely heard a speech by a president so shallow, so hyper-partisan and so intellectually dishonest, outside the last couple of weeks of a presidential election where you are allowed to call your opponent anything short of a traitor."
To those who were worried that Obama might make a feint to the center to help his re-election bid, have no fear. Obama is fully locked into liberal attack mode and that campaign is a loser!

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

New Details on the Budget Deal

Some good, some bad, but still a very strong first step in the right direction!

I don't want to repeat everything I said in this previous post, but a few corrections and additions to this story are required. Please read both posts before commenting.

Last night the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations released the text of the final bill to finish the work on the 2011 budget for the federal government that the Democrats failed to do prior to the start of the fiscal year on October 1, 2010. Visit their web site for the text and also the summary.

One correction from my previous post on this subject, the total of cuts for the entire fiscal year is $38.5 billion. That figure includes $12 billion in previously approved cuts. Appropriations Chairman Harold Rogers (R-KY) described the deal this way:
“Never before has any Congress made dramatic cuts such as those that are in this final legislation. The near $40 billion reduction in non-defense spending is nearly five times larger than any other cut in history, and is the result of this new Republican majority’s commitment to bring about real change in the way Washington spends the people’s money.”
The deal continues to invite criticism from those on both the right and the left. Conservatives continue to bemoan the fact that the cuts are minuscule compared to the size of the $3.8 trillion federal budget and the $1.6 trillion estimated deficit. That criticism is compounded by the news that many of the cuts were actually based on Obama Administration budget gimmickry. Another example of Obama's sleight of hand is an agreement to axe four White House "Czars" who are already out the door or on their way.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) Chairman of the conservative House Study Committee decried the failure to achieve larger cuts but also recognized that we have even bigger fish to fry:
“While I respect that some of my Republican colleagues will ultimately support this spending deal, I believe voters are asking us to set our sights higher. The debate is now turning to next year’s budget and the debt ceiling, both of which offer real opportunities to chart a better future than the one toward which the country is currently headed. Making a real impact will require the discipline to do the right thing even when it’s the hard thing. Americans want us to reach higher, act bolder, and remember the job we were sent here to do.”
UNDENIABLE: Deal Pulls National Agenda to Favor Budget Cuts

In a column on the Fox News web site, reporter Carl Cameron credited the GOP with a clear win in the budget fight:
The history of offers on this bill goes something like this. Democrats first offered no cuts, then $4 billion, then $6.5 billion, then $33 billion, then settled at $38.5 billion.

Boehner made numerous adjustments to his offer in recent days too, but started at $32 billion, then with a Tea Party push went to $62 billion, then dropped to $40 billion, then $38.5 billion.

Democrats claimed they met Republicans halfway after the $10 billion in cuts that already passed this year were approved. They settled late Friday night at three and a half times more.

Boehner came in $8.5 billion higher than the halfway point between his high offer of $61 billion in cuts and the Democrats opening bid of zero cuts.
The entire agenda in Washington has been changed by this budget deal. The best proof of that is the about face from Obama. 24 hours after the deal was signed the Administration sent their top flak, David Plouffe to the Sunday news shows to talk about a new and improved budget offer expected on Wednesday. Readers may expect Obama's new revised budget plan for 2012 to be heavy on taxes, but the wind for cuts is blowing strongly in favor of House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's 2012 budget plan a“Path to Prosperity.”

As Speaker Boehner wrote in an op-ed appearing on Sunday in USA Today the "Next fight to be about trillions, not billions."

Obama's Shutdown Propaganda War Foiled

I know there were some on the conservative side who wanted a government shutdown to make a point. But consider the downside of that approach. Here's a photo taken at the White House on Monday:

Photobucket
President Barack Obama poses in front of the South Portico of the White House with students from Altona Middle School from Longmont, Colorado April 11, 2011 in Washington, DC. The group had written to Obama saying that their trip to Washington would be cancelled if the government was shutdown.
Don't think that photo-op wasn't planned well in advance with the desired headline being "Obama Consoles Students with White House Visit After GOP Shutdown Ruins DC Tour." Reporters would be stationed outside every museum and monument in Washington and at National Parks around the country to find people willing to go on the record denouncing Republicans for the shutdown.

To those on the right who were ready for a shutdown I ask: what would it have achieved? How do you know that we would not be forced to settle for as little or less than we got from the current agreement? Would the cost levied against the GOP in the p.r. wars be worth the result and possible damage to our cause moving forward?

As many of us realized on election night 2010, this fight won't be over until we finish the job in 2012. But we are making steady, slow progress in the right direction. The best result from the current deal is that the conversation has changed dramatically in our favor. That's worth more than another 50 or 60 billion in a single deal. We're on a long road and we have to play for keeps, not just short term wins.

Saturday, April 09, 2011

Boehner Budget Deal a Victory in the Long Run

While the size of cuts may appear small, the stage is set for bigger victories!

O.K. here's some tough love for my conservative friends who were disappointed that out of a $3.65 trillion federal budget, the deal reached by Boehner, Reid and Obama would only make an immediate cut of $38.5 billion. But let's keep in mind that this was on top of previous cuts worth billions more from previous short term budget deals. And while the total $61 billion the House GOP was pushing for (still far too little for some) was a worthy goal, to shut down the government over a $22.5 billion difference would have put at risk our longer term projects by alienating independents who would blame the shutdown on the GOP.

Besides, this budget deal has many more sweeteners for conservatives to make up for the disappointment of the initial size of cuts. Speaker Boehner's web site has a full list, but allow me to highlight just a few items here.

These are permanent real cuts in programs. The savings extend out over time and will total hundreds of billions. This is the first time in history that the Congress and the President have agreed to real cuts, and not just a slowdown in the rate of increase.

A Defeat for Democrat's Demagoguery

Democrats are now on record approving cuts in amounts that only yesterday they called "extreme" and some suggested would kill women and starve senior citizens. The Dem's arguments have been exposed as silly, demagogic and reactionary making them that less effective next time around when even larger budget questions are at stake.

The way is now clear for a discussion of the Paul Ryan budget plan for 2012 which cuts trillions over time, not billions. Had we shut down the government over a difference of $22.5 billion, that discussion would not be taking place.

Putting Democrats on the Record

Even the majority of the American people who do not follow politics closely couldn't miss the clear message to come out of the wrangling this past week. Democrats are for more spending no matter what and Republicans are willing to provide the leadership and ideas to restore fiscal sanity to Washington. That's a big win for our side in the weeks and months ahead.

The deal also requires the U.S. Senate to take a vote on repealing ObamaCare The Senate must also debate and vote on defunding Planned Parenthood. Democrats in the Senate who hoped to avoid having those votes on the record before their re-election in 2012 will not be able to escape accountability.

Also, the deal forces the Obama Administration to disclose the damaging effects of ObamaCare including a "full audit" of the waivers the Administration has given to their union pals. In addition, there will be no increase in funding for IRS agents to enforce ObamaCare's provisions. These are the first real chinks in the armor of ObamaCare. Finally, the deal bans all federal and local funding of abortions in the District of Columbia. Another big win for the pro-life side. None of this would be taking place if the government had shut down over $22.5 billion.

Sets the Table for 2012

After the big GOP election win in 2010 we knew that while we had a comfortable margin in the U.S. House, we had failed to take the Senate and still had to contend with Obama in the White House. In the wake of the 2010 win the slogan was "on to 2012!" as we understood that in order to truly achieve the goals we set in 2010 we would have to do more than control the House.

With the absolute clarity coming from this budget agreement and our ability now to move forward on the larger budget questions and score votes on ObamaCare in the Senate, we have advanced the political football down the field. To me, that's worth much more than the $22.5 billion in immediate cuts we failed to get for 2011.

We have won the argument over spending and can move forward without being saddled with a messy government shutdown that might have left us in this exact same position at the end of it anyway.

John Boehner's leadership allowed us to leverage our power to the greatest extent possible and give us a superior position from which to fight the next round. With few cards in his hand he managed to pull off a win with the promise of more to come!

Friday, April 08, 2011

Democrats will say ANYTHING to Defend Abortion Cuts

In the age of post-Tucson massacre civility, this rhetoric reaches a new low!
From CNS.com:

Rep. Louise Slaughter, (D-NY): “This is probably one of the worst times we’ve seen because the numbers of people elected to Congress. I went through this as co-chair of the arts caucus," Slaughter said. "In ’94 people were elected simply to come here to kill the National Endowment for the Arts. Now they’re here to kill women.”
So, the Democrats who have offered no plan for a budget, continue to up the ante in their war on words aimed at Republicans. Not only do we want to starve senior citizens and children, poison the air and water but now we want to kill women.

Sarah Palin said there were death panels in ObamaCare and the media leaped all over her. What do you bet we don't hear a whimper about this outrageous charge by Rep. Slaughter?


Do they REALLY think that a few billion less for the federal government will mean the apocalypse?

This boy (or girl) has cried wolf once too often!

Thursday, April 07, 2011

Obama's Budget Commission Chairs Endorse Ryan Budget Plan

This has to be the kiss of death to the Ryan plan as Obama and the Dems totally ignored the Budget Commission recommendations!

From The Hill:
Fiscal Commission and Moment of Truth project co-chairs Erskine Bowles and former Sen. Alan Simpson released the following statement:

The budget released this morning by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan is a serious, honest, straightforward approach to addressing our nation's enormous fiscal challenges. We applaud him for his work in putting forward a proposal which will reduce the country's deficit by approximately the same amount as the plan of the President's Fiscal Commission.

We are particularly encouraged that Chairman Ryan's budget looks beyond the recent debates about near-term cuts and recognizes the need to address the long-term drivers of the debt. We are also pleased that the Chairman includes a process for Social Security reform in his budget to set the program on sound footing, and looks to do so for the program's own sake, not for deficit reduction.

Chairman Ryan's budget incorporates many of the proposals included in the Commission report. But in the areas where he did not support the Commission's recommendations, we are happy to see he has stepped up to the challenge of the "Becerra rule" adopted by the Commission - namely, to put forward alternative proposals with equal or greater savings for every provision one turns down.

Going forward, anyone who issues an alternative plan to Chairman Ryan's should be held to the same standard when offering their own solutions. We simply cannot back away from these issues.More
Speaking of alternatives, it is important to note in the current budget battle that not only did Democrats fail to pass a spending plan for the current fiscal year when they controlled both the House and Senate, they have yet to present ANY plan in the Senate as an alternative to the GOP spending bills which have passed the House.

The Ryan plan is the ONLY plan on the table and the only serious effort in many years to tackle the spending problem.

Wednesday, April 06, 2011

5 Year Old Jesse Gets His Wish: Governor of New Jersey (For a Day)

And just like a politician, his twin brother Brandon, appointed lt. guv, hogs the microphone and tries to butt in!

It's great to have a good news follow-up to this Mike's America story from last week. In 2009, then four year old Jesse Koczon couldn't stop crying when he was told he was too small to be Governor of New Jersey. Today, Jesse's size was swept aside as Governor Christie signed a proclamation naming Jesse honorary governor for the day and his twin named lt. governor.

The press conference with Governor Christie is priceless:

With Christie's Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno standing behind Brandon, Governor Christie joked about her standin's performance: “I’ve never said … this before: Someone control the lieutenant governor,” Christie said.

These two kids were anything but shy with a room full of cameras and reporters! As long as Jesse rethinks his idea to raise property taxes he and his brother may very well have a future in politics!

Paul Ryan's Bold Move: A Plan to Restore Fiscal Sanity in Washington

Dems predictable move: oppose any and all attempts to control spending as "extreme."

The federal government spend approximately $10 billion per day. Four billion of that is borrowed. That is a level of spending and debt that is unsustainable. The problem has become so acute that former Clinton chief of staff Erskine Bowles co-chairs of the presidential commission on deficit reduction called it “the most predictable economic crisis in history.”

Republicans were elected in the 2010 landslide election to address this problem and they are. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-MN)the telegenic Chairman of the House Budget Committee put his cards on the table on Tuesday. Here's his outline of the plan. It's a short 3:15 presentation:



On the House Budget web site, you'll find the complete details of the plan along with a summary. Describing the plan in one sentence, the Ryan plan slowly reigns in spending and limits it to 20% of gross domestic produce. Wouldn't you think that 20% of EVERY good or service created in the United States every year would be enough? Apparently not for Democrats.

Two charts from the plan:

Photobucket

Photobucket

An editorial in the Washington Times described the plan this way:
For the first time in almost 50 years, a congressional budget is on the table that would make an actual spending cut. We’re not talking about a Washington “cut” that happens when government spends more money but less than it would have liked to have spent. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan, Wisconsin Republican, gives a nod to the common-sense understanding of the term with an outline for federal expenditures in 2012 that would come in at $89 billion less than outlays in 2011. That’s a real 2.5 percent reduction.

Even the “cuts” Republicans still want to make to the 2011 budget would, if enacted, represent an overall increase from last year’s spending. In that context, Mr. Ryan’s proposal brings the nation closer to solvency but not quite as much as the “$6 trillion in savings over a decade” headline might imply. Specifically, Mr. Ryan’s 2012 deficit would remain near $1 trillion. Over a decade, overspending would continue adding more than $5 trillion to the national debt. That’s a 46 percent improvement over the $9.4 trillion in overspending under Mr. Obama’s budget. Both figures are too much.
Democrats Cry Wolf Once Too Often

Ryan's plan basically rolls back spending to 2008 levels. Were people starving in the streets in 2008 when Democrats ran the House of Representatives? You might think so if you listened to Democrats this week talk about Ryan's plan with the same shopworn scaremongering that has become a cliche in Washington since the Reagan era.

Democrats didn't even wait for Ryan to unveil his plan before they trotted out their recycled rhetoric about hurting kids and seniors and tax cuts for the rich. Those lines were written long ago. They were not true during the Reagan years when the budget reached $1.1 trillion and they are not true now with a budget of $3.6 trillion.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi topped the crazy cake by insisting that GOP cuts would mean "six million seniors are deprived of meals." Were those seniors starving when Pelosi's Democrat controlled congress approved 2008 spending?

Where is the Dem Plan for Fiscal Solvency?

Democrats had two years with overwhelming control of both houses of Congress and the White House. Instead of addressing the defict, as Obama promised, Dems went on a spending spree. Obama appointed a deficit commission to study the matter and promptly ignored their recommendations.

Rep. Ryan's plan is the first serious deficit reduction effort in many years. If Democrats succeed in demagoguing it to death with the usual lies then we will certainly face that future fiscal crisis completely aware of who is to blame!

Monday, April 04, 2011

New $5 Billion Slush Fund to Reward Obama Union Supporters & Subsidize Health Care for Retirees

Obama takes care of his friends and hands the rest of us the bill!

Remember how Democrats insisted that the need to pass the health care bill was great we didn't have time to read it? Remember that former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said we need to pass the bill to find out what is in it?

One year later and we are still just only now uncovering the corruption and payoffs that went into ObamaCare. The latest discovery comes as Investigators for the House Energy and Commerce Committee started looking into the workings of one of those many bureaucratic agencies included in the legislation (remember this organizational chart?. Investigators discovered that the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, part of the Dept. of Health and Human Services created something called the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program. The program's objective was to provide up to $5 billion for health care for early retirees.

From Byron York's report in the Washington Examiner:
Where is the money going? According to the new report, the biggest single recipient of an early-retiree bailout is the United Auto Workers, which has so far received $206,798,086. Other big recipients include AT&T, which received $140,022,949, and Verizon, which received $91,702,538. General Electric, in the news recently for not paying any U.S. taxes last year, received $36,607,818. General Motors, recipient of a massive government bailout, received $19,002,669.

The program also paid large sums of money to state governments. The Public Employees Retirement System of Ohio received $70,557,764; the Teacher Retirement System of Texas received $68,074,118; the California Public Employees Retirement System, or CalPERS, received $57,834,267; the Georgia Department of Community Health received $57,936,127; and the state of New York received $47,869,044. Other states received lesser but still substantial sums.

But payments to individual states were dwarfed by the payout to the auto workers union, which received more than the states of New York, California, and Texas combined. Other unions also received government funds, including the United Food and Commercial Workers, the United Mine Workers, and the Teamsters.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/03/uncovered-new-2-billion-bailout-obamacare#ixzz1IZfdkxqv
Bad enough that corporations like General Electric, a big corporate backer of Obama and one that pays NO federal taxes, but big labor cleans up as well.

I guess big labor has to keep those early retirees healthy so they can volunteer to man the picket lines in states like Wisconsin and protest about how bad off they are!

Saturday, April 02, 2011

Too Small or Too Liberal to Be Governor of New Jersey?

Isn't it the same thing?

Here's the story: Jon and Dawn Koczon took their four year old twins to the polls with them when they voted in the New Jersey governor's race in November 2009. On the way home, Jesse wouldn't stop crying. His mother asked him why:


Mother: "What's making you so sad Jesse?" '
Jesse: "Cause everyone tells me I'm too small to be the governor of New Jersey."

Governor Christie responded via Twitter: "Don't worry Jesse, people gave plenty of reasons why I couldn't be Governor, though being too small wasn't one of them."

But the real reason Jesse might not make it into the Governor's mansion came at the end of the tape when his mother asked him if he would raise property taxes. He responded "yes." His mother explained that raising taxes might not be what the people want.

Here's hoping that Jesse and millions of other four year olds out there learn the lesson that people want LOWER taxes!

Friday, April 01, 2011

Senate GOP Campaign Committee Mocks Obama 2012 Re-Election Effort

You have to see this ad!



Brought to you by your friends at the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee. They need your help to retake the Senate in 2012.
fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator