Tuesday, January 31, 2012

What was January 24th?

It passed us by with hardly a notice, aside from the almost two hour Obama campaign speech, er, State of the Union address, which allowed him to talk un-rebutted, heavily rehearsed and teleprompter assisted rhetoric, which amounts  to nothing more than his usual talking points/bullets he's said over and over again while accomplishing little.

What passed us by you might say? What were we distracted from, by the Pretender-in-Chief's monotonous speech?

It was the day that marks 1,000 days since the last time Congress passed a budget for our nation. That's right, well over two-and-a-half years, since April 21st, 2009.

How long can the government continue it's policy of passing measures to fund this group, that group, etc??? And don't forget, not only are they 1,000 days delinquent in actually doing the ONE FRICKING THING the federal government should ACTUALLY be doing (instead of officially declaring pizza a vegetable, for example) they actually FORGOT to fund the FAA before going on a week long break (as reported on the Communist News Network, aka, CNN).

Remember when the Senate defeated House Budget Committe Chairman Paul Ryan's (R-WI) bill 57-40, without ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT voting for it?  At least the House of Representatives is somewhat doing their job, as outlined in the U.S. Constitution:
“Article I Section VII - All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”
If only our government were as committed to operating on an approved budget, doing what they are elected to do, as they are in spending money and raising the debt ceiling. Of course they CAN take the time to vote down a balanced budget amendment proposal to the Constitution, saying something to the effect that the repurcussions of a balanced budget would be far more damaging than the benefits... ARE YOU KIDDING ME???

Sure lets have talking points on why it should be an amendment... sure, maybe it's a tough call in economic downturn. Ok, I get that, BUT if you were passing a budget every year and made that argument, for short term issues, sure, people might buy it. BUT YOU MORONS HAVEN'T PASSED A BUDGET IN 1000 DAYS (AND COUNTING). Guess what, you don't get to talk about Congress ceding powers to the courts, social welfare spending, and repurcussions, because YOU FAILED AT YOUR JOB ALREADY.

There are 435 House members, and 100 Senators... that's 535 people that should not have a job over the next six years of elections. FIRE THEM ALL!

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Post for one of my daughters

One of my daughters presented me with a graph she found from a friend's page on facebook, claiming that Obama has increased our national debt by a smaller amount than any president since before Reagan. I told her that she should never believe anything she simply sees on the internet, and that I would show her some facts/research, to prove that just because something is on the internet, ESPECIALLY on facebook, does not mean that it comes anywhere near the truth.

So this is for her, but feel free to enlighten your liberal friends as well...

Before Bush: 1/1/2001 - $ 5.7 TRILLION Total National Debt
After Bush (8 years): 1/1/2009 - $ 10.7 TRILLION Total National Debt ($5 Trillion increase in 8 years, or $625 Billion/year)
Obama (3 years): 1/1/2012 - $ 15.2 TRILLION Total National Debt ($4.5 Trillion increase in 3 years, or $1.5 Trillion/year – 2.4 as much debt per year as Bush)
Last two years of Bush’s presidency under a Democratic controlled House and Senate:  $8.7 Trillion Total National Debt when Democrats took control, minus $ 10.7 Trillion under Bush when he left, for $ 2 Trillion increase in two years, or $1 Trillion/year. That means that for the first 6 years under Bush, with a Republican House and Senate, the Republican’s raised our debt from $ 5.7 Trillion to $8.7 Trillion, or $3 Trillion over 6 years, for only $500 Billion (half a trillion) per year increase in debt WHILE lowering taxes by 5% across the board, and fighting two wars, rebuilding after Hurricane Katrina, and recovering after 9/11.
Myth of the Clinton surplus… used by permission of Mr. Steiner.
And remember, even if you claim Clinton had a surplus and refuse to believe the article and the facts contained within, then consider that 1994-2000, basically ¾ of Clinton’s presidency, the House and Senate were Republican controlled, meaning the national budget each year, was originated in the House, ratified by the Senate, and sent to Clinton to either sign or veto.
And using that logic, remember that the last two years of Bush’s presidency, 2007 and 2008, the House and Senate came under Democratic control, with an almost philibuster proof majority in the Senate.
Ultimately, both parties are irresponsibly raising our debt rather than getting us out of it, but do not believe the liberal lie that Clinton somehow paid off debt and left Bush with a surplus, and that Bush increased our debt far more than Obama has. And remember, per the United States Constitution:
“Article I Section VII - All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”

That means quit blaming the President for all the problems, and quit giving him credit for all the good stuff when it comes to budgets. Blame the House of Representatives, and to a lesser extent, the Senate. Then, and only then, blame the President for not vetoing the garbage budget proposed for him to sign. Of course, since we are 1000'ish days since actually having a budget, and the Executive and Legislative branches have been playing the "pay as you go" system and have not issued a budget for over THREE YEARS it is hard to actually assign fair blame to anyone in particular, so to hell with all of them.

Say no to 535 Congressmen, the President, and the Supreme Court. This is our government, not theirs.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Election predictions

Obama beat McCain by 7.2% popular vote.


Popular vote 69,456,897 for Obama, vs 59,934,814 for McCain. Thats a percentage of 52.9% vs 45.7%

If 3.6% of the people that voted for Obama last time, change their vote to the Republican candidate this year, thats a tie in popular vote. I guarantee there is at least that much in swing voters pissed off and voting him out.

That does not account for those that "turned out the vote" that didn't normally vote, but made a point to, because Obama promised the world, was called "The One" by Oprah Winfrey (referring to a question asked in the fictional novel "The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman" if different newborn babies were the ones who would save african-americans and bring them equality) promised his FIRST ACT as president would be to bring our troops home and that we could "take that to the bank". Of course, that video clip was Oct 7th, 2007, and THIS ONE is Oct 21, 2011, a solid FOUR YEARS TWO WEEKS LATER where Obama takes credit for the troop withdrawal "as promised" but which was promised under the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) signed and ratified in November of 2008, under then President Bush... People were pissed at Bush and voted against his party. Alot of those voters are going to be sitting at home this year.

To say nothing about McCain running a weak campaign...

So I think Obama IS easily defeatable BUT the issue to overcome, is conservative voters being dissatisfied with the GOP's "more of the same" candidate choice.

A little over a year ago, the House of Representatives went from Democrat to Republican by the largest single swap since 1948. That is conservative voters making their voices heard.

Now the GOP is trying to shove Romney down our throats (most think because of a back room deal during the McCain campaign, where he was one of McCains biggest challengers for the GOP nomination, and bowed out from a strong second, and endorsed McCain). I absolutely believe the GOP promised him he would be their choice this election. And thats's the point... facts do not really matter, only perception and beliefs.

Where Obama can win, is where those among us will vote for a 3rd party candidate, or write-in Ron Paul, in protest against the GOP (something I plan on doing not to protest the GOP but because it's my vote, and I intend to cast it for someone I believe in, not someone who is electable).

And besides, I don't think Romney is electable this year.

And if the GOP loses just 5% of it's voter base to disenfranchisement, who vote for 3rd party or write-in candidates or who just stay at home election day, Obama probably wins by a narrow margin.

That, or we can see yet another election where a president wins the electoral votes required to be president, but loses the popular vote... and expect a recount or two.

Just my take on it.