MSM acts like these things matter. Kelly Clarkson’s opinion is important because she’s an expert in… absolutely nothing even vaguely related to the subject. She thinks she’s a republican, except for voting for the most Liberal democrat in her lifetime. She’s done so little research that she hasn’t even heard about Ron Paul’s newsletters, let alone read one. Obviously her political opinions are not well thought out, so why do we care what Kelly Clarkson thinks? Incidentally, by her actions, she is at best a status quo democrat.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Proof that stupidity knows no bounds.
The good news? Only 17% of respondents “mentioned” Obama’s name, giving him the top spot.
Why bother reading politico?
As usual, the wrong conclusions, and false opinions held as fact. Politico trumpets that the freshman republicans had, for the first time, been put in line by the republican “leadership”. They conveniently forget that the same near sighted rhinos trampled cut, cap and balance. Actually, it was nearly the same playbook too, McConnell defected and Boehner caved.
Obama moves mercury emissions into your household.
Obama is once again being hailed, by environmentalists, as the earth’s savior. He’s demanding reduced mercury emissions for power plants, while demanding the American public use only mercury containing florescent light bulbs. Millions of mercury containing light bulbs, in homes, breaking and burning out, then filling landfills. I wonder if the power plants can scrub the mercury from their emissions and sell it to the florescent bulb companies? Would it be enough to match the 312 million people using lights? Sounds like more government regulation for the sake of regulation, higher prices, and no net benefit.
Sheriff Joe Arpaio knows law enforcement.
"I do have compassion, but I'll tell you one thing. Enforcing the law overrides my compassion," Arpaio said. That’s exactly what I want to hear from an officer of the law.
While Obama rails against voter ID…
I wonder if the same citizenship test that immigrants( you know the real ones, that is, the legal ones) have to take wouldn’t be a good idea at the voting booth. If you can’t pass(and I truly mean pass 70% minimum) a citizenship test are you really competent to vote for the future of the country?
Obama, fake it ‘til you make it. Re-election that is.
The news is blaring “Jobless Claims in U.S. Decrease Last Week to Three-Year Low” non stop. “Jobless claims dropped by 19,000 to 366,000 in the week ended Dec. 10, the fewest since May 2008, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington.” What are they failing to point out? “The continuing claims figure does not include the number of Americans receiving extended benefits under federal programs. Those who’ve used up their traditional benefits and are now collecting emergency and extended payments jumped by about 332,200 to 3.64 million in the week ended Nov. 26.” +19,000 -332,200 is a very large negative number. Obama is fudging the math in a desperate attempt to make himself look better. The headlines are a lie, the result is still negative.
Holder Declares War on Voting Laws in Texas
http://nation.foxnews.com/eric-holder/2011/12/14/holder-declares-war-texas
So now the definition of discrimination is “fail(ure) to show the absence of discrimination." Does innocent until proven guilty sound at all familiar? Not if you are one of Holder’s political opponents. You can’t prove a negative Mr. Holder. Since it didn’t happen there will be no evidence either for or against. Common sense, let alone actual intelligence, is apparently above Eric’s pay grade. Oh, and by the way, when’s the last time Mr. Holder proved he hasn’t discriminated against me? By his own admission, Guilty! Lock him up.
"That's what the democratic process is all about — creating space for thoughtful debate, creating opportunity for citizens to voice their opinions and ultimately letting the people chart their course," he(Holder) said. There’s your key. Pull out your wallet, produce your driver’s license, and prove you are a citizen, in the correct polling place, and who you claim to be all in one fell swoop. I guess Holder is worried that this might reduce voter fraud, and thereby democrat votes. It is amazing with what consistently people voting in multiple precincts, the dead, illegal, incarcerated, and institutionalized vote for democrats.
Child homelessness up 33% since Obama took office.
Yet some people still buy the liberal talking points. You had liberals in full control of the government during these years. You’ve seen, by their own actions, what their actual interests are. You’ve heard mountains of doubletalk and excuses. Liberals only interest is their own power, at any and all costs. The current crop of Rhino Republicans may not be much better, but they at least want a thriving economy too. Until we band together to restore our limited federal government, we’ll get more of the same.
Justin Velez-Hagan
+ FollowDecember 12, 2011 | Spotlight
Republicans oppose tax cut. Democrats oppose tax cut. What the . . .?!
If you were having a hard time figuring out which political party stands for what, following the recent battle over the expiring payroll tax cut won’t help.
In recent months, Democrats have proposed and touted payroll tax cuts that Congressional Republicans oppose, while at the same time Republicans are offering their own payroll cut that Democrats refuse to support.
Republicans are shooting down tax cuts and Democrats are fighting for them. Welcome to Seinfeld’s oft alluded-to Bizarro World.
Now that a deadline is looming for a holiday payroll tax increase, both parties are vying for a quick answer that will not add to the embarrassment of the recently failed “supercommittee.” Most Americans, however, see little difference in either party’s schemes.
Why the fight over what many see as the same solution? Politic365’s Charles Ellison gave his candid take on the politics of it: “Ultimately, both parties are playing base games. . .” With elections coming up, politicians will do what gets votes, which is far too often showing what your opponent will not do, not what you can do.
But for those of us who still have faith that our legislators have a more rational, economically-based explanation for their actions (yes, “they do exist”), good luck finding it in this talking-points dominated political world we live in.
“House Republicans have been opposed to extending the payroll tax cut for middle income Americans,” is what you will hear from anyone from the President to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Unfortunately for them, Senate Democrats are also opposed. The Senate recently backhanded Democratically-proposed legislation, with fewer affirmative votes than there are Democrats.
Republicans also blame their counterparts, claiming that Democrats are the reason their legislation has not gained headway. If the Democratic proposal was slapped down, the Republican version was shot out of the sky with a hypersonic missile, garnering approval from only 22 Senators.
Although both proposals seem contrary to previously-established party ideology, let us make you feel better: nothing has changed.
Republicans want to pay for a payroll tax cut by shrinking the number of federal employees and freezing their pay. Democrats want to pay for a payroll tax cut with the tax hikes on the “wealthy” they have been aiming for since Ralph Hall (R-TX) was being fed peas and carrots with a spoon (which is kind of confusing, since he is old enough to be doing the same now).
Much like the government’s yearly budget, a payroll tax cut or an extension is going to pass, one way or another. Both parties agree that increasing the payroll tax will cost jobs. “Independent economists have found that increasing the payroll tax could cost nearly 1 million American jobs and trigger another recession,” said the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in a statement.
Wait, a prominent Democratic organization just argued against raising taxes? Maybe this is the Bizarro World.
Given the payroll tax agreement, what remains is whether the adjoining legislation will have an impact on our economy, our pocketbook, and our families. Find an analyst that says that either party’s pitch will significantly improve our lives and I will show you someone who appears on cable news with the title “Democratic/Republican Party Strategist.”
So the real question is not “which party is going to offer the deepest cut?” Both parties will out-cut the other if given the chance. With the new political consensus that we can no longer afford tax breaks without a balanced increase in revenue production or a decrease in spending, the real question is the same as what it has always been: “What sacrifices are we going to have to make in order to keep those cuts?”
And that brings us back around to the same ideological divide we have always had.
Democrats want to counter the payroll tax cut with an increase in taxes on the wealthy, bringing in extra revenue that the government needs to support future spending. Walter Williams, economist, author, and pundit refutes the intended effects, “When individuals face higher income taxes, they report less income, buy tax shelters and hide their money.” Since federal tax collections have held steadily between 15 and 20 percent of the nation’s GDP since 1960 despite top tax rates that have been between 35 and 91 percent in the same time period, the premise behind Democratic proposals may be flawed.
Republicans want to freeze pay increases on federal government workers for the near future and reduce the total number of employees in the government, saving the taxpayer money in the long-run. In a fragile economy with a wary unemployment rate, the federal government is the only sector that has held steady or remained at full employment. Democrats are worried that reducing federal jobs will hurt employment with no real payoff. Considering also that minorities, especially African Americans, are employed at a higher rate in the federal government than within the private sector and Democrats walk away with a “race card,” ready to be played the next time a White Republican mentions “small government.”
Although surface pundits and political strategists may want you to believe that your party of choice has somehow betrayed its core values and become the “hypocritical devils” they have always told you they are, Republicans are still for shrinking government and cutting expenses and Democrats are still for maintaining the size of government and its benefits while raising revenues through new taxes.
Everything else is just Politicanese. Not fluent yet? Don’t worry, by this time next year, it will be second nature.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)