This guy has had enough of Obama. http://video.foxnews.com/v/1778945753001/
This guy has had enough of Obama. http://video.foxnews.com/v/1778945753001/
As I have already stated, I really hate it when the word agenda gets tossed around.
University of Chicago economist Luigi Zingales notes in his new book, "A Capitalism for the People," "If workers feel poorer, it is because rising health insurance premiums have been swallowing up most of their real wage increases of recent years." Premiums for family coverage, per Zingales, rose 50 percent from 2003 to 2010.
According to economist Art Laffer, government stimulus spending over the last five years totaled $4 trillion. That's almost $13,000 for every American man, woman and child. Our money, spent by politicians, according to Laffer, goes to "banks and companies that fail, solar energy companies that can't make it on their own, unemployment benefits, and the like."
How can we possibly have a functioning economy when politicians can randomly steal from citizens? When, basically, we have legalized theft? This is why our economic crisis is also a crisis in values.
At the root of our floundering economy is a loss of respect for the sanctity of private property that goes hand in hand with the loss of respect for the sanctity of life and marriage.
It seems the left in America can only define something they don’t understand, something that frightens them, something so truthful it hurts or something they have no real response to that leaves them grasping for any kind of answer that comes with the hope that maybe it will just go away…and if it doesn’t, do all possible to destroy it.
[Obama] has gone out of his way to divide this country in a way I haven't seen since the Great Depression when Franklin Roosevelt went around to divide his country. That's his hero. What makes America great [in Obama's mind] is that the government takes money from somebody and gives it to somebody else. No, that's what makes America, France.
"With his control over the Executive and Judicial branches of the government, the stage is set for a complete takeover of the government. Think about it! Since taking office, instead of helping the economy, Obama has purposely escalated the economic crisis by plunging the country into unprecedented debt. He has a number of programs that are designed to go into effect in January 2013, just in time for his second term of office. The economic burden and increased taxes on everyone will be enough to cause the final economic collapse of the country. As soon as that happens, Obama declares Martial Law and assumes dictatorial control of the nation.
The Department of Justice has already been subverting federal laws to strip us of a number of freedoms. The Supreme Court and many of the other federal courts have been seeded with socialistic liberal judges that will rule in Obama's favor on virtually anything, thus ending constitutional rule and law.
He's already changing the face of America's military...allowing homosexuals to openly serve, along with changing the retirement program, is causing many conservative military leaders to resign commissions and leave the military. Some Pentagon officials are also noting an increase in the enlistment of radical Muslims into the US military where they get all the training they need on weapons and defense systems. We have no idea how many of them there are in the armed forces or in what positions they may hold.
Obama has been wielding executive powers this past year as if he were already a dictator. When Congress is not doing his bidding, he simply bypasses them and uses an executive order to accomplish it anyway. This has set the stage for his disbandment of Congress. He would not be the first world leader to take control of a nation and disband the legislative branch of government.
He has been effectively using the media to anesthetize the public to the dangers he poses. Like a patient being prepped for surgery, people are numb to the changes and won't have a clue what took place until they wake up in recovery and realize that free America has been removed and replaced with a regime that may parallel those of Stalin, Lenin, Mussolini, Hitler, Chavez and Castro.
For the sake of our children and grandchildren, I earnestly pray that we are spared from what seems a certain future and that Obama is overwhelmingly defeated in 2012. Otherwise, heaven help us.
After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar, but never worked as an attorney.
As a venture-capitalist, Romney's first major business deal involved investing in a start-up office supply company with one store in Massachusetts that sold office supplies. That company, called Staples, now has over 2,000 stores and employs over 90,000 people.
Romney or his company Bain Capital (using what became known as the "Bain Way") would go on to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino's, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others.
Got your calculators handy? Let's recap.
Volunteer campaign worker for his dad's gubernatorial campaign 1 year.
Unpaid intern in Governor's office 8 years.
Mormon missionary in Paris 2 years.
Unpaid bishop and stake president for his church 10 years.
No salary as president of the Olympics 3 years.
No salary as MA governor 4 years.
That's a grand total of 28 years of unpaid service to his country, his community and his church. Why? Because that's the kind of man Mitt Romney is!
And in 2011 Mitt Romney gave over $4 million to charity, almost 19% of his income....Obama gave 1%
Joe Biden gave $300 or .0013%
This is real character vs....well you know what!
Romney may not be the best representative the Republicans could have selected. At least I know what religion he is, and that he won't desecrate the flag, bow down to foreign powers, or squander my money on vacations. I know he has the ability to turn this financial debacle that the "Spending President" has gotten us into. We didn't know that when Obama said he'd give us change, he meant nickels and dimes, and he would get the big bucks. We won’t like all the things necessary to recover from this debt, but someone with Romney’s background can do it.
But, on the minus side, He never was a "Community Organizer", never took drugs or smoked pot. Never got drunk. Did not associate with communists or terrorists. Nor did he attend a church whose pastor called for God to damn the US .
This tells the story, why Bush was so bad at the end of his term.Don’t just skim over this, it’s not very long, read it slowly and let it sink in. If in doubt, check it out!!!
The day the democrats took over was not January 22, 2009, it was actually January 3, 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and Congress.
At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS
of JOB GROWTH
Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
Add unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? OBAMA
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress
So when someone tries to blame Bush…;
REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is: I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20, 2009.
This election has me very worried. So many things to consider. I voted for Obama. McCain was a Washington insider and we don't need any more of them. I have changed my mind three times, since then. I watch all the news channels, jumping from one to another. I must say this drives my husband crazy. But, I feel if you view CNN, and Fox News, you might get some middle ground to work with. I started thinking "where does all the money come from for President Obama"? I have four daughters who went to College, and we were middle class, and money was tight. We (including my girls) worked hard and there were lots of student loans. I started looking into Obama's history for my own peace of mind.
Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental in California . He is very open about his two years at Occidental, he tried all kinds of drugs and was wasting his time but, even though he had a brilliant mind, did not apply himself to his studies. "Barry" (that was the name he used all his life) during this time had two roommates, Muhammad Hasan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both from Pakistan . During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a "round the world" trip. Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia , next Hyderabad in India , three weeks in Karachi , Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family, then off to Africa to visit his father's family.
My question - Where did he get the money for this trip? Nether I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they were in college. When he came back he started school at Columbia University in New York . It is at this time he wants everyone to call him Barack - not Barry. Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia ? It's not cheap to say the least.
My girls asked me; where did he get money for tuition? Student Loans? Maybe it's none of my business?
After Columbia, he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for $12,000. a year.
Why Chicago? Why not New York? He was already living in New York. By "chance" he met Antoin "Tony" Rezko, born in Aleppo Syria, and a real estate developer in Chicago . Rezko has been convicted of fraud and bribery several times in the past and in 2011. Rezko, was named "Entrepreneur of the Decade" by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association". About two years later, Obama entered Harvard Law School. Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School ?
Where did he get the money for Law School ? More student loans? His family has no money that's for sure.
After Law school, he went back to Chicago. Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down. But, he did take a job with Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Guess what I discovered? They represented "Rezar" which is Rezko's firm.
Rezko was one of Obama's first major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago. In 2003, Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with "seed money" for his U.S. Senate race.
In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in Kenwood District of Chicago for $1.65 million (less than asking price). With ALL those Student Loans - Where did he get the money for this property? On the same day Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot for full price. The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born Billionaire loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama's new home was purchased. Obama met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko.
Now, we have Obama running for President. Valerie Jarrett was Michele Obama's boss. She is now Obama's chief advisor and he does not make any major decisions without talking to her first. Where was Jarrett born? Ready for this? Shiraz, Iran! Am I going nuts or is there a pattern here?On May 10, 2008, The Times reported, Robert Malley advisor to Obama was "sacked" after the press found out he was having regular contacts with "Hamas", which controls Gaza and is connected with Iran. This past week, buried in the back part of the papers, Iraqi newspapers reported that during Obama's visit to Iraq , he asked their leaders to do nothing about the war until after he is elected, and he will "Take care of things". What the heck does that mean?
Oh, and by the way, remember the college roommates that were born in Pakistan? They are in charge of all those "small" Internet campaign contribution for Obama. Where is that money coming from? The poor and middle class in this country? Or could it be from the Middle East ?
And the final bit of news. On September 7, 2009, The Washington Times posted a verbal slip that was made on "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos. Obama on talking about his religion said, "My Muslim faith". When questioned, "he made a mistake". Some mistake, eh?
All of the above information I researched on line. If you would like to check it - Wikipedia, encyclopedia, Barack Obama; Tony Rezko; Valerie Jarrett: Daily Times - Obama visited Pakistan in 1981; The Washington Times - September 7, 2008; The Times May 10, 2008.
Now the BIG question:: - If I found out all this information on my own, Why haven't all of our "intelligent" members of the press been reporting this? Is this a Kettle of Fish?? As Arsenio Hall would say.----"HUMMMMMMM! Does something stink or is it my imagination?"
These are legitimate questions for our president.
Provider - M.D., RS - PHYSICIANS FOR WOMEN
GE is Moving from Wisconsin. Keep your eye on Waukesha, Wisconsin......Their biggest employer just moved out. General Electric is planning to move its 115-year-old X-ray division from Waukesha, Wis., to Beijing. In addition to moving the headquarters,the company will invest $2 billion in China and train more than 65 engineers and create six research centers.
This is the same GE that made $5.1 billion in the United States last year, but paid no taxes - the same company that employs more people overseas than it does in the United States.
So let me get this straight. President Obama appointed GE Chairman Jeff Immelt to head his commission on job creation (job czar). Immelt is supposed to help create jobs. I guess the President forgot to tell him in which country he was supposed to be creating those jobs. Thanks Jeff, you're a "real" American....give Barrack our Best! If this doesn't show you the total lack of leadership of this President, I don't know what does. Please pass this information to others and think about it before you buy a GE product.
For Snopes verification of this information, go to:http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/ge.asp
Wow! And make certain you read, at the bottom of this page, the part that says it will take 30 more seconds to read!!! This is what needs to be done, in my opinion! Please forward to all you know and ask them to forward to all they know. Maybe, together, we can make this happen!
The shoe is on the other foot and the Mexicans from the State of Sonora , Mexico do not like it. Can you believe the nerve of these people? It's almost funny. The State of Sonora is angry at the influx of Mexicans into Mexico !!!
Nine state legislators from the Mexican State of Sonora traveled to Tucson to complain about Arizona 's new employer crackdown on illegals from Mexico . It seems that many Mexican illegals are returning to their hometowns and the officials in the Sonora state government are ticked off. A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora was in Tucson on Tuesday to state that Arizona 's new 'Employer Sanctions Law' will have a devastating effect on the Mexican state. At a news conference, the legislators said that Sonora, - Arizona's southern neighbor - made up of mostly small towns - can not handle the demand for housing, jobs and schools that it will face as Mexican workers return to their hometowns from the USA without jobs or money.
The Arizona law, which took effect Jan. 1, punishes Arizona employers who knowingly hire individuals without valid legal documents to work in the United States . Penalties include suspension of, or loss of, their business license. The Mexican legislators are angry because their own citizens are returning to their hometowns, placing a burden on THEIR state government.
'How can Arizona pass a law like this?' asked Mexican Rep Leticia Amparano-Gamez, who represents Nogales . 'There is not one person living in Sonora who does not have a friend or relative working in Arizona ,' she said, speaking in Spanish. 'Mexico is not prepared for this, for the tremendous problems it will face as more and more Mexicans working in Arizona and who were sending money to their families return to their hometowns in Sonora without jobs,' she said 'We are one family, socially and economically,' she said of the people of Sonora and Arizona .
Wrong! The United States is a sovereign nation, not a subsidiary of Mexico , and its taxpayers are not responsible for the welfare of Mexico 's citizens. It's time for the Mexican government, and its citizens, to stop feeding parasitically off the United States and to start taking care of its/their own needs.
Too bad that other states within the USA don't pass a law just like that passed by Arizona . Maybe that's the answer, since our own Congress will do nothing!
1. 40% of all workers in Los Angeles County ( Los Angeles County has 10.2 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal aliens working without a green card.
2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
3. 75% of people on the most-wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.
4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.
5. Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.
6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.
7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.
8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
9. 21 radio stations in Los Angeles are Spanish speaking.
10. In Los Angeles County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish.
(There are 10.2 million people in Los Angeles County .)
(All 10 of the above statements are from the Los Angeles Times)
Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare.
Over 70% of the United States ' annual population growth (and over 90% of California , Florida , and New York ) results from immigration.
29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.
We are a bunch of fools for letting this continue!
Some states still maintaning the immiration law while Washington reneges on laws originally made.
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Gov. Rick Perry has told state agencies that the Obama administration's new program allowing some illegal immigrants to avoid deportation is "a slap in the face to the rule of law," and clarified that Texas' immigration policies won't change.In a letter dated Aug. 16 that was addressed and sent Monday to all agency heads individually, as well as to Attorney General Greg Abbott, Perry said he was seeking to "avoid any confusion on the impact of the Obama administration's actions." He added that the federal policy confers "absolutely no legal status whatsoever to any alien who qualifies."
Under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, students age 30 or younger who are enrolled in school on the day they apply will now be eligible for a two-year reprieve from deportation if they demonstrate they came to the U.S. before their 16th birthday; lived in the country for the past five years; and have not been convicted of certain crimes or pose a national security threat.
Last week, young people around the nation formed long lines to attend information sessions and briefings on the new program.
In his letter, Perry referenced media reports that "thousands of aliens in Texas are eligible to apply for relief from deportation under the guidelines."
The governor wrote that he has previously stated his staunch opposition to the new policy, and his letter criticized the Obama administration for attempting to "unilaterally undermine the law through a policy statement issued under the cover of so-called 'prosecutorial discretion.'"
He said the move was "a slap in the face to the rule of law and our Constitutional framework of separated powers."
But Perry also wrote that the program "does not undermine or change our state laws" and that he expects state agencies to keep enforcing them.
A spokeswoman for the governor, Catherine Frazier, said that even though the policy won't alter state law, Perry has been very clear in opposing it.
During his unsuccessful run for president, Perry strongly defended a Texas law that grants cheaper, in-state tuition to illegal immigrants who attended a Texas high school for at least three years. He also was a vocal opponent of a fence stretching the entire length of the U.S.-Mexico border.
Still, Frazier said Perry opposes the way the new policy has been implemented: "They basically circumvented the whole process."
It was a sentiment echoed by attorney general spokeswoman Lauren Bean, who said the Obama administration doesn't have the authority to ignore the law.
"As it does in all cases, the Attorney General's Office is prepared to defend Texas law — and any state agencies that are challenged for following the law and complying with the governor's directive," Bean said in a statement Monday.
Last week, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed an executive order directing her state's agencies to deny driver's licenses and other public benefits to illegal immigrants who obtain work authorizations under the program. Arizona passed one of the nation's toughest anti-immigration laws and Brewer said the federal program doesn't give immigrants legal status and she's following the intent of the current state law denying public benefits to them.
Nebraska Gov. Dave Heinemann has said his state won't extend program participants' driver's licenses, welfare benefits or public assistance.
Perry's letter does not direct any action in response to the new program. Instead, Frazier said the governor "wanted, on the record, to let agencies know what he expects of them."
Have you noticed how often the president's supporters talk about the "likeability" factor in politics these days? No longer do we hear that presidential candidates must convey "the vision thing" or "gravitas" or credibility as commander in chief. Not that those criteria were precisely calibrated. Four years ago, many commentators were assuring us that Joe Biden brought gravitas to the Obama ticket, which is a little like saying that helium provides ballast, but at least they thought a certain policy weight was important -- even if their perception was ludicrous. This year, however, we are told that voters cast their ballots based mostly upon which candidate they'd prefer to "have a beer with."If that truly were the most important qualification in the minds of most voters, we might as well abandon the Electoral College, chuck the Constitution with its complicated rules and just select presidents by liking them on Facebook.
That would suit Obama. When he or his surrogates are not suggesting that the Romney/Ryan team will throw grandma off a cliff or kill steelworkers' wives, the president seems to revel in his favorite subject: the coolness of Barack Hussein Obama.
Nearly all politicians offer glimpses into their personal lives to humanize and endear them to voters. George W. Bush sometimes described his fitness regimen. His father let it be known that he disliked broccoli. Ronald Reagan had a fondness for jellybeans and horseback riding. Bill Clinton played the sax (to say no more).
But Barack Obama, the man who published his first (of two) autobiographies at the age of 34, has cultivated a cult of coolness about himself. Perhaps because he cannot run on trillion-dollar deficits, the looming fiscal cliff, increasing poverty, the loss of America's AAA bond rating, or the decline in middle class incomes. Or perhaps because he is just shallow enough to think that celebrity matters, he has indulged in record-setting levels of vanity during his time in office.
Obama doesn't just love himself, he also thinks it's uplifting for others to love him, too. So he has shared his NCAA brackets, slow-jammed the news with Jimmy Fallon and crooned a few Al Green lyrics at a fundraiser. Human-interest fluff, you say? Everybody does it?
Maybe. But consider that in the past few days even some members of the White House press corps are complaining that the president hasn't held a press conference in two months, but he has managed to make himself available to Entertainment Tonight and People magazine. The world was apparently panting to discover that the president is personally friendly with George Clooney. Yes, and Michelle Obama confides that Clooney is "cute."
It requires a stratospheric level of self-regard to suggest, as the campaign did with its "Obama Event Registry," that in lieu of accepting gifts for themselves, Obama supporters should suggest that well-wishers send donations to the Obama campaign instead. "Let your friends know how important this election is to you," exhorts the site, "register with Obama 2012, and ask for a donation in lieu of a gift."
Unabashed, the campaign also taped a solicitation featuring the first couple's blow-by-blow reminiscence about their first date. Offering small details about your life is one thing, but this is like dragooning the entire country into watching your home movies.
"It was a cool date," the first lady recalls for the ad. Barack apparently showed her "all different aspects of his character." He took her to the Art Institute of Chicago, where they had lunch by the fountain in the courtyard. Obama winks at the camera. "Guys out there: Art impresses people." Then they went to see Spike Lee's movie "Do the Right Thing." Michelle summarizes: "He was hip, cutting edge, cultural, sensitive." Barack smiles complacently and again addresses the camera: "Take tips gentlemen."
While unavailable to discuss the entitlement time bomb, Iran's march toward nuclear weapons (accompanied by new threats to wipe Israel off the map), our crushing national debt or the record-high joblessness among college graduates, President Obama made himself available to the "Morning Mayhem" show on KOB-FM in New Mexico. For six minutes and 40 seconds, the president discussed a range of issues, from whether Colorado or New Mexico had the best chili to where to get a good hot dog in Chicago to what kind of music he likes to work out to to what kind of superpowers he'd like to have if he were an "Avenger."
He said he'd like to fly. Had enough yet? unquote
Another serious reason to vote Obama out before he completely dismantles our country.
The American system of democracy is under threat. It's under threat from an Obama campaign that seeks to polarize Americans along race and class lines. It's under threat from a Democratic Party that seeks to pit those who pay taxes against those who don't.But most of all, it's under attack from America's public sector unions.
Mallory Factor explains in his new book, "Shadowbosses: Government Unions Control America and Rob Taxpayers Blind," just how the unions pervert the political system. They demonstrate how our government has become subject to the demands of an ever-more-powerful minority -- and how that level of control breeds national bankruptcy.
In essence, government worker unions run the Democratic Party. Franklin D. Roosevelt long opposed the notion that government workers should be allowed to unionize; he recognized that the ultimate power of unions is the ability to strike, and that government workers striking would be acting against the interests of the dispersed taxpayers. That was unacceptable.
But over time, FDR's clarity of vision fell away. In 1962, JFK, recognizing the increasing power of private unions, realized that government employees who unionized could build the path to permanent Democratic governance. Here's how the scheme would work. The government would insist on bargaining with unions; employees would have to join unions in order to work and receive representation. Unions would be able to exact dues from their members, and they would use those dues to elect their favored politicians. Those politicians would then strike cushy deals for the unions. The winners: politicians, unions and working union members. The losers: taxpayers, who would subsidize both union salaries and Democratic campaigns.
Democrats across the country quickly adopted this strategy. The system of forced dues now rules larges swaths of the United States, destroying the fundamental freedom of labor that should be an American birthright. In certain states, private individuals have been forced into unions -- and more importantly, into paying union dues -- simply for caring for their disabled children.
But the unions have now become the masters of the Democrats rather than vice versa. As Factor writes, "Democrats live in fear of the people that really impact their reelection campaigns -- the union Shadowbosses. ... Open Secrets reported that of the top ten Congressional candidates whom labor spent money to defeat in 2008, all lost their races."
The cost of union domination has been economic stagnation and widespread bankruptcy. As Factor writes, "Over the last ten years, the federal government has subsidized more and more state government spending, covering 34.1 percent of all state spending in 2011, up from 25.7 percent ten years before." Overall, as Factor points out, "Lightly unionized states do much better than highly unionized states." The average real personal income growth from 2000 to 2010 in the seven most unionized states averaged 7.8 percent; in the seven least unionized states, that average was a whopping 24.9 percent. Government workers' unions impoverish Americans.
There's only one solution to taking back our country. It starts by taking control of our tax dollars by booting out of office those who are in bed with the public employee unions. Only when the corrupt cycle between the Democratic Party and their public-employee union shadowbosses is broken can American democracy be restored in full. unquote
"Joe Biden," wrote the editorialists of the Salt Lake Tribune four years ago, “is smart, articulate, and blunt.” Well, grant our Utah colleagues this much: One out of three is better than nothing. Joe Biden is blunt as a night stick, as he proved once more last week with his instantly infamous declaration that Mitt Romney hoped to enchain his fellow citizens (whom Biden articulately referred to as y’all). As for “smart” and “articulate,” the Trib’s editorialists were writing at a time, August 2008, when we were all required to marvel at what a formidable personage old Joe was. At least they didn’t use the word “gravitas”—an omission that could have gotten them run right out of the International Guild of Opinionmakers and GasbagsRemember? There was a period there, in the early days of the Obama Delusion, where Biden and gravitas were nearly synonymous. Why, if you looked up “gravitas” in the dictionary you’d see those pearly Biden choppers gleaming right back at you. The New York Daily News praised his “experience and gravitas.” The Washington Post said he “immediately added gravitas” to the Obama ticket. John Harwood on MSNBC said Biden’s “gravitas would enable him to take the fight to John McCain.” A Philadelphia Inquirer columnist went further: Biden was capable of “trumping the presumptive Republican nominee with gravitas.” Trumping John McCain with gravitas? Didn’t the North Vietnamese try that too?
And now the cliché makers say Biden has gone from gravitas to gaffe-prone.
But the reversal ignores the fact that the imputation of gravitas should have struck anyone familiar with Biden’s career as ludicrous. His gravitas, said 2008’s cliché makers, applied especially to his experience in foreign policy. Having first come to the Senate in 1973, Biden did indeed face all the great issues of the second half of the Cold War—and came down on the wrong side on every one of them, from the abandonment of South Vietnam to the deployment of Pershing missiles to the arming of the Nicaraguan contras. His record was pristine—completely untouched by good judgment.
The same limitations could be seen in domestic matters, often to painful effect. Two decades before Obama picked him as a running mate, Biden presided over the confirmation hearings of the Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork. Biden made the cringe-making mistake of assuming he understood such issues as substantive due process and the role of natural law in judging. He was just smart enough not to know what he didn’t know—half-fluent with the words but utterly confused about their meaning. The televised hours in which Bork tried patiently to explain the law to him seemed to last for days.
Biden’s confusion and lack of knowledge might be traced back to his law school career, when he imported several paragraphs from a law review article into a paper of his own. Accusations of plagiarism have dogged him ever since. Among other things, plagiarism is a crime of the intellectually insecure, and that same insecurity may account for his emphatic, and implausible, insistence on his own prodigious IQ.
In his revealing autobiography, published in 2007 to coincide with his second failed presidential campaign, he instructed his ghostwriter to include extended quotes from letters of recommendation he long ago received from various teachers, praising his “sharp and incisive intellect.” Indeed, one of the themes of Biden’s book is that with all that intellectual horsepower humming just beneath the hair plugs, life for him has been no day at the Delaware beach.
“I’ve made life difficult for myself,” the ghostwriter wrote for Biden, “by putting intellectual consistency and personal principle above expediency.” America should have understood such sentences as a cry for help. Instead, our opinion makers saw in them gravitas.
The Obama Delusion that gripped so much of the country was built on many assumptions that the last three years have proved to be false. The president was an intellectual, his countless admirers believed; he was a uniquely persuasive speaker, he was as eloquent off the cuff as he was on the stump, his deep thinking about politics transcended ideology, he understood both history and contemporary policy with rare penetration—and when it came time to choose his vice president, he “opted for gravitas.” This last false assumption was the most amusing of them all, and may yet prove to be the most dangerous. unquote
A new report by the Family Research Council and the Liberty Institute claims that there's been a rising pattern of hostility toward Christians in America over the past decade.
The 140-page "Survey of Religious Hostility in America," prepared by the Liberty Institute and the Family Research Council, highlighted more than 600 examples illustrating what it characterized as religious animosity shown by judges, government bureaucrats, schools and secular groups. From ObamaCare mandates that force religious entities to pay for contraception, to children being punished for uttering prayers in school, the report's findings shocked even those who commissioned it.
"It's way beyond anything we had imagined. It's so much more prolific than it's ever been before."- Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Institute
“It’s a conflict of world views," Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, told FoxNews.com. "These groups want people to check their faith at the door of the public square.”
Among the examples listed in the survey:
- Matthew Reynolds, valedictorian for HLV Junior-Senior High School in Victor, Iowa, was told he had to give a 'secular' speech after he wished to attribute his success to his faith in Jesus Christ during his graduation speech.
- A cross was removed from a veterans' memorial in San Diego, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit held that the memorial was unconstitutional.
- .Dr. Frank Turek, a Cisco employee, was fired for expressing his views on traditional marriage in his book, even though he never voiced his religious opinions at work.
- Samantha Schulz, 8, was barred from singing "Kum Ba Yah" at a Boys and Girls Club in Port Charlotte, Fla., because the song included the words "Oh, Lord."
- Catherina Lorena Cenzon-DeCarlo, a nurse at Manhattan's Mount Sinai Hospital, was forced to participate in a late-term abortion against her religious convictions, and was threatened with job termination and loss of license.
The goal of the report is to raise awareness of these incidents to promote the appointment of judges "who are sensitive to the Constitution," said Kelly Shackelford, president of the Plano, Texas-based Liberty Institute. The report was presented in Tampa just ahead of next week's Republican National Convention.
According to Shackelford, the hostility can lead to violence, as in the case of the Aug.15 shooting at the Family Research Council headquarters, in which a gunman allegedly said he disagreed with the group's beliefs before shooting an employee in the arm. He also cited the Aug. 5 shooting deaths of six people at a Sikh temple near Milwaukee.
"It's way beyond anything we had imagined," Shackelford told FoxNews.com."It's so much more prolific than it's ever been before."
One critic said the report is guilty of blurring the line between attacking religion and upholding the Constitution. A.J. Johnson, development director of American Atheists, Inc., said no one condones hate crimes such as the FRC shooting. But many other examples cited are simply cases in which advocates called for the separation of church and state," Johnson said.
"The Family Research Council distorts court cases upholding the First Amendment as examples of "religious hostility," she said. "In reality, they are imposing their beliefs onto others and claiming to be victims of religious persecution when they do not get unique Christian privilege."
But Perkins said the secular nation that groups like Johnson's seek was never envisioned by the Founding Fathers, and will not come to be.
"That's not the future of our country," Perkins said. unquote