Thursday, February 25, 2010

National Security Takes a Backseat Again

As if we actually needed more evidence that Obama is soft on terrorism, and doesn’t take the threat of attacks on this country seriously, there is now information coming to light that his pick to lead the U.S. Coast Guard wants to make major cuts to the agency's counterterrorism mission over the next five years.

An internal memo from Vice Admiral Robert J. Papp Jr., Obama's nominee to become Coast Guard commandant, says that starting in 2012, he would slash funding for programs in the agency's homeland security plan, including patrols and training exercises.

The memo, marked "Sensitive - for internal Coast Guard use only," was obtained by the Associated Press.

According to Papp's memo, he would scale back the Coast Guard's counterterrorism priorities and said he wants to eliminate teams that are trained to respond to and prevent terror attacks. These teams also train other Coast Guard forces on counterterrorism operations.

Papp said the strike teams were created after Sept. 11 "to fill a perceived void in national counterterrorism response capability." He says in the memo that other federal agencies are better at this type of mission. Really? Which ones exactly?

He also calls for cuts to the Coast Guard's largest homeland security operation, which patrols critical infrastructure and other sensitive security structures on or near waterways. Moreover, he would decrease the number of specialized units stationed in key coastal areas where an attack could be devastating. Obama has already proposed closing five of the twelve specialized units in 2011.

Seems as though Obama has no problem trimming spending when it comes to the security of this nation, but then spends money like a drunken sailor on liberty when it comes to his social engineering projects, like the health care bill, which he’s STILL trying to get passed (guess focusing on job creation was very short lived and takes a back seat again, much like it has for Obama’s entire tenure).

If Congress wants to keep their jobs, they will kill the nomination of Papp, who obviously is kowtowing to Obama for the appointment. The security of this nation should be our number one concern. Call or write your representatives and insist they vote this appointment down. The Coast Guard has a long and proud tradition of protecting this country, especially during times of war. No matter what Obama thinks, we are indeed at war, and we need all the resources we have in the fight. The Coast Guard’s motto is Semper Paratus; Always Ready. Mr. Obama should take a course in Latin.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Nations of Woosies

No one loves this country more than I do, but honestly, we're becoming a nation of woosies. I just heard today that employees can now miss work because of S.A.D. (seasonal affective disorder) or what is commonly referred to as the ‘winter blues.’


S.A.D. is where you don’t get enough sunlight in the winter and you feel depressed. There was a case recently settled last October where a teacher sued her employer for not accommodating her seasonal affective disorder by failing to provide her a classroom with natural light - and she won.

With jobs being at a premium, I’m wondering who would be stupid enough to call off sick with S.A.D. Can you also imagine the strain on employers who have to deal with the kind of economy we are currently experiencing, and then they have to deal with this kind of crap as well? I grew up in the northeast. I went for months in the winter without seeing the sun. Guess what? I’m still alive.

I also heard recently that a prominent sports figure took a leave of absence because he has S.A.D. Not the winter blues kind, another kind. It’s called Society Anxiety Disorder. Don’t even get me started on this one. It seems we have a syndrome or disorder that covers everything now-a-days, and a prescription to combat it, or at least keep it in check with a steady supply of your drug of choice.

Can you imagine if the “Greatest Generation” had succumbed to this kind of nonsense during the Second World War? We’d be speaking German on the east coast and Japanese on the west right now.

Of course, we’re no worse off than the British. They recently instituted a “Bully Hotline” FOR ADULTS, who feel like their boss is being mean to them, in light of recent news stories about their Prime Minister Brown being less than cordial with his staff. I guess the famous “stiff upper lip” of the British, is now a “quivering” one. Boo- freaking- hoo. Welcome to the 21st century, lads.

Monday, February 22, 2010

'Paper or Plastic' Now Equals Money and Power

I’ve always said if you follow the money, you will eventually find the truth in many circumstances. With the new “Green Movement,” it is becoming more obvious everyday that the motives behind these seemingly altruistic or “Earth friendly” policies are about nothing more than two things: Money, and the power it brings.


Case in point - Washington, D.C. last month enacted a new law mandating that any store where you can buy edible items, like grocery stores, now have to charge for the bags you use to carry home your purchases, which were once free.

For decades, the standard question at U.S. grocery store checkout counters has been "Paper or Plastic?" However, since January, consumers in the U.S. capital have faced a different question: "Will you pay 5 cents for a bag?" The capital city's decision to charge for bags is supposedly an effort to raise money to clean the Anacostia River.

However, they aren’t mandating the 5 cents a bag charge for just the normal plastic bags that are the target of the “Greenies,” who say they aren’t biodegradable and hurt the planet, but for ALL bags, including the biodegradable paper ones. Can you say revenue stream? I thought you could.

Looks to me like just another case of the Nanny State raising its ugly head. The folks are using too many plastic bags? Hell, let’s tax them on ALL bags. Pulling out “the Green Card” will make some of the sheep out there feel good about it and get on board, and the rest… too bad for them. We’re the government. We can do anything we want. It seems to be working for the Global Warming thing and Cap & Trade… let’s keep it rolling!

Free trade? Yeah right. No one ever thinks about letting the individual stores enact their own policy. That, of course, would give people a CHOICE where they decided to shop, and we would find out what the market will bear on any issue. It’s easier to just MANDATE it and make it law… and then reap the benefits of a windfall profit so they have more money to waste and keep them in power.

Don’t care what happens in Washington, D.C.? Think again. Washington's law is the first of its kind in the United States. It is being carefully watched by activists who hope that one strong success will prove the tipping point for a program aimed at furthering their green agenda. San Francisco has already banned plastic bags. They enacted the ban in 2007 and similar legislation is to take effect in July in Los Angeles, where shoppers will be charged 25 cents for a paper or biodegradable one.

However, when cities put it up for a vote, rather than arbitrarily mandating it, things are different. Attempts by other U.S. cities and states to curb the predominance of plastic shopping bags have been rejected, most notably in the eco-friendly West Coast city of Seattle, where voters last August overturned legislation to charge 20 cents per bag.

Keith Christman, Managing Director of Plastics Markets for the American Chemistry Council argues that Seattle's attempt to charge for bags angered residents who were already overwhelmingly recycling and reusing their bags, which he says is the better option.

I have a feeling I know why tree-hugger types in Seattle voted down the measure. They could probably see the handwriting on the wall and the inevitable addendum to the plastic bag issue: Charging 5 cents tax on Starbucks coffee cups, which must contribute to the a lot of the litter in Seattle.

All this and more… coming to a city near you.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

History's 10 Most Appropriate Uses of The F-Word

10th - "Scattered f***ing showers, my ass!" - Noah, 2304 BC


9th - "How the f*** did you work that out?" - Pythagoras, 518 BC


8th - "You want WHAT on the f***ing ceiling?" - Michelangelo, 1508

7th - "Where did all those f***ing Indians come from?" - Custer, 1876


6th - "It does so f***ing look like her!" - Picasso, 1907

5th - "Where the f*** are we?" - Amelia Earhart, 1937

4th - "Any f***ing idiot could understand that." - Einstein, 1915

3rd - "What the f*** was that?" - Mayor Of Hiroshima , 1945

2nd - "I need this parade like I need a f***ing hole in the head!" -JFK, 1963


And The number 1 most appropriate time for using the "F" word...

"Aw c'mon. Who the f*** is going to find out?" - Tiger Woods, 2009

Friday, February 19, 2010

Surprised and Shocked?

Ok, no one has said it yet – at least not that I know of – so I’ll say it. Am I surprised and shocked that a guy flew his plane into the IRS building in Austin, TX? No. I’m actually surprised it hasn’t happened more often, lately. I’m not condoning what this guy did, just saying it doesn’t really surprise or shock me.


Of course, by admitting this, the loony-left will say that I and all conservatives and TEA party members are cut from the same bolt of cloth, and will now probably lobby for legislation to ban our use of private planes, making possession of them illegal. However, I’ve learned that it’s useless to argue with these left-wing loons; it’s about as fruitful as trying to explain quantum physics to a four year old.

The reason I’m not surprised by this act of rebellion is that however fanatical or radical this one individual was, no one who has been victimized by the IRS can say that they haven’t entertained similar ideas, for at least a few fleeting moments.

Thankfully, most of us are rational, law-abiding citizens who can find more productive ways of voicing our anger and frustration with a system that puts people in the position this suicide pilot found himself. We can voice our disapproval by forming movements like the TEA Party and rallying voters like the ones in Massachusetts, whose voices were clearly heard a few short weeks ago and which – hopefully - will be heard again loudly in November.

Was this guy who flew his plane into the IRS building a criminal? Yes of course. Should he be held up as some kind of hero? No, of course not. But, should we focus some attention on a system that drove a U.S. citizen to the point where this seemed like his only option? You’re damned right we should. We all know we are being taxed to death and that our taxes are being used for frivolous, fraudulent and less than frugal reasons.

We also know that our taxes are currently being used to reshape and re-engineer our society into the vision of some left-wing radical progressives, hell bent on making the government the dominant entity in American life. What’s worse, we also have come to realize the rate at which this spending of our tax money is proceeding - at about warp nine - far in excess of what we are actually taking in, making it woefully unsustainable and ultimately resulting in the inevitable crash, looming darkly on the horizon.

With tax cuts that had been in place for almost a decade being done away with, with the capital gains tax being raised, with the “Death Tax” being re-instated, with self employment taxes at a criminal level (one of the points made in the pilot’s suicide note), with tax rates for some wealthier citizens who drive our economy nearing the 50 percent level and with the advent of the middle class ultimately having to pay higher taxes, as now even THAT promise seems as doomed as any promised C-SPAN programming on the health care debate, it’s not much of a surprise the IRS and the government are in some peoples sights.

Sometimes, even law-abiding citizens can be driven past the point of no-return. It happened once before in our history: July 4th, 1776.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

The Cost of Obama's Pet Projects: Climate Change Research

Global warming skeptics are agog that President Obama is seeking to dramatically increase federal funding for global warming research in the wake of the Climate-gate scandals that have emerged during the last three months.

The federal budget for 2011 proposes $2.6 billion for the Global Change Research Program, a 21 percent boost over 2010. It will bring funding to a level higher than under any administration dating back to 1989 -- when global warming first attracted federal budget funds.

In fact, critics note, overall climate funding is approximately as large as the entire federal government's budget was in 1932 -- $3.994 billion. (Additional money for climate science is apportioned to a number of federal agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation.)

Critics are lambasting the Obama administration, saying it remains unfazed by the revelations of Climate-gate: doctored research statistics by British environmental scientists, attempts to discredit skeptics of global warming science, and disclosures that the U.N.'s own Nobel-Prize-winning climate science research was based on faulty research about the Amazon rain forest and Himalayan ice caps.

Some public policy experts are expressing outrage that the White House is seeking to boost global warming research funding. "Spending more money on research does not necessarily lead to concrete results," Norm Rogers, a senior policy adviser at the Chicago think-tank The Heartland Institute. He said tens of billions of dollars have been spent on climate research in the last 20 years, and there remains no consensus on the science.

Another expert, Professor Don Easterbrook at Western Washington University's department of geology, said the federal money "ought to be spent carrying out real research on the climate." Easterbrook said most of the federal funds so far have been spent on what he terms "political science," which aims to find a manmade cause of global warming when there are any number of ways to investigate the causes of temperature change. These are political motivations rather than purely scientific reasons, he said.

What, exactly, will the American taxpayer get for its global warming research dollars? The EPA is spending $43 million to implement the greenhouse-gas reporting rule, to perform regulatory work for the largest stationary sources of greenhouse gases, and to develop new standards for cars and trucks.

Research being funded at the National Science Foundation seeks to promote "discoveries needed to inspire societal actions leading to environmental and economic sustainability," according to an agency statement. The NSF's portfolio for global warming will reach $766 million.

Last year's budget provided $2.0 billion for the climate science program, a figure that doesn't include the half a billion in stimulus money that the White House directed to global warming, as Obama's science adviser recently told Congress.

Friday, February 12, 2010

Say It Aint So, Joe!

When you’ve had the largest majority in Congress in a very long time, in fact you have a Super Majority, and you can’t pass one piece of substantive legislation in your first year in office as President - having spent most of that past year blaming your failure on the previous administration - I guess the only logical thing to do now is to take credit for something you had originally opposed, but which the previous administration put into play, and that now is seen as being successful. That would, of course, be liberal logic I’m referring to.


As senators, Barack Obama and Joe Biden both opposed the troop surge in Iraq - and Biden even wanted to divide the country into three sections. But as vice president, Biden is taking credit for success in Iraq. "I am very optimistic about Iraq," he said. "I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration."

You mean rip-offs, don’t you Joe? What a pathetic attempt to shine some light on an otherwise lackluster tenure in office for this administration. What’s sadder is that I have no doubt that some of them, Obama included, might have actually deluded themselves into believing this bunk.

The Vice President also took credit for the troop drawdown. (Say it aint so, Joe)

"You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer," he said. "You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government."

But, the drawdown was negotiated in the Status of Forces Agreement before the Obama administration took office.

"The reduction in U.S. forces that is under way right now is in fact important and it's largely the continuation of the policy that President Bush had set in place when he negotiated the drawdown schedule with Prime Minister Maliki at the end of 2008," said Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution. In fact, the agreement called for having U.S. troops out of Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. combat troops out by the end of 2011.

Col. Bill Cowan, a retired Marine officer and well known security policy strategist said, "The timetable for withdrawing those troops had been worked on for a long time, way preceding this administration coming into power, and that timetable really centered on success in Iraq. That success starting really after the surge that was implemented by the previous administration."

Reporters at a recent briefing asked Press Secretary Robert Gibbs how the administration could take credit for Iraq, responded by saying, "Well, putting what was broken back together and getting our troops home, which we intend to do in August of this year," he said, adding that Obama helped provide critical "political pressure" on Iraq policy before taking office.

Talk about spin. This guy rivals Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi Propaganda Minister during the second world war.

The saddest fact of all is that these smarmy, elitist, swine, currently occupying the White House, who obviously have no honor nor integrity, actually believe the American people are stupid enough to believe the pure crappola they are dishing out. Come November, I have a feeling they are in for a rude awakening.

Monday, February 8, 2010

Who knew?

So, how many beers did you down while watching the Super Bowl? Two, three… fourteen? Feeling a little guilty today are ya? Relax. You have no reason to hang your head (unless of course you have a hangover) because, we devotees of that malted, hoppy, liquid ambrosia are, in reality, drinking our way to better health.

Scoff not you naysayers. Recent studies show that beer contains a significant source of dietary silicon, a key ingredient for good bone health. Though past research has suggested beer is chockfull of silicon, little was known about how silicon levels varied with the type of beer and malting process used. So, a pair of researchers took one for the team and ran chemical analyses on beer's raw ingredients. They also picked up 100 commercial beers from the grocery store and measured the silicon content.

The average beer has about 15 mg/L of the bone healthy nutrient, and while there is no official recommendation for daily silicon intake, most people consume between 20-50 mg of silicon each day. With that in mind, downing two or three of the brown bottle’s nectar should do you just fine, in your fight to prevent poor bone health.

For me, I prefer the darker beers to the lighter pale ales, and such. However, the IPA’s seem to have more of the dietary silicon than the darker fare. Which, of course for me, means I will have to consume a little more on a daily basis (oh woe is me).

The type of silicon in beer, called orthosilicic acid, has a 50 percent bioavailability, meaning that much is available for use in the body. Some foods, like bananas are rich in silicon but only 5 percent is bioavailable. This soluble form of silica found in beer could be important for the growth and development of bone and connective tissue, according to the National Institutes of Health.

And, if you guys out there have used this ancient concoction, on occasion, to further your romantic endeavors, by encouraging your female partners to imbibe heavily, you now have even more ammunition to help convince your partner that this foamy liquid is akin to “the nectar of the Gods.”

Past research has suggested that beer consumption may help fight osteoporosis, a disease characterized by low bone mass and deterioration of bone tissue, commonly prevalent in women. A past study involving nearly 1,700 women reported last year showed participants who were light to moderate beer drinkers had much better bone density than non-drinkers.

So, drink up me hearties! You are not only improving your over all general health but, by encouraging others to do so also - especially the women folk - you are joining the ranks of crusaders in that never ending battle for strong bones and healthy teeth they told you about in school as a kid. Milk? I don’t think so. I don’t know about you, but I’m lactose intolerant. I'm all for a new ad campaign, myself. How about, “Got Beer?”

As my name sake was once quoted as saying, "Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Oilfield Math

A clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year at 15 mpg uses 800 gallons of gas a year.

A vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year at 25 mpg uses 480 gallons a year.

So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year.

They claim 700,000 vehicles so that's 224 million gallons saved per year.

That equates to a bit over five million barrels of oil.

Five million barrels is about five hours worth of US consumption.

More importantly, five million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million .

So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million.

We spent $8.57 for every dollar we saved.

I'm pretty sure they will do a great job with our health care, though.

Friday, February 5, 2010

Something's Not 'Right'

Why are we letting the left-wing loons, who obviously are in the minority, rule this country and flush it down the toilet? It's time for the silent majority to be SILENT NO LONGER.

Click to Enlarge

Angie Comics

Congressional Quail Break For Cover – Conservative Bird Hunt.

IT’S MAGIC! Congressional leftists are finding all sorts of mainstream centrist and even (gasp) right of center issues to take up… as they scatter in all directions trying to distance themselves from a President and a Democratic party leadership who they see as leading them down a rocky road to destruction.

This magic transformation has come about, as predicted by yours truly, by the turn of the new year and the sudden recognition by some REALLY arrogant Democratic Congress critters who have had a really rude awakening, something else I predicted was on the way. Before anyone gets the idea that I’m making claims towards prescience, I’m not and it wasn’t really all that hard. Following the mood of the American people through news research you can get a pretty good idea of how things may go. Once the Virginia and New Jersey races were improbably won by Republicans in predominantly Democratically dominated areas the change in the temper of the electorate started to make itself known loud and clear. Then came Massachusetts and the Democrats were rocked to their core.










Tea Partiers Make Themselves Heard.

The Democrat leadership began to lose their iron grip on the membership, with Senators and Representatives being incessantly hammered by their constituents and any number of the millions of patriots who have been making themselves heard in no uncertain terms. The Obama, Reid and Pelosi brand of hope and change is not what we want and as AMERICANS we really resent having something crammed down our throats or sneaked behind our backs. We pushed back. We stopped the Obama juggernaut in its tracks, super majority not withstanding. We stopped the illegal and unconstitutional theft of our health care, though that battle isn’t over yet. There are other battles yet to fight, but as Conservative challenges have sprung up all over the nation the momentum has begun to change.

Then there was the disclosure of President Obama’s massive budget and deficit figures. With Obama more determined than ever to try and force his agenda on the American people, Americans are more determined than ever to stop him. The 2010 elections may well prove disastrous to the socialist aims of Obama and the Democrats.

In the interim the Republicans have their work cut out for them. They will have to challenge the administration and the Democrats in Congress on every item, every word if that’s what it takes. It’s good to see Republicans learning how to fight again and doing it to good result. It’s amazing to see liberal arguments dissolve when challenged on fact and principle.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2010

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

And Now For The Real Deal

Anyone with an ounce of sense, who hadn't fallen victim to the "Obama Fog," induced by his campaign back in 2008, which made these Kool-Aid drinking fools walk around with a glazed expression and false sense of euphoria, chanting, "Yes We Can," while parroting slogans like "Change we can believe in," knew the crappola Obama was shoveling about not taxing the middle class was a bunch of doo-doo. Now of course it has come to pass. Welcome to the "Real Deal," you dumb-ass sheep.

Backdoor Taxes to Hit Middle Class

By Terri Cullen

NEW YORK (Reuters.com) --The Obama administration's plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.

In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year -- effectively a tax hike by stealth.

While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.

The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration's Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.

If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated.

Investors will pay more on their earnings next year as well, with the tax on dividends jumping to 39.6 percent from 15 percent and the capital-gains tax increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent. The estate tax is eliminated this year, but it will return in 2011 -- though there has been talk about reinstating the death tax sooner.

Millions of middle-class households already may be facing higher taxes in 2010 because Congress has failed to extend tax breaks that expired on January 1, most notably a "patch" that limited the impact of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT, initially designed to prevent the very rich from avoiding income taxes, was never indexed for inflation. Now the tax is affecting millions of middle-income households, but lawmakers have been reluctant to repeal it because it has become a key source of revenue.

Without annual legislation to renew the patch this year, the AMT could affect an estimated 25 million taxpayers with incomes as low as $33,750 (or $45,000 for joint filers). Even if the patch is extended to last year's levels, the tax will hit American families that can hardly be considered wealthy -- the AMT exemption for 2009 was $46,700 for singles and $70,950 for married couples filing jointly.

Middle-class families also will find fewer tax breaks available to them in 2010 if other popular tax provisions are allowed to expire. Among them:

* Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes;

* The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies;

* The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses;

* Individuals who don't itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid;

* The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free.

Monday, February 1, 2010

Where Does it All End?

He said he knew what he was doing. He ran for President and told us all he had the expertise to fix things. After all, he went to Harvard. He said all we had to do was throw enough money around to stimulate the economy and our problems would be solved. Now he says it’s all the other guy's fault and he was left a mess that was bigger than he anticipated, and that even though he has failed to fix the economy by spending money we don’t have, his newest idea is to spend more.

Does this sound like someone who has clue one what the hell he’s doing? I’ve asked this before, if you had this guy managing your business, would you keep giving him money to flush down the drain? Does anyone really think this guy, who never ran a business, or worked at an executive level, or was responsible for a budget, can really find the answers we need in this country to solve the economic quagmire in which we find ourselves?

President Obama just sent Congress a $3.8 trillion budget today for fiscal year 2011. The Senate moved last week to extend the nation's debt limit to $14.3 trillion to accommodate the projected gap for the current spending year, which ends Sept. 30, but with another $1.3 trillion hole next year, the nation's debt could reach $15.6 trillion by Oct. 1, 2011. That would surpass the nation's annual gross domestic product. Does anyone out there understand what that means? Obviously, Obama and his boys either don’t, or they don’t care. One of the ways they “hope” to pay for all this spending is by taxing the hell out of us, which only affects the job market negatively.

He believes keeping budget deficits where they are currently projected will happen only if tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 expire as scheduled at the end of this year. The White House calculates tax hikes would generate $1.2 trillion in revenue over 10 years.

"We just did an 84 percent increase in a very short period of time of all this new spending. Democrats, since they took over Congress, increased domestic discretionary spending by $1.4 trillion," Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said on "Fox News Sunday."

"We don't think taking all this money out of the private economy up to Washington and spending it through Washington is the way to create jobs. We believe we should keep that money in the economy," Ryan added.

Anyone who wasn’t a progressive, big-government, tax and spend liberal would be able to figure this out. It seems like Obama and his band of fiscal misfits almost want us to go under economically. Maybe that’s been the plan all along. When the economy collapses, most people will have no choice but to rely on the government for help. But, with our debt surpassing our annual GDP, where does this all end? If this country were a business - which it really is folks - it would go bankrupt, which eventually it will. They will at first inflate the economy by printing more money – which actually has already started - but eventually we will become insolvent, which will be the legacy we pass on to our children. After that, this once great nation will lose its status as a world leader, again, forcing us to rely more on, and be at the mercy of, the “Global Community,” which seems to fit right in, quite nicely, with Obama’s ideology.

Pray that in November the power in Congress shifts and that it’s not too late to turn this country around by then. Otherwise, it’s all down hill from there.
 



Free Hit Counter

Copyright © 2009 - 2012 The Audacity of Logic