Dr. Asten: Hell, no!
I recently got in a heated discussion with an Obama supporter, over a status on Facebook which called on people to stop criticizing President Obama, since he believes they patted President Bush on the back for eight years. When asked to clarify the Obamist's status message, it turned into the typical left versus right debate we were exposed to during the Bush Years, where the liberal would engage in attacks ad hominem and the conservative would try to engage in substantive debate. Any person who followed the news coverage of the Bush Years knows that the Obamist's statement is a misspeak, if not a lie. If anything, the media metamorphosed from being the "government watchdog," to the "government lapdog." The media tried their damndest to keep President Bush from being reelected, and made it a point to form their coverage to make him look like the "Imbecile-in-Chief." I reminded him that Republicans and conservatives were all over President Bush for runaway spending, illegal immigration, McCain-Feingold, and bungling Iraq. Hell, several self-described conservatives were arguing against the US invading Iraq.
Those facts proved his theory wrong, but he wasn't letting up. In a move that showed his intent was to empty the punch bowl, and follow the media's line hand over foot, the ObamAid drinker tried to come after me using the line we heard in the beginning of the Obama Administration, giving Obama time to "fix George Bush's mess." I reminded him that the economy grew after Bush's tax cuts in 2001, we were privileged to have 52 months of economic growth, which began to decline the year the majority in Congress switched to the Democrats. I also told him that if President Obama was serious about fixing the economy, he would have allowed both Republicans AND Democrats in on crafting the legislation which culminated in the Porkulus law. I also noted that Obama doesn't want the electorate to look at his US Senate record, where the supposed fiscal conservative Obama supported both TARP and the bailout of Bear Stearns. I explained that Obama is at least culpable for our current economic situation, and that he's not blameless. The Obamist claimed that he was one vote in a sea of 535, against a lone President Bush. I rejected that line for exactly what it was...its lameness.
Clearly, the Obamist was feeling frustrated that his theory was falling like a house a cards, he went into a tirade against McCain, asking me if I believed had McCain beat Obama, if the economy would be "hunky dory," to which I said "No," with the caveat that McCain would have better vetted his Treasury Secretary, and not allowed a tax cheat to dictate tax policy. I believe McCain would have called on a bipartisan bill to emerge from Congress that would have actually "jumpstarted the economy," instead of scaring the shit out of people declaring this money is needed now, and waiting until next fiscal year to spend a bulk of the funds. By this time, the ObamAid drinker was in sputtering rage, most of his words were indeterminable. I also told the Obamist that while he is content on allowing Obama to quadruple the deficit, and continue to blame President Bush, his talking point is in the minority.
In getting me to say that McCain's policy probably would not make everything "hunky dory," the Obamist declared "victory." I admit, his bar for victory must have been low, if all he wanted me to do was say something bad about Republicans. His larger point was refuted over and over again, yet he continued to ignore it and was sputtering at me because I would not jump on his bandwagon. He did claim that he's willing to give Obama another year before he will say the economy belongs to Obama. I say by that point, most Democrats would have distanced themselves from Obama, and this ObamAid drinker will still be drinking from the punch bowl wondering why he's all alone. It's a shame the ObamAid drinker I was "debating" was my own brother...
Gateway Pundit shows us the all familiar chart that shows how much the Obama Administration plans to increase the deficit. There's also a story on Yahoo! that says that tax cheating US Secretary of the Treasury, lil Timmy Geithner, has not ruled out tax increases for the middle class, and I suppose ObamAid drinkers will invoke the cynic card, claiming all politicians lie. It doesn't occur to them that their cynicism, in the face of Obama blowing up the deficit, will have a perilous effect on us in the future. The Porkulus jive was an excuse to pander to his political donors and rationale to enact his disastrous agenda on the nation. 2010 and 2012 can't get here fast enough.
This weekend, I also had the privilege, I guess, to read Gwen Ifill's Obama puffery, "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama," more on that in a later blogpost...
Have a great day...
Showing posts with label deficits. Show all posts
Showing posts with label deficits. Show all posts
03 August 2009
28 July 2009
Democrats: Will someone rid us of these meddlesome Blue Dogs?
...out, out damned spot!
While ObamaCare stalls in Congress, its supporters continue, unabated, to look for any villian to justify why ObamaCare isn't law. They've tried President Bush, but he's been out of office since January. They've tried Rush Limbaugh, three times, and they've all failed. They've tried blaming the Republicans in Congress, only to be reminded they [Democrats] hold significant majorities in both chambers AND have a majority at the White House complex. The president has attempted, yet again, to fool the populace that ObamaCare is necessary. This time, he holds a townhall with members of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), Senate Republicans have told Paul Bedard, of US News and World Report, they have talked to at least 1 million people about the looming perils in ObamaCare.
Of course, ObamaAid drinkers will smear the GOP as being satisfied with the status quo, and rooting against the country. The idea is to shift focus from problems within the Democratic caucus, and this bill, and blame the Republican party. It is hard to argue that government can expand healthcare, improve it, and keep costs down. Coming under fire recently, has been the Congressional Budget Office, which has said none of the proposals that claim to save money, will do so, and according to charts at HotAir, even the tax increases proposed by Charlie Rangel, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, will not be enough to offset the skyrocketing costs. Obama and the Office of Management and Budget director, Peter Orszag, have met with the director of the CBO, which is highly irregular. Ya think they're trying to cook the books on ObamaCare?
Blue Dog Democrats, one of which is my congressman, John Barrow (D-GA), seem to hold the key to the success or failure of ObamaCare. Recently, they met with both Henry Waxman and former House Energy and Commerce committee chair, John Dingell and appeared to compromise. Some reports are indicating differently, as the CBO has yet to weigh in on the costs of an offer made by the chairman. Until then, the Blue Dogs will not compromise. The US Senate, on the other hand, is mulling a strip of the "public option," which is designed to destroy the private healthcare insurance industry, and a strip of the healthcare mandate, which will not only destroy the private healthcare insurance industry, but will drive up costs.
That is the bottom line. Controlling costs, is paramount, despite how ever many liberals bitch and moan. If none of the Democratic-led initiatives have shown to control rising costs, why should Congress support them. Obviously, Democrats believe that the legislative body is answerable to them, not their constituents. During the upcoming recess, our representatives will be asked the hard questions in their districts, especially those who ran as all things conservative in 2006 and 2008. If a majority of the electorate doesn't sleep well at night with the thought of continually rising healthcare costs, then that should be reason enough for Congress to take more time and draft a better bill. The bottom line here is to cap rising healthcare costs, no matter who provides the care. The numbers show ObamaCare is not that vessel...
If Michael Barone is correct, Democrats attempts to continue to grow the federal behemoth will not sit well with an electorate that doesn't favor big government at the outset...
Have a great day...
While ObamaCare stalls in Congress, its supporters continue, unabated, to look for any villian to justify why ObamaCare isn't law. They've tried President Bush, but he's been out of office since January. They've tried Rush Limbaugh, three times, and they've all failed. They've tried blaming the Republicans in Congress, only to be reminded they [Democrats] hold significant majorities in both chambers AND have a majority at the White House complex. The president has attempted, yet again, to fool the populace that ObamaCare is necessary. This time, he holds a townhall with members of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), Senate Republicans have told Paul Bedard, of US News and World Report, they have talked to at least 1 million people about the looming perils in ObamaCare.
Of course, ObamaAid drinkers will smear the GOP as being satisfied with the status quo, and rooting against the country. The idea is to shift focus from problems within the Democratic caucus, and this bill, and blame the Republican party. It is hard to argue that government can expand healthcare, improve it, and keep costs down. Coming under fire recently, has been the Congressional Budget Office, which has said none of the proposals that claim to save money, will do so, and according to charts at HotAir, even the tax increases proposed by Charlie Rangel, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, will not be enough to offset the skyrocketing costs. Obama and the Office of Management and Budget director, Peter Orszag, have met with the director of the CBO, which is highly irregular. Ya think they're trying to cook the books on ObamaCare?
Blue Dog Democrats, one of which is my congressman, John Barrow (D-GA), seem to hold the key to the success or failure of ObamaCare. Recently, they met with both Henry Waxman and former House Energy and Commerce committee chair, John Dingell and appeared to compromise. Some reports are indicating differently, as the CBO has yet to weigh in on the costs of an offer made by the chairman. Until then, the Blue Dogs will not compromise. The US Senate, on the other hand, is mulling a strip of the "public option," which is designed to destroy the private healthcare insurance industry, and a strip of the healthcare mandate, which will not only destroy the private healthcare insurance industry, but will drive up costs.
That is the bottom line. Controlling costs, is paramount, despite how ever many liberals bitch and moan. If none of the Democratic-led initiatives have shown to control rising costs, why should Congress support them. Obviously, Democrats believe that the legislative body is answerable to them, not their constituents. During the upcoming recess, our representatives will be asked the hard questions in their districts, especially those who ran as all things conservative in 2006 and 2008. If a majority of the electorate doesn't sleep well at night with the thought of continually rising healthcare costs, then that should be reason enough for Congress to take more time and draft a better bill. The bottom line here is to cap rising healthcare costs, no matter who provides the care. The numbers show ObamaCare is not that vessel...
If Michael Barone is correct, Democrats attempts to continue to grow the federal behemoth will not sit well with an electorate that doesn't favor big government at the outset...
Have a great day...
21 July 2009
Liberals: The Republicans have no plan...
...and frankly, we don't either...
The more I hear liberals whine about Republicans' alleged gumming up the otherwise well oiled Obama legislative machine, the more I feel justified in my belief that liberals are expressing frustration at congressional Democrats who have been unable to agree one with another on whose healthcare coverage needs to be screwed first. Obama has gone after Republican strawmen, yet again, claiming that they are happy with the "status quo" (even though no Republican has...) and how his plan will not increase the deficit, but rather yield a savings that could be squandered on other pet projects...like Porkulus II (I made Porkulus II up...). Something just didn't sound right to me, because there was a disconnect between the rhetoric emanating from the White House and what the rest of us read in HR 3200, otherwise known as the Obama becomes your doctor bill. Come to find out, our Dear Leader has frankly no clue what's in ObamaCare...and he's supposed to be the most intelligent president EVUH, at least that's what they tell me...
Perhaps Obama isn't aware that we are in a recession, which is surprising since he continues to use that line as an excuse to blow up the deficit. The electorate wants results, and with Porkulus I not showing any visible signs of working, they're not too keen on giving Obamessiah the green light on overhauling a system that frankly doesn't need it. Sure, our healthcare system isn't without problems, but there is a reason why those in Canada or other parts of the country venture to the US for its healthcare. It's because it's second to none. Howard Fineman writes in Obamaweek, that the "plan" was supposed to change the way people regard healthcare, to improve it and to cut costs. We're waiting to see whether anything coming from HR 3200, or any of its relatives, will do that.
Rushing Congress to pass a shitty bill may be fine and dandy for Obamessiah and Democrats, but it won't sit well with the number of families who will be affected by the craptastic bill. The goal isn't to ensure Amuricans acquire and maintain healthcare coverage, the goal is to make sure Obamessiah fulfills a campaign promise, before his dwindling political capital runs out...no matter what the costs. I ask, "who's playing politics?" It would be hard to argue that Republicans are engaging in such, when the president is demanding Congress stop debate and give him a bill to sign before their August recess. As Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) said, the first time the president uttered the word "crisis," we were handed a $787B piece of shit that no congressman read, and to date, hasn't been spent wisely...and wasn't crafted with the president's assurances in mind, that it be used to "jumpstart the economy." So Obama's a liar when he attempts to blast Senator DeMint by claiming that this bill isn't about him. It is definitely about the O.
What Democrats and Obama, like their lapdogs in the blue blogosphere, don't seem to understand is that most Amuricans view their current coverage with satisfaction. As they were in the HillaryCare debates, they are concerned that ObamaCare will degrade their current coverage. Resistance to healthcare overhaul works, and Republicans are in a good position, because a majority of the electorate is beginning to sour on ObamaCare. Democrats are feeling the heat as well, which explains why committee votes on it continue to be postphoned. There is nothing wrong with Congress taking time to craft a better bill, that benefits all people, instead of Democratic donors and the unions.
Have a great day...
The more I hear liberals whine about Republicans' alleged gumming up the otherwise well oiled Obama legislative machine, the more I feel justified in my belief that liberals are expressing frustration at congressional Democrats who have been unable to agree one with another on whose healthcare coverage needs to be screwed first. Obama has gone after Republican strawmen, yet again, claiming that they are happy with the "status quo" (even though no Republican has...) and how his plan will not increase the deficit, but rather yield a savings that could be squandered on other pet projects...like Porkulus II (I made Porkulus II up...). Something just didn't sound right to me, because there was a disconnect between the rhetoric emanating from the White House and what the rest of us read in HR 3200, otherwise known as the Obama becomes your doctor bill. Come to find out, our Dear Leader has frankly no clue what's in ObamaCare...and he's supposed to be the most intelligent president EVUH, at least that's what they tell me...
Perhaps Obama isn't aware that we are in a recession, which is surprising since he continues to use that line as an excuse to blow up the deficit. The electorate wants results, and with Porkulus I not showing any visible signs of working, they're not too keen on giving Obamessiah the green light on overhauling a system that frankly doesn't need it. Sure, our healthcare system isn't without problems, but there is a reason why those in Canada or other parts of the country venture to the US for its healthcare. It's because it's second to none. Howard Fineman writes in Obamaweek, that the "plan" was supposed to change the way people regard healthcare, to improve it and to cut costs. We're waiting to see whether anything coming from HR 3200, or any of its relatives, will do that.
Rushing Congress to pass a shitty bill may be fine and dandy for Obamessiah and Democrats, but it won't sit well with the number of families who will be affected by the craptastic bill. The goal isn't to ensure Amuricans acquire and maintain healthcare coverage, the goal is to make sure Obamessiah fulfills a campaign promise, before his dwindling political capital runs out...no matter what the costs. I ask, "who's playing politics?" It would be hard to argue that Republicans are engaging in such, when the president is demanding Congress stop debate and give him a bill to sign before their August recess. As Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) said, the first time the president uttered the word "crisis," we were handed a $787B piece of shit that no congressman read, and to date, hasn't been spent wisely...and wasn't crafted with the president's assurances in mind, that it be used to "jumpstart the economy." So Obama's a liar when he attempts to blast Senator DeMint by claiming that this bill isn't about him. It is definitely about the O.
What Democrats and Obama, like their lapdogs in the blue blogosphere, don't seem to understand is that most Amuricans view their current coverage with satisfaction. As they were in the HillaryCare debates, they are concerned that ObamaCare will degrade their current coverage. Resistance to healthcare overhaul works, and Republicans are in a good position, because a majority of the electorate is beginning to sour on ObamaCare. Democrats are feeling the heat as well, which explains why committee votes on it continue to be postphoned. There is nothing wrong with Congress taking time to craft a better bill, that benefits all people, instead of Democratic donors and the unions.
Have a great day...
26 March 2009
Hey, remember that tax cut we were promised?
...I knew we weren't gonna get it either...
Ok, raise your hands if you figured that with all the deficits that Obambi is creating with his prolifigate spending that the "tax cuts on 95% of working families" was like all his other promises on the campaign trail...they had an expiration date? Like former President Clinton, who also promised a middle class tax cut, Obama will have no other choice but to renege on his promise and take back that tax cut of $13 a week until the end of the year, to pay for his one man spending spree. I say after this, no other Democrat will be able to credibly express outrage at any Republican president who ended their terms with deficits. Democrats would also like for us to forget that tax cuts did aid in economic recovery after former President Carter left President Reagan a recession (I bet you thought that only Republicans left stuff for Democrats to clean up...). It is true that combined with an increase in domestic spending, Reagan's economic plan did very little to control the deficit. Former President Bush recently claimed that because of the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, that the nation enjoyed 52 months of economic growth, while Democrats were charging that these cuts did nothing to help the economy...
I continue to state that those who ardently defend Obama's policies, in light of his incompetence, by pointing at Republican use of filibusters or Rush Limbaugh, are embarrassed at the notion that they all got drunk on the "hopenchange" rhetoric and threw their common sense to the four winds. The New York Times would like to focus on the POTUS being seen around Washington, and applaud his willingness to indulge in ever changing priorities, as him being ambitious. Some of those who are sobering up from getting inebriated on the Obama Kool-Aid are realizing that through all the high-falutin' mantras, Obama's a mere lightweight (I do remember saying that a few times throughout the campaign). It's not just on economic policy where Obama's being seen as in over his head, his snubbery of our allies abroad is yet another indicator. h/t: Ann Coulter and Elisabeth Meinecke
The Obamedia yawns as this incompetence continues, and chooses instead to focus on the lie that all Republicans are doing is offering obstruction and nothing constructive to debates. Of course Republicans are offering alternatives, but the Democratic majority, instead, would like to remind them that "elections have consequences" and Democrats control the agenda. Beginning with the debate over Iraq, liberals charged that former President Bush had alienated our allies abroad, despite the fact he went to the UN before US forces were sent to Iraq, and due to UN obstruction, Bush formed a coalition of his own. They [Democrats] told us that when elected, they would repair the relations that were destroyed by the Bushites (they also promised to lower gas prices, but it was the lifting of the executive order by Bush and the global recession...). So far, this is the only promise that Obamessiah has kept, he has repaired them, to the point that we are the laughing stock we were under President Clinton.
Each time he has extended his hand under the misguided notion of "talking to our enemies," President Obama's been ridiculed, not only by conservatives, but by the very people he's trying to bring to our side. One would think that a man who is regarded as "brilliant" by his acolytes, he would understand that diplomacy doesn't work with people who are hellbent on destroying you. The incompetence shown by President Obama gives the GOP a great opportunity, and they should use it, if they want to continue to be electorally viable.
It's not enough for us to critique Obamessiah. We, like congressional Republicans, have to offer viable alternatives to those policies we believe are wrong. At least one campaign commercial idea has been created by Ace, at Ace of Spades HQ, conservatives must offer someone in the campaign of 2012, who can effectively articulate conservative policies and explain why liberalism has gotten us to the perilous state we are now. If we choose not to do this, then liberals will lie or project their beliefs about conservatives (I should mention, that unlike Glenn Greenwald's belief, there were ample conservatives who opposed Bush policy when they went against conservative core beliefs...perhaps Greenwald and liberals were too busy lying to notice).
Have a great day...
Ok, raise your hands if you figured that with all the deficits that Obambi is creating with his prolifigate spending that the "tax cuts on 95% of working families" was like all his other promises on the campaign trail...they had an expiration date? Like former President Clinton, who also promised a middle class tax cut, Obama will have no other choice but to renege on his promise and take back that tax cut of $13 a week until the end of the year, to pay for his one man spending spree. I say after this, no other Democrat will be able to credibly express outrage at any Republican president who ended their terms with deficits. Democrats would also like for us to forget that tax cuts did aid in economic recovery after former President Carter left President Reagan a recession (I bet you thought that only Republicans left stuff for Democrats to clean up...). It is true that combined with an increase in domestic spending, Reagan's economic plan did very little to control the deficit. Former President Bush recently claimed that because of the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, that the nation enjoyed 52 months of economic growth, while Democrats were charging that these cuts did nothing to help the economy...
I continue to state that those who ardently defend Obama's policies, in light of his incompetence, by pointing at Republican use of filibusters or Rush Limbaugh, are embarrassed at the notion that they all got drunk on the "hopenchange" rhetoric and threw their common sense to the four winds. The New York Times would like to focus on the POTUS being seen around Washington, and applaud his willingness to indulge in ever changing priorities, as him being ambitious. Some of those who are sobering up from getting inebriated on the Obama Kool-Aid are realizing that through all the high-falutin' mantras, Obama's a mere lightweight (I do remember saying that a few times throughout the campaign). It's not just on economic policy where Obama's being seen as in over his head, his snubbery of our allies abroad is yet another indicator. h/t: Ann Coulter and Elisabeth Meinecke
The Obamedia yawns as this incompetence continues, and chooses instead to focus on the lie that all Republicans are doing is offering obstruction and nothing constructive to debates. Of course Republicans are offering alternatives, but the Democratic majority, instead, would like to remind them that "elections have consequences" and Democrats control the agenda. Beginning with the debate over Iraq, liberals charged that former President Bush had alienated our allies abroad, despite the fact he went to the UN before US forces were sent to Iraq, and due to UN obstruction, Bush formed a coalition of his own. They [Democrats] told us that when elected, they would repair the relations that were destroyed by the Bushites (they also promised to lower gas prices, but it was the lifting of the executive order by Bush and the global recession...). So far, this is the only promise that Obamessiah has kept, he has repaired them, to the point that we are the laughing stock we were under President Clinton.
Each time he has extended his hand under the misguided notion of "talking to our enemies," President Obama's been ridiculed, not only by conservatives, but by the very people he's trying to bring to our side. One would think that a man who is regarded as "brilliant" by his acolytes, he would understand that diplomacy doesn't work with people who are hellbent on destroying you. The incompetence shown by President Obama gives the GOP a great opportunity, and they should use it, if they want to continue to be electorally viable.
It's not enough for us to critique Obamessiah. We, like congressional Republicans, have to offer viable alternatives to those policies we believe are wrong. At least one campaign commercial idea has been created by Ace, at Ace of Spades HQ, conservatives must offer someone in the campaign of 2012, who can effectively articulate conservative policies and explain why liberalism has gotten us to the perilous state we are now. If we choose not to do this, then liberals will lie or project their beliefs about conservatives (I should mention, that unlike Glenn Greenwald's belief, there were ample conservatives who opposed Bush policy when they went against conservative core beliefs...perhaps Greenwald and liberals were too busy lying to notice).
Have a great day...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)