The sequestration is a bogeyman that the Democrats are trying to use to blame Republicans for everything that happens. The fact that Obama came up with the idea is not part of their thinking process because they are interested in blaming everything on the right. They have hopes that they can pin this on Republicans and that it will help them keep the Senate and take the House back.
The idea that Sequester is debilitating is moronic. The cuts amount to 2 cents of every dollar. That is not much money and any pain felt is because Democrats have specifically made cuts to areas that would cause harm. They can shut down White House tours while still allowing million dollar donors to show up. They can allow TSA to furlough employees to harm the public because it is the only way. Of course another solution was found as soon as some member of Congress was inconvenienced by the travel delays.
These facts have not stopped Democrats from using sequester as their talking point. One Democrat blamed sequester for the events in Benghazi when sequester took place after the murders there. As an aside, the alleged cut in money for security is a smoke screen. We had money to put electric car charging stations but not for security? Get real.
Nancy Pelosi is the latest Democrat to blame the sequester for something. It seems that San Fran Nan is blaming the sequester for the fact that she did not take a delegation to Iraq or Afghanistan to thank mothers and grandmothers for serving in the military:
“Every year for the past few years on Mother’s Day I’ve taken a delegation to Afghanistan – or Iraq – to say thank you to our moms – and by the way, our grandmothers – who are serving there – to also thank all of our troops for what they do to protect America’s families. I won’t be going this particular weekend because we don’t have – you know, under sequestration – we don’t have (inaudible).” IJ Review
I don’t know how much money it costs to take a delegation to Iraq or Afghanistan but it is not cheap and we don’t have money to begin with. I also do not know why Pelosi thinks it is necessary to fly around the world to say thank you to mothers and grandmothers. It would be much easier and far less expensive for her to put out a thank you on her website and then have Defense notify the troops it is there through their systems. She can’t possibly visit every mother and grandmother in these countries so the message sent electronically would at least make it to as many as she would have visited.
It sounds to me like Nan just wants and excuse for a trip. I know these places are not garden spots but think of how many places she can visit on the way out and the way back, I mean since they are already in the neighborhood.
Pelosi makes this statement as if it is a bad thing that she could not go and seems to think blaming it on sequester will hurt Republicans.
First of all, I venture to bet that most of the military do not want to see her or visit with her. She is a liberal moron who does not support the troops.
Second of all, if she could not waste money on this trip because of the sequester then I say it is doing what it is supposed to.
However, I will buy her a one way ticket if they promise to keep her there.
Never surrender, never submit.
May 9, 2013 Political
During the 2008 presidential election Hillary Clinton put out an ad about a 3 am phone call. In it something bad happens in the middle of the night and the viewer is left with the impression that if there is a middle of the night (3 am) emergency we want Hillary to answer the phone. I imagine she has experience answering late night calls with Bill as her husband…
In any event, the ‘who is best to answer the call’ contest began with Clinton and Obama each claiming to be America’s next best hope for late night emergencies.
Obama won that contest as voters decided that he was the one to lead. He was the one they had been waiting for, in Obama’s words…
It now turns out that neither of them has the qualifications to do anything more than answer an emergency phone call. Whistleblower testimony shows that Americans were in danger and made calls that might have been answered but were not acted upon. It appears that Obama blew off the calls so he could get some sleep for a next day fundraiser and Hillary answered the calls and gave no decisive orders that involved saving our people.
As a result of the inept leadership four Americans are dead.
Obama’s response to his phone call failure is to blame it on a video, claim that they could do nothing and tell other lies in order to win reelection. Clinton’s response; what difference does it make now?
There are interesting story lines with regard to the murder of our diplomats. The Secretary of Defense said we did not send help because we could not get there in time. How did he know that? The attackers did not broadcast their intentions. The fight went on for hours and hours. We had military units ready to launch and they were told to stand down (several times).
Our military answered the 3 am phone call for help and were ready to go. The people who told us they were the best qualified to answer the phone kept them from going.
Let us assume for a minute that we did not think our military could get there in time to help. Would that be reason enough not to send them at all? If Obama had sent all available assets as soon as he knew what was happening this whole ordeal would not be an issue even if those assets did not get there in time. It would be evident that we made every possible effort to save our people but could not get there fast enough.
As it stands now it looks like they decided that either we could not get there or they did not want to send them there so they just said the hell with it and sacrificed the lives of our countrymen.
Imagine if a house in your neighborhood (or your house) was on fire and it was pretty well engulfed in flames. How would you and your community respond if you called the fire department and told them that your house was on fire and that it was pretty well engulfed and they told you that since they probably could not get there in time to put out the fire before the house was consumed they were not going to bother showing up?
Would you stand for that? Probably not and even though your mind might tell you the house was going to be a total loss your heart would leave doubt. You would always ask if anything could have been saved if they had just responded.
While I am in the camp that believes we should have sent forces to help as soon as we knew and would not support any other decision I could have at least listened to the other point of view if Obama had not lied about it all. I can’t see any reason he could give to justify NOT sending help but at least he would be on more solid ground if he told us the truth when he explained it.
Instead, he and Hillary worked hard to cover up their inability to lead by lying to us. They called this a spontaneous demonstration over a video rather than a terror attack even though they knew right away that it was terror and not a video. They knew it was well organized and that their refusal to beef up security resulted in the attack and eventual murder of our people.
So they decided to cover it all up. They have been obstructing people trying to get to the truth and have exacted revenge on people who dared to step forward with it.
The 3 am phone call placed by those in danger did not get a busy signal and it did not get anyone qualified to help.
It reached people who place their agendas and their political aspirations ahead of human life.
And the message it sent was loud and clear;
Obama and Clinton are not qualified to lead…
Never surrender, never submit.
May 8, 2013 Political
The excrement will hit the fan today as whistleblowers testify about the Obama cover-up regarding the attacks in Benghazi. Obama and his minions knew that it was a terror attack almost immediately but blamed it on a video. That story continued for weeks as America tried to understand how four of their fellow countrymen were murdered.
The facts in the case will show that Obama did not send help, that those who were ready to go help were told to stand down and that it was all covered up. The probable reason is that Obama was running for reelection and part of his platform was that al Qaeda was on the run and he was beating terror back. In other words, Obama lied in order to win reelection.
I can’t imagine that the low information voters have any idea about this particularly since the Obama stenographers in the Main Stream Media have been spinning stories and covering for him and his people. They are particularly focused on protecting Hillary Clinton so she can run for the presidency in 2016.
Low information voters are not aware of many things. 40% of people surveyed did not know the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was a law and most Americans in that low information group think gun crime is up even though it has decreased 39% since 1993.
Many of them still think Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her house and a lot still think Obama has some secret stash of money he can dole out to them.
So I doubt many of these people know what happened in Benghazi or will understand the implications of Obama’s actions. Most will think that Republicans are just trying to attack Obama based on baseless accusations because that is what the MSM will tell them.
Richard Nixon resigned because of a cover-up after the Watergate break in. No one died as a result of the activities that ended the Nixon presidency.
Obama is directly responsible for the death of four Americans and he is responsible for the cover-up that followed all so he could win reelection.
I don’t know if his presidency will survive the aftermath of the issue though some are predicting this will end it for him.
I do know that if he is forced out of office we will be stuck with Joe Biden (unless he is involved in the cover-up) and that is not good for America. Biden could not pour water out of a bucket if the directions were written on the bottom.
In any event, the aftermath of all this will substantially weaken Obama and probably end any hope Hillary has for becoming president.
Time will tell…
Never surrender, never submit.
May 6, 2013 Political
OK, OK, Obama really told the students to reject the voices that warn of government tyranny. He is basically telling the students to ignore those who say government can become tyrannical as his regime moves toward that very tyranny. He needs to indoctrinate the young minds so when government is in full blown tyranny mode the heads full of mush will reject the idea because their overlord Obama told them it can’t happen.
Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave, and creative, and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.
We have never been a people who place all our faith in government to solve our problems. We shouldn’t want to. But we don’t think the government is the source of all our problems, either. Because we understand that this democracy is ours. And as citizens, we understand that it’s not about what America can do for us, it’s about what can be done by us, together, through the hard and frustrating but absolutely necessary work of self-government. And class of 2013, you have to be involved in that process. Real Clear Politics
Well there you have it. The great and wise Obama has told the students that they should reject those who talk of tyranny because they suggest that our experiment is somehow a sham that can’t be trusted and that we do not believe government should solve all our problems.
To address the last part first, Obama and the rest of the progressives DO believe government is the answer to all our problems. This is evident by the way he is leading. Their solution to every problem is more government which usually involves some form of massive spending (and of course taxing the evil rich).
His talk does not match his actions because he is a liar. He works to deceive people and his goal here is to discredit those who actually see what is going on.
What about that first part? First of all, Obama used a false argument. No one warning of tyranny is suggesting our government is a sham (though it might be one with Obama at the helm). We suggest that tyranny can occur in the best of governments. Obama might want these kids to believe that government can be trusted and he and his followers might actually believe this. I prefer to look at the words of much wiser people and those I look to are the people who founded this nation (as well as a few from past presidents who were not Founders). Let us look at what those men had to say about government, shall we?
- “The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing.”
- “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.”
- “If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”
- “Every step we take towards making the State our Caretaker of our lives, by that much we move toward making the State our Master.”
Dwight D. Eisenhower
- “Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants.”
- “The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.”
Patrick Henry, American colonial revolutionary
- “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government — lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”
- “It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains.”
- “History, in general, only informs us what bad government is.”
Thomas Jefferson (1807)
- “We the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts–not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”
- “I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.”
President James Madison (1751-1836) speech, Virginia Convention, 1788
- “The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.”
- “It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government.”
- “Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does NOT mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country.”
Quotes obtained here.
I think it is very clear that much wiser men than Obama, those who gave us this great experiment, were suspicious of government. Their words clearly tell us they felt that government was not to be trusted and that tyranny was something that governments become and that we should be cautious of this.
So regardless of what Obama tells these youngsters, the voices talking about tyranny are echoes from the past. They are the echoes of our Founders and others who have held this nation’s highest office.
They are voices from those who experienced firsthand that which they warn about and that which Obama seeks to deny while placing the wheels in motion.
My advice to these students and all citizens is to be wary and to ignore the words of those who tell you not to worry about tyranny. In other words, ignore what Obama said to these students because history is not on his side.
I prefer to use the words of Ronald Reagan, Trust but verify.
Though quite honestly, I have no trust of the government.
Never surrender, never submit.
May 3, 2013 Political
It Depends on who you ask….
The April jobless numbers were released today and unemployment has dropped to 7.5% as employers created 165,000 jobs. The jobs created number will certainly be revised and the unemployment data is skewed, as it has been all along, to make things look much better than they are. ADP shows that only 119,000 jobs were added in April and its numbers are probably more realistic than the governments.
But if we take the government’s numbers as accurate then we can draw a conclusion Obama and his mouth pieces will not point out. The cuts to government have not hurt the economy.
Yes, Obama will tell us how wonderful things are because of what he has done and his followers will swoon at the words of their dear leader and while he touts the phony numbers he will not state the reality that if the numbers are real (as he contends with his assertions that we are recovering) then one can only conclude that the Sequestration and the budget cuts have not hurt us.
Keep in mind that the cuts are not real cuts. We are still spending more money this year than last or in any of the previous years. The cut was in the rate or amount of growth. Think of it as still crashing but doing it at a slower speed.
So if we are to believe the government’s numbers we can safely say that the cuts did not hurt us and, in fact, things got better. So in order to make things continue to improve we need to CUT MORE.
If we cut the spending back to the levels of 2008 then we could be well on our way to prosperity.
This can’t happen though because Obama and the progressives are big government cheerleaders who believe that the only way to improve is to continue to grow government and for government to spend more and more.
Obama will never admit that cuts are good for the economy and the country because it is not in his DNA. He will not associate any good news with the cuts and will continue to say the cuts are bad and that we need to spend more. We spent a fortune over his first 4 and a half years and unemployment remains high. His dire warnings about the effects of cuts are not playing out even though the government’s numbers show that cuts are not hurting us (once again, if we accept the numbers as true).
Even if we demonstrate the numbers are flawed the effects of the cuts are good. The debacle at the airports and the claims of Armageddon did not pan out as Congress quickly reversed the plans that Obama and his transportation people claimed were the only option. Obviously there was another option and it was quickly exercised by Congress. It is worthy to note that Congress did this because they were being impacted by the delays. We can’t have our overlords delayed from their work…
In any event, cuts are good and we need to make more of them. Obama has no idea how budgets work. He has never had to make a payroll and has never run a business. He has not been successful at anything except running for office.
He is hell bent on pushing a progressive agenda regardless of the consequences.
Well the government’s latest numbers show that the sequestration is not having a negative impact. The cuts are good for us and the only reason there are any problems is because Obama has directed that cuts be imposed in a fashion to cause the most harm.
Most people are not affected by the sequestration and Obama is trying to impact as many people as he can but it will not work. He can close the White House to tours but he loses credibility when he then opens it to wealthy donors.
Yes, he is a man child and is way out of his league.
And it is time for us to step up and make sure he can do no further harm.
Never surrender, never submit.