Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ 

Let’s Call Obama’s Bluff

February 22, 2013 by  

Let’s Call Obama’s Bluff
PHOTOS.COM

The Chicken Littles in Washington are sure having conniptions over the thought of having to make some spending cuts, aren’t they?

“Sequestration” has become the new scare word, with the White House and its allies using language like “doomsday,” “deeply destructive,” “irresponsible” and “catastrophic.”

President Barack Obama sounded the alarm over sequestration in his State of the Union speech. “These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts,” he declared, “… would certainly slow our recovery, and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs.”

Pardon me while I inject a little reality into this picture.

First of all, there is nothing “sudden” about this so-called crisis. It’s been staring us in the face for the past 18 months. And it was the White House, not Republicans in Congress, who first came up with the idea.

Back in the summer of 2011, Obama’s team made the proposal for mandatory spending cuts as part of the debt-ceiling negotiations. The Administration insisted that the cuts be divided between defense spending and domestic programs, no doubt assuming that the Republicans would never permit hundreds of billions of dollars to be removed from the Pentagon’s budget.

So far, Obama’s team has lost that bet. It seems that the Republicans who control the House of Representatives believe that sequestration is the only way to force some spending cuts on the Federal behemoth, so they are willing to let it happen.

I couldn’t agree with them more. During the last big tax-cut battle, doing nothing meant raising taxes for everyone. The Republicans got what they thought was the best possible compromise in the New Year’s Day fiscal cliff deal. The bargain retained the George W. Bush-era tax cuts for all but families earning $450,000 a year or more.

But today, doing nothing means that some spending cuts will be enacted. Since a majority of Congress seems to be incapable of agreeing on any plan to cut spending, how else is it going to happen?

After all, Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi all proclaim that we don’t have a spending problem in this country. What’s even more amazing is that they can say it with a straight face — and without their noses growing several inches longer.

That’s why I urge Republicans to call Obama’s bluff. Let sequestration begin on March 1. Ignore the dire threats and howls of outrage. Instead, let’s take the first small step toward living within our means.

That said, I have to agree with Charles Krauthammer, the popular FOX News commentator, who had this to say:

Of course, the sequester is terrible policy. The domestic cuts will be crude and the Pentagon cuts damaging. This is why the Republican House has twice passed bills offering more rationally allocated cuts. (They curb, for example, entitlement spending as well.)

Naturally, the Democratic Senate, which hasn’t passed a budget since before the iPad, has done nothing. Nor has the president — until his Tuesday plea.

Well, it wasn’t so much a plea as it was a threat. Of course, the powers that be will do everything they can to make the consequences of sequestration seem truly dreadful. We’ll hear horror story after horror story about vital services being slashed. Don’t believe a word of it, folks. That’s just how the game is played. Before you buy into all of the bullhockey about all of the horrors that will ensue, please consider a few facts.

We are talking about minuscule reductions in the Federal budget. The deal is supposed to reduce Federal spending by $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years. But thanks to the compromise Congress made last month to raise the debt ceiling, the actual cuts this year will be just $85 billion. And they may be even lower than that trivial amount. Given a Federal budget this year of $3.6 trillion, we’re talking about a measly 2.36 percent reduction.

Guess what? Even if every nickel of those cuts takes place, the Federal behemoth will still spend more money this year than it did last year. And please keep in mind that even with the $600 billion in tax increases Obama got last month, we will still need to borrow over $1 trillion this year so Uncle Sam can keep writing all of those checks.

The American Thinker reported:

While the nation’s growth rate has been stagnant, spending by governments at all levels has increased dramatically from $4.9 trillion in 2007 to $6.2 trillion in 2012, a jump of 26.5% which is driven entirely by the federal government as it has increased its spending by nearly 41% over this period. This has resulted in the total national debt rising from $9.2 trillion at the beginning of January 2008 to $16.45 trillion as of today. (a staggering 79% increase).

By the way, it isn’t just the “poor” who have reaped the benefits of all this increased spending, reports Gary D. Halbert. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, by 2011 (the last year for which numbers were available), the average total compensation for Federal government employees was $126,200. By comparison, the average total compensation for workers in the private sector was less than half that amount.

That’s right; while government employees on average were pulling in $126,200 a year, the average free-enterprise employee earned just $62,100.

And here’s another statistic I found even more shocking. From 2007 until 2011, the average net worth of all American households fell by nearly 40 percent. Look at that number again. It’s a four followed by a zero. There’s no decimal point in there.

Most of that horrendous decline was due to the devastating collapse in home prices. But the average household income is also down sharply, falling from $54,489 in 2007 to $50,054 in January 2012. We’re getting poorer fast, folks.

The bottom line is that the past four years of Obama’s Presidency have marked the worst period of economic growth for this country since the beginning of the Great Depression. Fewer of us are working (some 3 million fewer than when Obama took office). We’re earning less, saving less and worth less.

Faced with this record of economic disaster, the Democrats want to do more of what’s gotten us in this mess in the first place. They want to spend more, borrow more and tax more.

I’m in favor of doing anything that’s legal, moral and ethical to slow them down. As far as I can see, the sequestration, while far from ideal, qualifies on all three. So I say, bring it on.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

–Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of PersonalLiberty.com. He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Let’s Call Obama’s Bluff”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • http://n/a AmFer

    I definitely buy into “Let’s Call Obama’s Bluff”…however, I don’t trust that Boehner and the weak-kneed, spineless RINOS will follow through. What do you think?

    • APN

      I hope is does happen and then it happens again, then again, then again, then again…………….

      APN

      • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

        APN say, “I hope is does happen and then it happens again, then again, then again, then again…………….”

        I say ~ if I was a dye in the wool democrat, I’d agree with you APN.

        The GOP will suffer the blunt of such a move.

        I know that most of you wish to believe otherwise ~

        I say do it! ~ and lets see what happens, ~ I don’t really care ~ if smaller government is what you want ~ That’s one way to do it. But be prepared to suffer sooner then later.

      • APN

        We are already suffering DIW. We can either face the music now or apocalypse later.

  • John Mitchell

    Why do we call them spending cuts. They are actually spending increases. The sequestration just calls for spending to increase less than Obama asked for it to. We call it a cut but it is only a reduction of increases. We are still increasing our spending.

    • http://n/a AmFer

      John Mitchell: Exactly – I think they look at it as the ‘lesser of two evils’. I look at it as you do but can you imagine what Boehner and Congress would do IF we really held them to “Cut Spending”……..they’d run and hide.

    • Ken

      Thank you for bringing out the rest of the story.

  • Linda Turner

    A Republican Power Point presentation throws cold water on House Republicans’ attempts to call this ‘Obama’s Sequester.’ Boehner’s office developed it with the Republican Policy Committee and sent it out to the Capitol Hill GOP on July 31, 2011. Intended to explain the outline of the proposed debt deal, the presentation is titled, ‘Two Step Approach to Hold President Obama Accountable.’ It’s essentially an internal sales document from the old dealmaker Boehner to his unruly and often unreasonable Tea Party cohort. But it’s clear as day in the presentation that ‘sequestration’ was considered a cudgel to guarantee a reduction in federal spending — the conservatives’ necessary condition for not having America default on its obligations. The presentation lays out the deal in clear terms, describing the spending backstop as “automatic across-the-board cuts (‘sequestration’). Same mechanism used in 1997 Balanced Budget Agreement.”

    • Capitalist at Birth

      Are you suggesting that the liberal Bob Woodward lied in his book? He contends that this was an idea created by Obama’s Chief of Staff, approved by Obama and taken to Harry Reid who introduced the bill? Or, are you deliberately attempting to lie?

      • APN

        Capitalist, That is my understanding of how all this went down. Now we have a Democrat Senator saying the same thing.

        It originated from Obama in the WH, no doubt. I’ve gone back and watched him speak about it on numerous occasions.

        Bottom line, I don’t have a problem with sequestration, I do however have a problem with Obama saying something totally different now and NOBODY in the liberal media is challenging him.

        This guy can say and do whatever he wants and gets away it. I think he will once again be successful in politicizing the event and then blaming it on the GOP. However, I do not think he will get the political capital he thinks he will get. I think this one may backfire on the Dems in 2014.

        In the mean time, while Washington is playing darecare politics, our country is going to HELL in a handbasket.

        WE ALL WILL LOSE IN THE END, unfortunately.

        I just don’t see any form of adult leadership coming out of Washington.

        Sad but true.

        APN

  • Bev

    Some of us are going to feel the pinch of sequestration. DOD has already cut many jobs and we haven’t had a pay raise in 3 years. With the SQ they’re basically laying off people for an entire month. That means my husband will make only 11 months of salary this year. He is not well paid, nor does he earn 6 figures. It always amazes me that congress never takes a cut in pay but they don’t mind dumping on the citizens.

    • Capitalist at Birth

      What do you think the rest of us have not already been pinched by the inflation caused by the overspending and borrowing? Somebody else needs to get pinched and I suggest it is anyone working for the Government that has been living high on the hog for over 60 years.

      • APN

        If we could just get the Federal workforce pay scale back in line with the private sector nobody would need to be laid off. This is what happens with a centralized form of government. It is to big and CANNOT be managed properly. Paying a Federal worker 46% more than the same job in the private sector is pretty arrogant if you ask me.

      • macgyver1948

        APN… You say “If we could just get the Federal workforce pay scale back in line with the private sector nobody would need to be laid off”. This is so doubtful it defies and eliminates reality per haw things really work. The Execs are the only ones who decide on when a job is created or filled when there are vacancies or eliminated and on what to pay it, living with needed livable minimum wages. No politician can do that and workers do not seem to have control on that either. It is up to the Execs and they go by how to keep as much money at the top as they can, do more with less as long as they don’t have to do the more themselves, keep expenses way down (payroll is the most controllable expense) and how to grow the bottom line – all to keep themselves and the top shareholders fat and happy. Oh, the bosses in the federal work force are the execs there.

        As long as you are not a top decision maker in any company you will have no control over your raises, promotions and layoffs. By the way, government is way to big and we need it to shrink but that has to be done wisely and with concern for “We The People”. As long as there are many in government who refuse to let go of some power and/or who work exclusively for the benefit and protection of the big corporations don’t look for any real concern for “We The People” happening any time soon.

      • APN

        Mac said: As long as you are not a top decision maker in any company you will have no control over your raises, promotions and layoffs.

        I disagree; in a free market you do have control over your pay as an individual. If you have skills and your current employer is not paying you the “market”, well, activate your resume and find a company that will pay you market wages.

        Your performance on the job has EVERYTHING to do with your pay, if not, find a company that does recognize your skills and performance. In addition, if you’re in a position and you actually think you don’t have a fair shot at life because you aren’t a “Top decision marker” well become a TOP DECISION MARKER.

        Personally I think your comments are an excuse for your lack of discipline which seams to be a GROWING trend in this country. No offense intended or implied.

        If you don’t have any skills to sale, well, shame on you, that is not a “Collective” problem. Is it however an individual problem created by decisions YOU made not decisions WE made.

        Collectivism has been tried all over the world throughout history. It never has worked and it never will work because those in POWER are only interested in THEIR self-interest, not a “Collective” interest. They are however interested in a “Collective Vote” to retain them in the seat “on high”. Therefore, they will tell you exactly what you want to hear.

        Proof in point, how did Obama get re-elected? Well, he is the great divider-in-chief, correct? It’s all about the GREEDY OLE “Rich” people however he never mentions all the LAZY dope smokers who do nothing but make illegitimate babies and spead every desease known to man, at OUR expense. Or those that are 4th and 5th generation welfare recipients that have never contributed anything to the “Collective” interest since birth. i .e.; Users not producers playing this dumb “Collective System”.

        Bottom line, as reality dictates, they may campaign, as Obama did, on this idea of “We are all in this together” ” Social Justice” “Economic Justice” Etc Etc Etc however that is nothing more than a sales pitch to get him re-elected to retain his POWER over YOU and ME and it is being done at the expense of future generations.

        People are going to find out this TRUTH in the very near future. His economic house of cards are closing in on him and there will be no place to hide and nobody else to blame, including GEORGE BUSH.

        APN

      • macgyver1948

        APN… You say “I disagree; in a free market you do have control over your pay as an individual. If you have skills and your current employer is not paying you the “market”, well, activate your resume and find a company that will pay you market wages”.

        Good luck with that. When you work for a company they decide not only if you get a raise, there could be wage freezes for one, and they decide what they want to increase you to. They might play a bit if they want to keep you but if you leave there is always someone to replace you; they wont care for long. If you do not like it you have the choice to leave and try to go to another company who will give you as much control as the one you want to leave. It is delusional to think you can go into the boss and say give me so much of a raise now but politely. Payroll is an expense and they need to keep those things down as much as they can.

        Your performance on the job is what gets them to want to keep you or not but they decide what you get. As for promotions. Those too are up to them. I have seen all too often when the harder working more proficient guy was passed over for someone they feel is good by not as proficient. They decide how close they want you to them and how much they want to give you control over others below you.

        Another thing. Negotiations for initial salary is based on how much they think they want you and if they want to pay as much as you are asking for. If not, good bye. If there are no negotiations, a set starting hourly wage for example, then you are just like everyone else in that classification of the job but either way, what you start with is what they generally want to keep you down with – as small raises as they can get away with throughout. And even with annual evals they decide what you get no matter how great your are. They even tell you this is a great raise at 4 or 5 percent.

        I know a very large corporation, and I bet they aren’t the only one, who has a policy that states “for all current employees who are transferring they cannot make more than 10% over what they made before the transfer. They even send send around email to all who have company email suggesting they go to their job site and see if you can qualify for a job which will improve your economic standing. In other words, if you as a worker who is making $8.60/hr and you apply for a job which starts out at $20/hr, per salary range stated by the recruiter, the most you can receive as a raise is $.86 and hour. Oh, they do not tell you about this until the hiring manager wants to make you an offer after all the interviews. I call this policy ‘the 10% screw the employee’ policy.

        This particular employer, about the biggest private employer, says they love and take care of their employees/associates publicly but when it comes to what really goes on inside it is a different world. There are other screw the employee policies at this company but they deny them until they have to apply them. The ’10% screw the employee’ policy I mentioned. Well, the recruiter suggests to an associate who is trying to transfer to go to the policy on transfer web page to see if they qualify for the jobs they try for before the interviews begin. When asked if all the transfer policies are there the recruiter says “YES”. Guess which policy is mysteriously not at all there but you do not know it is not there until you receive the job/transfer offer and you go back to look for it. Have you heard of “plausible deniablity”?

        Now I know many there who wouldn’t have received an offer for the transfer if their annual evals weren’t good enough but there you go, no employee control over salary. It is about keeping expenses down, pure and simple, and the employee/associate does not matter, except to the public maybe.

        What “free market” are you talking about? I only know the one in America and I have worked in home offices of vary large as well as small corporations. As an IT business analyst at that very large corporation I mentioned, my last job, I worked closely with the execs when it was called for. But you are entitled to disagree.

        I can’t let this go because you are typically assuming as the Right generally does. You say “Personally I think your comments are an excuse for your lack of discipline which seams to be a GROWING trend in this country. No offense intended or implied”. But it was stated as though it were implied. Before I was that IT Business Analyst, last job, but before that over a span of almost 40 years I was, after college, a programmer analyst, a systems analyst, the manager of systems and programmers at a fairly large university’s computer center, and a project manager. I had a nice career and I can’t complain so much for me. I watched and learned over the years what was going on and I knew complaining would only get me a lower annual evals and lower raises. An that would be even as I produced very well. I had to leave each company after several years, which was common in the IT field, if I wanted a decent raise and promotion which is how we might have some control.

        The employee needs some kind of effective representation which isn’t attached to the company, IE open door policies or Ombudsmen programs who owe their regular pay check to the company, for him/her to get a break if they stay with a company. You cannot have that in a Right To Work state because the government in that state will generally protect the employer or look the other way.

      • APN

        Mac you said :What “free market” are you talking about? I only know the one in America and I have worked in home offices of vary large as well as small corporations. As an IT business analyst at that very large corporation I mentioned, my last job, I worked closely with the execs when it was called for. But you are entitled to disagree.”

        I think I follow you Mac, no offense but it was a lot of material to read through. If you are an IT professional then you should clearly understand what I meant by the “Free Market” system.

        As I stated, if you have skills, and I/T is definitely a skillset, well, you should be able to get “market value” for your skillset. That statement does not imply that you can achieve a standard of living above the market just because you think it should. That’s how the government works and why the average postal worker, sorting mail, makes 88K per year which probably exceeds the average pay for an I/T professional in the private sector.

        The aforesaid is a PRIMARY factor in our 17 Trillion dollar national debt charged to future generations. People are being paid well beyond their skillset and for what? Some politician figured out a long time ago that is is easy to buy votes with other folks money. Same principle when Obama bailed out GM, at OUR expense.

        In other words, a corporation is only going to pay you as little as possible in a free market economy. Why? Because the sole purpose of a business is to make a profit, not to employ people or provide jobs. The only reason for those jobs is to provide a service to a PAYING client or a product to a paying customer. The beauty of this system is very simple, those who study hard and work hard typically get ahead in life until you get the Government involved.

        I made many changes in my carrier in I/T. I had a duty to my family to be a good provider. Given that, I always kept my options open and eyes on the primary GOAL of becoming self-employed, which I eventually achieved through hard work and discipline. I never asked for a raise in my professional carrier however I received many.

        I did however have an employer counter an offer + 10K one time in my carrier. My answer to them was, well, if I wasn’t worth that last week then how could I be worth that to you now? I resigned and moved on to the next hurtle in my life.

        True Free Market Capitalism is a beautiful thing until you get Washington involved then it becomes cronie-capitalism with a POTUS picking the winner/losers based upon political motivations. Again, this is the primary reason we find ourselves in this fiscal-nightmare and what we have done to the American System of doing business is criminal.

        Proof of that is what America achieved as a FREE PEOPLES as compared to the mire and the muck we find ourselves in now due to “progressive marxism”. A system where over-educated fools that have never worked in the private sector or made a payroll are making business decisions for those of us who HAVE done those things. We are qualified to do it, they aren’t.

        This is why Obama, our Commander-in-Community-Cheerleading doesn’t have a CLUE about the Free Market economy or what to do with it. The results of another four years of “Cheerleading the Masses” and making all the num-nuts “Feel-good” about themselves will be an economic disaster beyond description.

        I will stay with a free-market system any day over a government controlled progressive nightmare. How about you?

        APN

      • macgyver1948

        APN,,, Yeah, I do tend to write a lot at times. I am a wanna-be writer and I like to write. I was being sarcastic in a facetious way when I asked you what free market system you were talking about.

        I have the going rate for my skill sets and education (both at least are factors in hiring) but those too depend on the market and the size of the corporation and at times what kind of corporation. Yeah, kind of does factor into it. Banks pay less than many manufacturing and tech companies and Retail, well not their managerial and execs, pay really lousy. Although retail in upper management can pay relatively nicely and their execs can as well, that I know. Let’s remember jobs are created with the companies budget in mind for that job. As a manager and hiring manager I had to consider payroll budget or I would get nailed by my up-line. Your experiences and education do help but they are no guarantees.

        If I think I deserve a better pay than my marketability might suggest as an employee I need to start my own company and pay myself. I wonder sometime if government feels they have unlimited funding they can offer higher wages. We, the tax payers, the feeders of that so-called unlimited fund, may be dwindling in our offerings as pay shrinks further and unemployment doesn’t improve fast enough. Employers have a lot to do with that, more than anyone else. Government work is a different animal. The only government job I held was as a GI so I cannot speak from experience there but I hear and read about them.

        You say “Some politician figured out a long time ago that it is easy to buy votes with other folks money. Same principle when Obama bailed out GM, at OUR expense”. I think it is many politicians but that OPM thing, as you say “other folks money, is what comes from so many and many of those donations are from those who expect big returns on their investment. ROIs are a touchy thing. If an investor does not get the return they would like they tend to ignore that stock in the future. GM and the Auto industry was a needed friend. That is politics. Little bush gave graciously to the Oil execs and that was a pay back from our money.

        You go on to say “Why? Because the sole purpose of a business is to make a profit, not to employ people or provide jobs. The only reason for those jobs is to provide a service to a PAYING client or a product to a paying customer”. In a real sense I agree. If Execs could avoid the expense that is payroll they would avoid creating jobs. But to them jobs are only a thing that requires a tool to work it or the exec will have to work it themselves if they feel the need for that job. Execs really do not want to do most of the jobs they create. When I was at that huge retail company one of the things I had to do in early on training was work in the big box to get a feel for what the company does and how it directly relates to the customer. So many of us did not want to work in the store and it sucked but we had to. I was teased by an exec who also didn’t want to work in the store but he was glad he didn’t have to. Don’t tell anyone I told you that, he might get into trouble, LOL…

        You say “The beauty of this system is very simple, those who study hard and work hard typically get ahead in life until you get the Government involved”. I wondered why I went as far in school as I did and then worked hard, there is a lot to that. It is statistically clear that the college grad tends to make much more money than the high school grad in their life times with exceptions (look at that Harvard drop out Bill Gates) but these days a college grad may have to take a job as a file clerk with that pay grad. I read an article about that the other day which showed many college grads choosing between jobs like that or no job. That is so sad especially when so many large corporations are nicely in the black and the grad is stuck with a huge college loan, the money for which is their investment in reverse – pay back.

        You say you made many changes in your career too to provide for your family. We have to depend on our options, hopefully recognizing them, because we cannot depend on any employer for our future unless your employer is daddy and even that doesn’t always work. I know of a plastic injection molding company where dad owned the company and he so often referred to his college grad son as “my idiot son”. The kid eventually opened his own karate school so he went with an option that he did had. Also employers will do as their accountants and financial advisors tell them so jobs are insecure at best. For so may years that huge Retail company I worked for boasted they didn’t lay people off even in hard times. BUT, maybe it was 4 or so years ago they laid off over 1200 in just the home office, more in other places. Many of those who were laid off were there 15 or more years and doing well.

        In your paragraph where you say you were offered $10k to stay happens often enough, it did for me. We have to do what is best for us because if we do not who will? And if they feel they have us with more money like that they may take advantage later.

        “True Free Market” is beautiful until government gets involved but there are times when it needs to get involved. Like when the environment is being destroyed without the reg. Or, you may not agree, when wages were so low those listed as in poverty were doing better than the workers. Pay at the hourly levels must keep up with inflation or what would be the point to work if you can’t afford the gas to get to work? Also there are regs outlawing stealing form the company pension funds but with that most people might agree. We hired a guy to come in and lecture on just that. He spend several years in prison for helping higher execs with that. He wrote a book called (well, it is here some place but I cant find it now and the title might be a bit off) “Stealing without a gun”, that’s close enough. The point is we need regs but we shouldn’t over reg.

        In regard to your “Proof of that is what America achieved as a FREE PEOPLES…” paragraph… I always felt it would help if people did the time on a job before they make or enforce the rules. I saw this so often. Once I was pressured to hire a programmer manager who never really programmed before. He was someones son. That was a fight I was glad I fought and won and I saw I was right during the interview. But he did have 2 masters degrees. Woopie DOO. LOL… I do not really like the term “progressive marxism” because here it tends to link commie and those on the Left and as many Libs as I know I never met a commie in the bunch but I keep hearing about them from the Right.

        Obama knows more than he is given credit for from the Right. No one person can be all things in that job, not even Clinton, and hopefully he/she hires good advisors. How much did the actors or generals who became president know when their charisma and support got them elected? It would be nice if we could have a good free market system without government intervention, I’d love it, but there are way too many greedy takers in the corporate world and many of them own our politicians anyway. The Founders warned us about them but we haven’t yet learned.

        Ah, another long one, sorry…

      • APN

        Mac said: I read an article about that the other day which showed many college grads choosing between jobs like that or no job. That is so sad especially when so many large corporations are nicely in the black and the grad is stuck with a huge college loan, the money for which is their investment in reverse – pay back.

        You made some good points Mac. I don’t think we are in disagreement of any significance.
        I would suggest that your comments on the college grads is due to government intervention into the PRIVATE sector.

        Government needs to get our of the way so WE THE PEOPLE can unleash the power of FREEDOM to make our own decisions with our OWN money.

        As far as “progressive-marxism”, well, I will just have to disagree with you on that one. How does progressive-marxism differ from Statism or communism? Where in history has Marxism been fruitful for the PEOPLES and how does the concepts of Marxism work within the constructs of our Constitution? Hows does our B-O-R fit and our individual FREEDOMS to live life as we see fit? What is the next “progressive” step from the system of Marxism?

        Are you suggesting that we modify the first three key words of our constitution to

        “We the Government”?

        Surely not?

        APN

      • macgyver1948

        APN… You say “…Mac. I don’t think we are in disagreement of any significance”. There are many on the Right who can get along with many on the left even with the degree of difference. I see that would depend on a person lever of acceptance of the other persons right to have their own opinion even as it differs form theirs. I run into so many on the Right who cannot tolerate any feelings or opinions which differ from theirs and that is when things get sticky. Those who are that non tolerant types seem to forget what Liberty and Constitution really is about. You seem to be accepting and I hope if I seem otherwise I apologize now and probably will again since I do not ever mean to be.

        Then you include “As far as “progressive-marxism”, well, I will just have to disagree with you on that one. How does progressive-marxism differ from Statism or communism?” and “Where in history has Marxism been fruitful for the PEOPLES and how does the concepts of Marxism work within the constructs of our Constitution?”. I will never argue against what you say here concerning “Marxism”. Although they are on extreme different sides of the political aisle both Marxism and Fascism/Nazi, each others bitter enemies, are so anti God and anti people and I will always be an enemy to them. What I have a concern with is connecting Marxism with the Left or with Liberals. I have met so many Dems and even Liberals over the years and I never saw Marxism or Fascism/Nazi in any of them. I think the Right is poisoning their followers about the Left in this with how they extend their aggression for them by making up the connection in general and exaggerating by using those labels. It is all BS and that is where I have to disagree with the connection of “progressive-marxism”.

        I told you before I do not trust Tea because they evolved from the John Birch Society. The Koch Brothers father, Fred, was a founding member of the JBS and he heavily financed them. Well they were not only bigots, you can get that from researching them, but they fought against the Civil Rights movement in the 1960′s. They also referred to any who would not support them in their efforts to totally support the very wealthy and Big Corporations as Communists, even President Eisenhower. Fred taught his sons, known “affectionately” as the Koch Brothers, very well and that is why I do not trust Tea. The Koch brother “officially” ended their membership in JBS but they still have connections probably because they cannot disconnect their roots.

        Your last question here “Are you suggesting that we modify the first three key words of our constitution to“We the Government”?”. To that my answer will always be – NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is a people country and not a government country, at least it should be that way, meaning the government is here to serve us, we own it and not the other way around. So “surely not”. I am also fighting against Plutocracy which is what I see groups such as the TP want. Tea owns so many of the GOP so there we are in how I feel about the falsely nick named GOP.

      • APN

        You made some good points Mac and I respect your opinion. I do not however agree with your comments about the TP and I think it is a healthy thing to shake up the status-quo in Washington.

        I would like see the two-party system abolished totally and start all over with a constitutional form of governance beginning at the LOCAL level. Washington is to BIG and to centralized and CANNOT be fixed in it’s current form. It is to large to MANAGE thus we have 17 TRILLION and counting in DEBT for future generations to deal with. That my friend is economic-terrorism through generational theft.

        APN

      • macgyver1948

        APN… This has been discussed before, even on this site. The Founders were leery of or fearful of a two party system. Ok, both big parties have their respective degrees of corruption and treasonous ways toward us but we have to have a party of some sort as an alternative, to replace them both. One who knows they work for us. One who needs to be more fearful of us, for their public jobs, than they are of the big money people or their party. Otherwise, without the fear from the right direction, us, we will continue to have the same BS we have now with our two party system. Nothing changes otherwise. I also suggest we go back to having a government of citizens, a real GOP, as the Founders wanted and not of self serving professionals, especially who have price tags on their backs, price blank until…, for the highest offering and demanding investor, who receive more benefits from us then we give ourselves.

        How do we make this happen? One suggestion is by taking back the government peacefully, it is still morally and legally ours for now, and incorporate certain Government Reforms, which go for both the elected as well as the appointed, and start from there. That is just a suggestion and my opinion but I know there are loads of people who agree. I know this, at the very least, because there were petitions going around in 2011 and last year through email with loads of names on them asking for The Congressional Reform Act of 2011/2012 to be demanded. Not enough people supported it so nothing is getting done. There was very good stuff in it and I even added some points of my own before passing it along.

        Yes I agree with you, beginning at the local levels and going all the way up the fed level. The Constitution is our and we have to protect it as well as fix what was broken in it by our so-called “representatives”. We need to make it a law that when they tarnish it without the permission of a majority of us they will go to a fed prison. They need to learn it is there to protect us from them and not the outher way around.

      • APN

        Well said Mac, no disagreement from me.

        APN

      • macgyver1948

        APN… It is so easy to see there are some on the Right and on the Left who will never agree and there are many others on both sides, different from this first pairing, who want the same things, such as what is best for the country. This last pairing is good and the Founders didn’t always agree with each other but they all wanted to make a great country for each of us. That is where we should focus and not disallow others who do not agree with us their views. Real Liberty is when we accept views we do not agree with as much as we want our own listened to. We don’t have to change our views and feelings by we have to allow for others or Liberty becomes meaningless with only “our views and beliefs in force”. All parties should.

  • jopa

    The anti-Americans are showing their true colors this week by weakening our military and security for diplomats around the world.This is nothing new for the Retardicans with all the blood on their hand from 911 to two wars and wanting to start more.I know they are embarrassed to be called Republicans so it’s best we respect that and call them Retardicans.If you really thought about it this is a gift( the sequester) that keeps on giving for our President.The Prez looks good and wasn’t the bad guy and he gets the cuts we need and if there is no sequester he will still hold on to his very high approval rating.It’s a win win for him no matter which way it goes.He is a genius.

    • Bev

      Just like you troll.

    • Toy

      Beef up security for the embassies, by all means.
      Shut down all of those hundreds of military bases around the world.
      That will give you all the staff you need, with local knowledge, for the embassies.

    • APN

      Jopa said: The Prez looks good and wasn’t the bad guy and he gets the cuts we need and if there is no sequester he will still hold on to his very high approval rating.It’s a win win for him no matter which way it goes.He is a genius.

      Yep! He’s genius alright! He WINS with his “Cheeleading” and “Social Media” while the country goes to hell in a handbasket.

      Great post!

      APN

  • Milton K. Beer

    Funny, not one mention about the price of fuel causing a vast majority of our economic problems for most of us low life’s.

    • John Mitchell

      The price of fuel is high because the democratic and green parties want it high. There are three things we could do to drastically reduce the price of energy.

      First quit diluting our gas with ethanol. According to several independent studies and government studies our cars are only 68% as efficient as they were with straight gasoline. We ended up burning 31% more gasoline, as well as some ethanol, to go the same distance. (We also subsidize the ethanol industry with more than $6 billion in taxpayer dollars.

      Second, let us use the hydrocarbons we have in this country. We should be drilling on all land including federal land. We should switch to natural gas for cars. We have enough natural gas in this country to be energy independent for centuries

      Finally, we should build nuclear power plants deep in our granite shields. All electricity could be produced with the cleanest and cheapest source of energy.

      But what has the price of fuel got to do with sequestration?

      • Capitalist at Birth

        The Secretary of Energy has said in the past he would like to see gasoline prices between $ 6 and $ 10 a gallon.

      • APN

        Yep! That is the GOAL of this administration. Has been from the very beginning. It is also a major part of the CC scam. We can all look forward to paying 8-10 bucks a gallon and 5-600 per month for “energy”. The elites have grown tired of we commoners using THEIR resources. ie; highways, friendly skies, beaches, mountains, etc.

        This is THEIR planet now, not We the Peoples. We can all look forward to sitting home wondering how the heck to pay the next GREEN ENERGY bill.

  • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

    I read the word “Entitlement”. Tell me: Where does it say in our Constitution that anyone is “entitled” to another mans wealth? Where in our Constitution does it say the government is entitled to take one man’s wealth and give it to another man to buy his vote and skim a lot of it first for themselves of course? Sure the Consitution was changed so the federal government can put it’s hand in our pockets, but does that change mean that the government can take money and give it where it wants?

    Call his bluff? Never happen. That is to imply that Obama and the socialist have the same goal as the rest of us. They want power gained by buying votes with the people’s money. The truth is we’re all willing to live a lie by accepting a counterfeit medium of exchange as our money, republicans, democrats, libertarians, tea partiers and so on. Turn off the printing presses and let our industrial genius put value to the worthless pieces of paper. When we used gold and silver as our medium of exchange the purchasing power of those coins increased, cost were cut, with knowledge in production methods.

    • FreedomFighter

      we used gold and silver as our medium of exchange

      getting as much as i can, mostly silver, couple of coins at a time, getting alot harder to get them guys to give up a few coins too.

      Laus Deo
      Semper FI

    • jopa

      Christian American;I wholeheartedly agree when you state” where in our Constitution does it state the government can take ones mans wealth and give it to another”.This is happening because the wealthy contribute a tiny amount of there income to politicians who in turn make the middle class pay higher rates giving the rich a huge tax break.It is the middle class with a higher percentage of their income income taxes going to fund government programs such as the military, poor and just every day operations.Huge tax breaks for the rich to buy a third vacation home is as silly as the corporate welfare in America.

      • Adolf Schmidt

        It’s not hard to figure where the majority of jobs come from, the wealthy! I don’t see a problem with a few tax breaks for those who are putting people to work! I don’t think it is right fore facebook to profit 1 billion dollar, pay no taxes and get almost half a billion dollar tax refund! I would rather see more people working and sharing the burden, than a good number unemployed and unable to pay taxes! Major tax reform is needed! The more people that are hired by the wealthy, the better the tax cut! The layoffs that came after the increase in taxes on the rich was offset by the increase in hiring in the government sector! The hiring of government employees helps the people getting a job, but adds to the strain on the economy! We need to make the large corporations want to hire in a bad economy, and your not going to do that by raising their taxes. I have been living on a very low income the past 7 years while trying to raise 3 children. I would rather have a good job provided by a wealthy man getting a tax break, than to be unemployed or underemployed and him paying higher taxes!

      • macgyver1948

        @Adolf Schmidt… You say “It’s not hard to figure where the majority of jobs come from, the wealthy! I don’t see a problem with a few tax breaks for those who are putting people to work!”.

        Of course you wouldn’t if you are of the very wealthy and/or didn’t see that is is also the very wealthy who cancel jobs just to cut their expenses with no regard for the workers and their families that they down size or lay off or BAIN (from what investments companies such as Bain Capital does when the buy our companies and sell them off and fire people just so the people at the top and their investors can get wealthier). It is easy to see only one side when that is all that is wanted to see.

        Wealthier people and big corporations get away with paying fewer taxes because they can afford to. Those who make most or all of their money on Capital Gains saves bundles on taxes and the wealthier we are the more we benefit for the Capital Gains tax system as the little bush knew when he lowered CGT.

        Is it fair and who shoulders most of the tax burden when those who can afford more pay less? I guess it depends on how hi up on the financial ladder we are and how greedy we want to be. Do any of us still think it was a magnanimous gesture on Romney’s part when he waved his salary while being head guy for the Olympics and as Governor? Can average wage earners who invest afford to do that? Bush little knew what he was doing when he lowered the Capital Gains tax.

      • APN

        Refreshing honest comments Adolf. I see it the same way. Nobody gains by taking money away from those who create jobs. It is a loose loose situation without exception.

        Fact is, I have never had a poor man offer me a job much less a good paying job and I sure as heck don’t need some politician speaking on my behalf.

        APN

    • macgyver1948

      Capitalist at Birth… It is so true that we will not find the word “entitlements” in the Constitution. Back then they didn’t think about it, they were more concerned with creating a free nation, one with liberties equal for all. As smart as the Founders were I bet they knew times and changing demands will cause the need for things they didn’t think about. They warned us often about the evils of the Big Corporations and big money and they knew the wealthy would be able to better protect their wealth than the UN-wealthy ever could. The Founders knew Big Corporations would influence government, those in Congress who are willing to sell their vote and allegiances in exchange for money and support.

      All Entitlements are doing is giving those in need a helping hand and a fair shake if they earned and are entitled to it. “Entitled”, as in Social Security because they worked all their lives paying into it. Unemployment compensation as in for those who were down sized and laid-off so the corporations, even the many who are doing well, can reduce their expenses. Medicare for those who are paying monthly premiums as they become eligible. We cannot claim we are a better country, more caring and concerned for our people, if we support only the wealthy in their “entitlements and welfare”. The TPGOP is doing just that for the Corporations and the very wealthy so there has to be some kind of defense and balance for the rest of us who have earned it and are not of the very wealthy.

      I am not talking about unearned or undeserved entitlements. If people do not qualify for Social Security, for example, they are turned down as they should be. If each who applies cannot prove they have worked long enough, payed the minimum required all those working years and they are of age they are refused. This is “earned and deserved entitlement”.

      • tony newbill

        Good Point MACGYVER1948 !!!!

        The word Entitlement should be called Bribery … of the American Peoples Vote because of a Failed Economic Policy that is suppose to enable the Individual to Freely prosper equally under the Laws of the US Constitution !!!!!
        Our Economy would support the communities if we were making our own stuff , but that would make the Politicians not able to control us all then like how these so called entitlements make us , DEPENDENT on a Politician for a Promise of either you favor me or you Lose the favor that I say you will get , IS THIS DEMOCRACY or is it Tyranny against the Americans right to their own nations economic value ???? http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/obama-skirting-congress-in-globalist-plan/

      • macgyver1948

        @tony newbill… I am not sure what you are saying “good point” to. Are you saying those who are entitled and earned should be neglected for their own good, so they wouldn’t be controlled by the politicians? If those in need and deserve are taken off the entitlement rolls they would starve and become homeless after retirement.

        We are in economic slumps because the politicians screwed us up but does that mean we should neglect those in need? We need to put the politicians on a more employee level with us since we own the government and they work for us. We need to fire those who put us in economic slumps, as well as other things they do not for our benefit, but we cannot put the deserving on the street to live even though many in Congress are pledged to do so by starving entitlement funds.

        The web site you suggest. It asks “Do You Hate Republicans?”. I do not hate Repubs, just those who are working exclusively for the benefit and protection of the very wealthy and the big corporations at our expense. Those who take loads of money and support from the big corporations, perhaps through lobbyists or other means as well, and those who sign conflict-of-interest pledges against us, as over 270 TPGOPers in Congress have. But then I would hate Dems who do that too but there are so few Dems doing that.

        Both sides have problems but there is a more obvious concern with one side than the other for those of us who aren’t very wealthy or a big corporation. I do not want handouts, just what I have earned and deserve when I need it. I believe most Libs feel the same but many on the Right seem to know better what Libs/Dems want.

      • tony newbill

        MACGYVER1948 you are right and this Makes your case about how the Corporations are able to take your earned and well deserved benefits . Plus this act against the prosperity of the American People ability to seek a healthy domestic Job market is evident in this videos explanation by Democracy NOW , http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CiIaPhvHa-w

      • macgyver1948

        tony newbill… Thanks for the video link… This is why history is so important. What this is is a “1%er power tool”, as it was stated in the video (the wealthy and the big corporations have way too much power over us as it is given to them by politicians above what they already have over us in the working environment). This is what many politicians do for the benefit of the big corporations and it would be wrong no matter what party sponsors it. They all screw us one way or another.

        That was for those who think I would support Obama no matter what he does. I didn’t like giving the military arrest powers of citizens without due process either but mostly what Obama does is for our benefit so he is the lessor of the evils. We need to know more about this trade agreement to really know what is going on and who is behind the sponsoring.

        In the past, when Nixon went to China and kissed Mao’s butt they agreed on secret arrangements which we are feeling today to our economic detriment but Nixon also betrayed Formosa/Taiwan. We screwed a nation friend, one who was headed toward Democracy, in favor of deals with a huge commie country. Then, after that, was NAFTA and alike which screws us all the time. The ones who benefit the most from moving American jobs out of our country are the Employers and the TPGOP is right there with them as it would cut corporate expenses.

  • Danseur

    Why are we still calling these “spending *cuts*” at all? these are not cuts!! these are lower *increases* in spending than the government wants. Make no mistake about it, these are *not* cuts at all; these are just smaller *increases*.

    — Danseur

    • tony newbill

      Yes you are right , and the KEY to getting a real recovery underway is JOB growth due to Supply-side production expansion , and instead OBama is doing a trade agreement behind congresses back that will allow him to make deals with Foreign nations that want to DUMP their Cheaper Products into the USA causing Further Decline in Jobs and wages as this forces us to have to compete on a Global wage scale !!!!! And this will create the accounting for a downgrade in US Credit ratings leading to bankruptcy of the USA . Thats the Plan make it look like it was just a ever slow and winding road of Capitalism Never has Never will work as we heard Obama say over and Over so Eloquently …. LOL LOL

      Obama skirting Congress in globalist plan?
      Pushing for fast-track authority on new Trans-Pacific agreement

      http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/obama-skirting-congress-in-globalist-plan/

  • Tarrel Callaway

    Another way to call Obama’s bluff is to point out that in the “Obama Care” bill is Senate amendment 3276, sec 2716 Part C dated March 21, 2010, which states ” According to that amendment, the government cannot collect “any information relating to the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition.” This means that the government CANNOT mandate firearm registration. No registration, no confiscation.

    According to that amendment, the government cannot collect “any information relating to the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition.” This means that the government CANNOT mandate firearm registration. No registration, no confiscation. Poor ol’ Joe Biden, he spent the last couple of weeks focusing on making a law requiring registration. Good thing is though, the amendment also states that not even an executive order can override the amendment.

    CNN is now referring to it as “a gift to the nation’s powerful gun lobby.”

    And according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), that’s exactly right. He says he personally added the provision in order to keep the NRA from getting involved in the legislative fight over Obamacare, which was so ubiquitous in 2010.

    • Danseur

      Unfortunately, the FBI is making the list anyway via the mandated background checks. And are blatantly refusing to let anyone audit them on that.

      I do have to wonder why no one has ever challenged “background checks” for exercising a Constitutionally guaranteed natural right for what they truly are: guilty until proven innocent.

      No where else in any Court in this country is guilty until proven innocent acceptable, but that is exactly what a background check is.

      — Danseur

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Good point.

  • Don 2

    This is just another confirmation of the undeniable fact that under socialism, the rich get poorer, but the poor also get poorer.

  • Peggy Files

    Instead of defense budget cuts, cut off ALL foreign aid.

    • http://www.booksbyoliver.com OhioRiver

      I concur, Peggy. Why would our government (Democrats & Republicans) starting cutting aid to it’s own citizens, but continue to send millions of dollars around the world to people who despise us?

      I mentioned the novel out ( A TIME TO STAND by Oliver ) cause it’s about Americans who are so upset that they do something about the corrupt, federal government. THE DIARY is even better. Both are inspiring to see that there are still a few among us to take action. I recommend it.

    • TML

      I concur as well. That would be the most logical and best start. It’s insane to borrow just to give it to other countries that do nothing but drah us into wars (and more spending) or turn their weapons on us after we train them.

      • http://www.booksbyoliver.com OhioRiver

        TML, yes, it’s only a start, but it would be symbolic enough to incite more ‘small cuts’ that will quickly bring a grand total of billions of dollars saved.

  • Peggy Files

    yes, i agree with impeaching this president–it is sad when in the situation room and knowing what was happening to those American Patriots in Bengazi, he went to a fundraiser. And why when The embassy in Bengazi was telling them that they did not have enough people to defend it, they did nothing. On friendlly soil, our officials have more protection then they had in Bengazi, and that was a far from friendly place for any American. He is directly responsible, and needs to be held accountable.

  • Robert Skow

    The dumbycratsare idiots and obama needsto be fired now.

  • http://www.dhamilton Haskell Dale Hamilton

    Until both the House & Senate are controlled by common sense people this hypocritical fiasco will continue.

  • http://www.dhamilton Haskell Dale Hamilton

    The only answer for this man is Impeachment.
    Maybe only the House will do it, but it is time.

  • S.C.Murf

    Why not take away anywhere from 10% up to 25% of ALL federal employees wages? They should share in the burden as all do. Not just the elderly and kids but the senators,congressman even the pres. Lets spread this around a little better than what they are talking about. We have a spending problem and need to get it under control. These people in washington are either not smart enough or are being told not to get it taken care of.

    up the hill
    airborne

  • Jim B

    The Sequestration is a 2% cut out of every government budget bucket for which there are THOUSANDS of buckets! Not one bucket for each worthless government organization, but thousand in each organization. The Pentagon alone has THOUSANDS of budget buckets… are you kidding me! These are not cuts by the way, but a reduction in spending i.e. the government will spend much more in 2013 than they did in 2012. Sequestration is nothing, drop one conference a year in most of these budget buckets and done, that’s a joke… on us! We could go on for hours complaining about this, fueling the fire, but the reality is, and we should know this, it’s all just smoke and mirrors. When will we stop being so gullible, it’s embarrassing to know how stupid and naïve Americans really are.

    • APN

      Well said JIm, I agree completely!

      This entire subject of sequestration amounts to about 1/2 of 1% of the total budget over the next 10 years.

      I also agree that it is amazing as to how stupid Americans have become. It may be the THC factor.

      APN

  • Johnny D

    Yes, Obama the great brain of our lifetime according to the media, has put our nation in deep do do. Let the chips fall where they may so everyone can see what a jerk he is.

    • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

      Johnny , He didn’t do it ~ we did ! The 107th Congress did it, Dick Chaney and friends did it.

      Don’t believe everything opposition to the current administration says.

      They want back in power and will say anything that serves to that end. That is the way our system of government works ~ “worthy opposition”.

      It’s for each of us to determine what is truly “worthy” or just horse manure.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        What the *#@* are you talking about? Dick Cheney did what? I think you should change your handle to Deerinheadlights. It sounds more appropriate. What say you?

      • tony newbill

        This happening under a Liberal Mayor and Liberal President of the USA , Its CALLED OPPRESSIVE TACTICAL OPERATIONS Against the Citizens of the USA and its a Impeachable offense that BOTH THESE ELECTED OFFICIALS NOW QUALITY FOR in a way that cannot be covered up as a bias in politics !!!!!!!!

        http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/02/crushing-ny-gun-bill-would-force-gun-owners-to-buy-1-million-in-liability-insurance-2495770.html

      • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

        I was addressing Johnny statement CAB , ~ “Yes, Obama the great brain of our lifetime according to the media, has put our nation in deep do do. Let the chips fall where they may so everyone can see what a jerk he is.”

        If you can’t keep up with the conversation CAB and resort to flocking around with people’s handle ~ maybe you need a nap.

        It’s not Obama that has placed us in deep DODO ~ CAB ~

        Again, ~ if you can’t keep it ~ go take a nap! ~ Obama has gone thought not more loot then what W spent getting us into ! ~

        I will never ever allow you to forget ~ W Bush administration and that weasel Dick the Snake Chaney or the dead 900,000 Collation forces or the 7 Trillion dollar price tag on 12 years of protracted unfunded wars. I’m just not going to do it!

        Are you up to speed now CAB ?

        You want to talk about “deep dodo” ~ I’ll tell you about some deep dodo!

        Johnny, ~ it was the Right Wing Christian Collation now relabeled the Tea Party that supplying the wing under GWB administration via the SAME media that is now telling you today that it’s all OBAMA that got us in deep DODO.

        Wake up man! ~ The same media that told you that Mitt Romney was a shoe-in to win the 1st chair position. ~ The same media that has palm tree growing in Wisconsin. The same media that markets the best media for sports and new 24/ 7 with GOP tilted commentary delivered by some of the pretties women world wide.
        Foxed News channel is packaged with premium TV channels and sold at discounted prices. Which accounts for it popularity

        They don’t call it Foxed News for nothing. ~ FOXED News repeated whatever Karl Rowe or Dick Chaney tells them too. ~ Have you not figured that out yet? and Karl Rowe and Dick the Snake Chaney are serious liars.

        http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/09/10/face-of-the-monstrous-lie-of-911-is-dick-cheney/

      • tony newbill

        Heres a Thought …. why we cannot find solutions is we spend all our time blaming the other sides leaders instead of finding leaders who will fix the problems !!!!!!!!

      • APN

        I’ll buy that for a dollar!

        I think maybe Rand Paul is moving in the right direction. I’m pretty darn impressed with this individual and he gives me a tiny bit of hope for what may be the “New Leadership” upcoming in Washington.

        At least he is a calm, honest, extremely intelligent individual that understands the problem and seems to be focused on problem solving instead of finger pointing.

        It is a small hope anyway.

        APN

      • Bob666

        Yo Deer,
        “O’Neill said he tried to warn Vice President Dick Cheney that growing budget deficits-expected to top $500 billion this fiscal year alone-posed a threat to the economy. Cheney cut him off. “You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don’t matter,” he said, according to excerpts. Cheney continued: “We won the midterms (congressional elections). This is our due.” A month later, Cheney told the Treasury secretary he was fired”

        Dead-Eye Dick was and still is a snake and in amazes me how soon people forget this.

      • Don 2

        Deerunderwater,

        Are you off your medication again?

      • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

        Don , just address the thread ~ If you have something worth saying ~ just say it.

        It’s 6:20 pm ~ and I’m not wasting time with you. ~

      • Don 2

        What, were you blogging on O.T.? And you ‘still’ wasted time anyway? It was time for a chuckle, and you gave it to me. Thanks!

    • nc

      johnny d, what you wingnuts will not admit is that Obama was up to his lower lip in bush’s DODO WHEN HE TOOK OFFICE! The second worst recession in our history and getting worse by hundreds of thousand of jobs being lost each month BEFORE he took the oath! Then there was the small matter of two UNFUNDED wars going nowhere BEING FOUGHT ON MONEY BORROWED FROM CHINA! GOT ANY IDEA HOW MUCH THE GOVERNMENT PAYS JUST IN INTEREST ON THOSE TWO MISADVENTURES?? GOT ANY IDEA HOW MUCH THE MEDICAL BILL WILL BE FOR THE GOVERNEMENT FOR THE CARE OF 30,000 PLUS SERIOUSLY INJURED YOUNG HEROES FOR THE NEXT 50-60 YEARS?

      IT WILL BE MANY MANY YEARS BEFORE THE daddy’s boy bush DOO DOO QUITS STINKING! 24% APPROVAL IS NOT THE STUFF THAT LEDGENDS ARE MADE OF!

      • tony newbill

        NC the thing about a WingNut is that its a Universal Innovative piece of the Industrial Revolution that advanced the ability of man to Improve the quality of Life and Liberty , and Liberals don’t even stop to consider that effect on their Lives too While they spew their ideology across those who have yet to realize this matter of FACT !!!!

      • S.C.Murf

        nc I would call you a moron but because of your post I find you to be more off than on. How does it feel to not be a moron today? nc/off now that makes sense.

        up the hill
        airborne

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Actually, the great burst of the real estate bubble was a necessary correction to a false market created by the Democrats under Bill Clinton’s direction insane enforcement of the CRA. Look it up. I predicted this bubble and the popping in 1998. Who’s doo doo?

      • tony newbill

        CB we cannot leave Bush 43 out of this Housing Blame as well !! He was the Guy who said the Term Ownership society and DID NOT Force Regulatory action in the rating agencies to force Interest rate increases as the DEBT in the Credit markets was rising in Unsustainable rates with all the Undocumented Incomes that was the result of the Derivatives Deregulation that he could have pushed back against . Yes they talked about it but did not order the SEC to regulate something they could have done even through the democrats were at the time saying there was no Housing Credit threat .

        Watch this , Inside Job , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlIqHlJ9ZSw

      • APN

        CAB said: Bill Clinton’s direction insane enforcement of the CRA.

        That is correct and when you add B. Franks/Dodd…..BOOM!

        Had to happen, no way around it.

        APN

      • cawmun cents

        Bmlame Bush,racecard,point the finger of blame at others…..a Liberal has no other argument…..for years I have been saying this.
        Who knew some would come along and prove it daily?
        Cheers!-CC.

    • Johnny D

      Blame blame blame. I would prefer solution. Obamas solution pours salt into the wounds.There is a better way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

    Hmm? Sound like the GOP is threatening to shoot themselves in the foot if they don’t get their way!

    Ouch! That’s going to be painful for a lot of people. I am prepared to see it happen. ~

    My biggest concerns will be the American’s on foreign soil like Ambassador Chris Stevenson with less than adequate funding to protect, another Benghazi incident we do not need.

    • Steve E

      We had plenty of money to protect those in Benghazi, that was not the problem. the problem was that we didn’t have the leaders with enough guts to give the command to do it.

      • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

        Oh yea! You want to bet ? ~ I say 300 million dollars would buy a lot of security!

        “It also deserves resources. In each of the last two years, Congress has cut President Obama’s request for U.S. Foreign Service and U.S. Agency for International Development staffing levels despite repeated analysis by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, indicating that our embassies are critically understaffed.
        But even more inexcusable are the repeated and deep cuts made to embassy security and construction. Thousands of our diplomatic personnel are serving overseas in facilities that do not come close to meeting the minimal requirements for security established by the so-called Inman commission’s report on overseas diplomatic security to President Ronald Reagan’s secretary of state more than two decades ago.
        Nor is it likely to change anytime soon. In the 2011 continuing resolution, Congress, at the insistence of the House of Representatives, slashed the president’s request for embassy security and construction and forced another cut in fiscal year 2012. Altogether Congress has eliminated $296 million from embassy security and construction in the last two years with additional cuts in other State Department security accounts.
        Sequestration required under the Budget Control Act of 2011 will take more than $100 million more out of the program in 2013 if the current Congress does not overcome the impasse over budget cuts and tax revenues by yearend. Those cuts are largely the result of the draconian and unrealistically low budget caps placed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) on all discretionary spending, falling particularly hard on the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee with responsibility for embassy security.
        This is not the kind of treatment our dedicated government servants and men and women in uniform protecting them deserve.

        Read more? http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/news/2012/09/18/38352/diplomats-national-security-and-the-house-budget/

      • APN

        Well said Steve, we had resources available and in close proximity(within 2 hours) and it was enough firepower to blow Benghazi off the planet. It has NOTHING to do with the lack of resources and Deer-in-Water has no clue what he is talking about.

        Obama was INFORMED by the Secretary of Defense immediately and He DID NOTHING about it. He never even called back to get a status update until it was over and four brave Americans were DEAD. ie. AWOL as CIC

        Then, what did he do, he denied it was a terrorist attack for weeks and the complicit liberal media sold it to masses.

        Shameful behavior for someone sworn to protect and defend we citizens of the USA.

        APN

    • Ron The Marine

      And you are concerned NOW about American Patriots safety on foreign soil after four American Patriots were murdered while YOUR SOB INFIDEL POTUS in the White house could not even be found?? Why don’t you go to the idiot CNN web site where you and your kind belong, this site is for AMERICAN PATRIOTS!!

      Semper Fi, even to the enemy among us!

      • nc

        RON, I SERVED IN THE SAME MARINE CORPS YOU DID! Your First Amendment Right is also my First Amendment Right! I would not object to your commenting on a liberal site! In fact, I would welcome it as a different point of view.

        One question! Where were bush and Reagan when the 20 plus Americans were killed in terrorist attacks on our embassys during THEIR WATCH> AS A MARINE YOU KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT HAPPENS ON YOUR WATCH!

        WITH THE BUSH AND REAGAN RECORDS IT SEEMS YOU WING NUTS ARE JUST TRYIN TO MAKE AN ISSUE OUT OF AN INCIDENT!
        DON’T FORGET REAGANS 241 DEAD SOLDIERS IN LEBANON?

        I, TOO, AM AN AMERICAN PATRIOT AND PROUDLY SERVED MY COUNTRY AND SPENT 35 YEARS DEFENDING MY OATH TO MY STATE AND THE U S CONSTITUTION! CONSERVATIVES DO NOT OWN THE FLAG!

      • Ron The Marine

        ns, you and your twit friends are really pathetic! My text was to sf*t for brains (bambi in water), not to you and your fellow left wing morons, who approve of killing the unborn!!! You and your left wing moron UNSCOTUS also came to wonderful decision back in the early 70,s that it is OK for a sperm sponge whore to kill her unwanted Baby THAT WAS CREATED IN GOD’S IMAGE! DR. Charles Stanley, Pastor of First Baptist Church Atlanta, GA, said prior to the infamous 2008 election, “If you build a grave yard big enough to bury all the USA’s aborted PRECIOUS GOD-GIVEN BABIES that godless women KILL, IT WOULD MEASURE 100 MILES WIDE AND 100 MILES LONG! He further said WITHOUT giving his muslim name “YOU ONLY NEED LOOK AT A PERSONS STANCE ON ABORTION TO KNOW WHOM GOD WOULD HAVE YOU VOTE FOR”! His famous statement “OBEY GOD AND LEAVE THE CONSEQUENCES TO HIM”! really sums it up! And for those who line up with the baby filling left and claim to be a marine? give me a break! you must have been dropped on your sh*t-for-brains head in the delivery room, so get in lock step with your furer! I HOPE ALL “YOU” BABY KILLER SUPPORTERS DIE FROM A GOOD CASE OF LEAD POISONING! TURN OR BURN YOU DUMBAS*!

        SEMPER FI!

      • S.C.Murf

        Ron the Marine, up the hill, airborne brother keep up the good fight Jesus of Nazareth has our backs.

        up the hill
        airborne

      • daleh

        This to NC for his comment to Ron the Marine— If you were a U.S. Marine as you claim, you know or should know that a Marine is NEVER referred to as a ” Soldier”—unless he is a “Seagoing Marine”, then that Marine can be called “Soldier of the Sea”–You referred to the Marines KIA in Lebanon as “241 Soldiers” –You should know better—-

        Semper Fi–

      • nc

        Ron, if you have a problem with Roe v.Wade IN YOUR RANT ON ABORTIONS you need to bitch at the Republicans. Ike and Nixon are the fathers of Roe v. Wade !!!!!! Not the Democrats.

      • tony newbill

        NC Nixon would have initiated the birth control measure due to the release of the National Security study NSSM200

  • Doc Sarvis

    President Obama has been pretty cool on the subject. Congress and the talking heads in the media (right and left) have been causing the most commotion.

    • APN

      Yep Doc, Obama has really been “Cool” on the subject. He suggested it and authored it and now he is against it……”COOOOOLLLLLL MAAAAANNN”

  • ROG W

    ALSO MRS. OWEBOZO IS A TOTAL HYPOCRITE — [offensive comment removed]

    • jim

      Man…that was uncalled for…it does however clarify your depth of intelligence.

  • ROG W

    HE IS RIGHT… IT IS OWEBOZO’S PROBLEM AND ALL EYES WILL POINT TO HIM WHEN IT HAPPENS… IT IS INEVITABLE FOR GOVERNMENT TO GET SPENDING UNDER CONTROL … OWEBOZO WILL INCREASE TAXES AT EVERY POSSIBLE TURN BECAUSE HE IS A COMMUNIST GUN GRABBING FOOL… OWEBOZO…

  • Warrior

    Imagine a CEO or owner of a company or even a “head of household” having to cut back on their spending than railing against themselves. This guy is sooo childish I’ll bet moochelle doesn’t even let him near the family checkbook. This fraud is such a tool. And yes, the tide is beginning to turn. 53% now think the gubmint is a danger to themselves. Duh, even Wink woke up.

  • FreedomFighter

    “Sequestration” has become the new scare word, with the White House and its allies using language like “doomsday,” “deeply destructive,” “irresponsible” and “catastrophic.”

    President Barack Obama sounded the alarm over sequestration in his State of the Union speech. “These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts,” he declared, “… would certainly slow our recovery, and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs.”

    Obama insisted on sequestration, democrates insisted, Repubs have submitted multiple bills to change it…the Obummer regimes has rejected them…

    bring it on, about time government employees felt the same pain as the rest of us. Maybe they will vote for the right guy next time.

    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

  • http://www.booksbyoliver.com OhioRiver

    You are most correct, Chip. Obama is the person who originally supported the sequestration. Now, we see another lie from him & the RINO’s will once again support him. Where is the outrage? Who will stand up & do something?

    A TIME TO STAND by Oliver is a book that’s a must read about decent Americans taking a stand against federal tyranny & end up starting the 2nd American Revolution. The sequel is even better THE DIARY. They are provocative so I recommend both to everyone nowadays.

    We are being scared by D.C. that 800,000 people are going to lose their jobs because of the sequestration, but that is not true. For those who do lose their job then I can only say that now they can start living in poverty as most of us are now living in for years.

    • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

      agreed! Share the wealth, share the pain.

    • rb

      And note that you can bet those 800,000 lost jobs #1 Will be lost to the economy crippled by tax and spend regardless and #2 not one of those jobs will be a government job. I find it odd that no one has mentioned the screeching halt in consumer spending we’ve seen since the working stiff got jacked for 2.5% tax increase January 1st. But those two things couldn’t possibly be related now could they.

      • APN

        Obama’s economic “House of Cards” will begin to fall around the 3rd quarter of this fiscal year. When ALL the new OBAMACARE taxes kick in in 2014, well, it’s not going to be pretty.

        I know numerous young folks that are very upset with the lower net pay now due to higher taxes, gas prices, electric bills, food prices, etc etc etc. All I’ve said to them is; I TOLD YOU SO but you didn’t believe the ole man. If you think that you are going to get something for nothing, well, shame on you and maybe you should vet your candidate a little better next time.

        The Dems will have a very difficult time staying in power after 2014.

        APN

      • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

        APN say ” If you think that you are going to get something for nothing, well, shame on you and maybe you should vet your candidate a little better next time.”

        FREE LUNCH? ~ Demanding people to pay for their Health Care is a FREE LUNCH?

        Maybe you should rethink your argument? You are not making any sense!

        You and I are being required to insure up ~ that is what you’re angry about! ~

        It was a FREE LUNCH, for some and Federally discounted pricing for others ~

        A level playing field clearly don’t set well with you it seems. oh well, ~ be penalized or insure up ~the cost is the same ~ I’m tired of carrying your dead weight with my county and federal tax dollars.

      • APN

        DIW said: DIW said: A level playing field clearly don’t set well with you it seems. oh well, ~ be penalized or insure up ~the cost is the same ~ I’m tired of carrying your dead weight with my county and federal tax dollars.

        Maybe you should rethink your reading skills, DIW.

        Where did I express or imply that I was looking for a FREE MEAL? Hell, I’ve paid enough taxes in my life to support 20 damn families! I’ve probably pay more in taxes in a year than you make!

        Now, my point was, since you missed it, was, these young very NAIVE Obamanites thought they were going to get something for nothing…..Get it??

        APN

      • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

        APN says, “Now, my point was, since you missed it, was, these young very NAIVE Obamanites thought they were going to get something for nothing…..Get it??”

        I guess not, ~ or you are a mind reader, ~ It’s clear,~ time to pony up or belong to the “state” with abridges rights and privileges.

        If you are a documented “do nothing” you become ward of the state. ~ do you see where this is going? ~ Do you? Really?

        It’s confusing I know for a narrow mind, but think about it for a week or two.

        Produce or support. ~ Just selling drugs and puzzy is not enough anymore.

        It’s one thing to have a insurer to deny you for whatever reason they wish to make up , and another to simply refuse to invest in health care because you are not required too.

        I have a monster of a computer whiz, ~ a young father that I depend on. ~ There is nothing too complicated for him and I pay him well. ~ 125.00 per hour for as long as it takes to make my “stuff” work!

        While ironing out some problems last week ~ he shared his concerns about having to fork out health care for his young family, a wife and two babies. ~ He said it was going to cost him 2500.00 to 3,000.00 dollars. ~ While today,he has no coverage at all.

        I’m healthy, my family is healthy he says, ~ we take care of ourselves ~ we do this , we do that. ~ we are bright, we are cleaver~ he says.

        i said , yea I understand ~ You never been sick or had a child’s life to hang in the balance between life or death. ~and until you have ~ this conversation is wasted ~

        In the the last three year ~ my family has had two incidents ~ a sister-in-law that came down with “swine flu” and a niece that contracted an Ecol i virus ~ they both almost died, spending 6 weeks in ICU. ~ the hospital bill alone over 250,000 dollars.

        Is your baby worth $250,000 dollars? ~~ hmm?

        I’m willing to guess that your baby is worth 10 times $250,000.00.

        The community helped my family with this bill, ~ and I will be forever grateful ~but let it not be said, ~ that as a family we did nothing to contribute to the health care system. If it not for me or mine ~ it’s for another family in great need,

        It’s called paying forward ~ and being a stand up person in the community.

        Life is not all about you! ~ it’s about us all. There will come a day ~ you will wish that you had.

      • APN

        You must be a mind-reader DIW. Your comments imply that I’m not capable of compassion for others or do not care about my fellow man. Helping someone help themselves is compassion and caring. We would do much better to teach a person to fish than provide them on a daily basis with “FREE” fish or “FREE STUFF”.

        Personal responsibility is a concept that WORKS for all of us. If you go to the store and buy a New Car, 52″ flat screen and Android phone, before you have paid for INSURANCE, well, that just isn’t being responsible, now is it? Foolish maybe and unfortunately WE GET TO PAY FOR IT!

        Again, my point is, we are on a very foolish path with our young folks that will be the greatest disaster to date. A generation of people who “Thinks” that they are “Entitled” to something that they did not EARN but they “THINK” that they will have the same FREEDOMS or LIBERTY going forward. Those who voted for Obama are going to get a very large dose of reality in the end.

        It’s called being a SLAVE to the state via “Progressive-Marxism”.

        APN

blog comments powered by Disqus
Bottom