Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Top 25 Numbers of the Obama Administration

It's been quite awhile since I've written a blog post.  But I think it is time to write again.  This first post is in response to the 47% comment made by Romney at that fundraiser last spring.  Now, you won't get an argument from me about whether he articulated his point well or not.  I don't think he did.  But a simple reading of the text will reveal that the 47%, as he put it, actually represents the percentage of people he surmises would never vote for him no matter what.  He did NOT say that he didn't care about those people.  What he DID say was that he is not going to waste time trying to convince them to vote for him.  That he was more concerned about winning the votes of the 6-10% who are undecided.

That being said, even IF you could turn his 47% into a negative number and attach it to his campaign, let's take a look at the top 25 'numbers' associated with Obama and let's see if they sway any of those 6-10% undecided.

1) +8.0% unemployment - 44 straight months

2) 11.4% TRUE unemployment

3) 14.8% REAL unemployment

4) 23million unemployed or underemployed

5) 47million on food stamps

6) $16Trillion in Debt....YES, Mr. President, WE remember.

7) 1 in 6 living in poverty

8) 8.2% decline in median income per household

9) more new welfare recipients than jobs created last month

10) 6million middle class families paying the Obamacare TAX

11) 4 dead Americans in Libya

12) 100+ golf rounds

13) 150+ fundraisers (including one the day after 4 dead Americans)

14) less than 40%  of intelligence briefings attended

15) who know how many dead because of Fast and Furious

16) 1/3 of the Gitmo detainees to be released...nicely timed announcement after Libya

17) $3.85/gallon gas

18) 40+ czars with no Senate approval

19) $1.8T/year revised cost of Obamacare

20) $716B taken from Medicare to make Obamacare APPEAR revenue neutral

21) $300K...average cost from the stimulus per job created or saved (and that's ONLY if you believe the Obama Administration's claim that the Stimulus created or saved 4 million jobs)

22) >$500M to Solyndra

23) $3000 average increase in the cost of family health insurance.

24) $2500 what Obama said would be the average DECREASE in the cost of health insurance through Obamacare.

25) ZERO - number of budgets passed in the last 3+ years

Let's hope that last number also represents the number of additional years Obama remains our president.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

What is Newt Really Attacking?

Look, people, let's get this straight about what exactly Newt did when attacking some of the practices of Mitt/Bain Capital. He is not attacking capitalism. He is attacking certain practices of Bain Capital that are, in his mind, a CORRUPTION of the capitalistic system. Attacking one person's corrupt VERSION of capitalism is NOT the same as attacking capitalism.

Republicans took a vow a couple of years ago to place a moratorium on earmarks. Earmarks, as Santorum and RP have shown, are very much a constitutional principle. The stand against earmarks was not a stand against the Constitution. It was a stand against what has become a CORRUPT version of earmarks...where they are used as a payback to political supporters.

The problem with Bain and Mitt is not that they are capitalists...but that in some of their acquisitions they stepped over the line and abused the capitalist system to gain bigger profits.

The argument that this somehow sounds like the liberals when they attack capitalism is absurd. Perhaps the complaints are similar but what's wrong with pointing out problems that are occurring in our system. The big difference is that when liberals complain about things like this their solution is END capitalism. Newt is nowhere even remotely suggesting that. He IS, however, suggesting that there IS a place for us, even as conservatives, to say that there ARE corruptions within our system...and it IS our duty to point them out AND offer ways to fix them in our efforts to restore integrity to that system.

The entire TP movement is ABOUT pointing out the corruptions in our system...our VERY GOOD system of government. Are WE advocating ending that system and installing a different one? Hell no. We are looking to weed out the corruption and fix the problems that are giving our VERY GOOD SYSTEM a bad name.

Newt is doing nothing different. We should be embracing what Newt is doing. The entire OWS movement is trying to convince enough people to join them in their efforts to replace our entire economic and political system because of corruptions IN that system just like what Newt is pointing out in Bain Capital. Instead of fighting against OWS by denying that such corruptions exist...we should be the one LEADING the fight to weed out those corruptions to restore the integrity of the economic and political systems we cherish so highly.