Jumping Ship

What a difference 2 weeks makes! The following is a quote from Arlen Spector regarding his place in the Republican party:

"If we lose my seat they have 60 Democrats, they will pass card check, you will have the Obama tax increases, they will carry out his big spending plans. So the 41st Republican, whose name is Arlen Specter is vital to stopping tax increases, passage of card check, and the Obama big spending plans....Those 41 seats are the only thing standing between a Democratic onslaught of higher taxes, more spending and card check."

"I am a Republican and I am going to run on the Republican ticket in the Republican primary.”

Specter is facing a tough Republican competitor in the 2010 Senate primaries and switched parties to run unopposed as a Democrat. Although I respect the fact he wants to remain in power, let’s see if holds true to the aforementioned comments.

My guess is his stance on card check will now go out the window….he’s already helped Obama with his spending plans!

So.....with a filibuster-proof majority of 60 Democrats, Obama's radical agenda will proceed unopposed...unless some Blue Dog Democrats decide to grow a set.

If that's the case, there should be NO reason we are not all living in prosperity within 4 years.

Right?

Rhetorical Straw Men

“There are those who will have you believe people living with illness should be dragged out into the street and shot…..but, we are a better nation than that, and free healthcare should be a right for everyone……”

I’ve heard several people bring to light Obama’s rhetorical cunning when it comes to his ad hominem attacks on “straw men”. The straw man argument involves attacking an unpopular and discredited view in order to validate a point you are attempting to make.

Obama did this yesterday when announcing his plan to fund scientific research with 3% of our GDP.

He said, "...there are those who say, we cannot invest in science.."

Really? Who are these people?

I think most people agree that “investing” in scientific research is a good thing. Now, the manner in which we invest is another matter. Do we encourage private investment through tax incentives tax incentives, or do we “invest” by setting up government laboratories to prove the existence of manmade global warming?

Either way, it is a gross mischaracterization of the true landscape of the debate.

During the stimulus debacle, Obama attempted to justify his unnecessary $800 stimulus package by saying, "Nothing is not an option. You didn't send me to Washington to do nothing" and "There seems to be a set of folks who -- I don't doubt their sincerity -- who just believe that we should do nothing".

Yes, doing “nothing” would have been foolish; however, it was not even part of the discussion.

He also did this when he lifted the ban on embryonic stem-cell research. He made it appear that those who were against federal funding were against science in general. This was not true, and those who are against it are simply taking a moral stance.

This form of trickery is nothing new to politics, but Obama seems to use it with ease. He makes it appear as if he is always taking the “high road” by misrepresenting the opposing view point.

The Teleprompter Presidency

Increasing Union Power=Increased Political Power

I had written a post several months back calling for more “regulations” for Unions. I am fully supportive of the rights of workers to assemble. It is a matter of freedom of speech and should be protected.

However, we are fully aware of the fact that Unions have been a detriment to our country’s economy, especially within the past 50 years. Their purpose has shifted from protecting the safety of its members and working to negotiate “fair” wages to using bullying tactics to shore up inflated wages and pensions. This has completely decimated our automobile industry by increasing the costs of manufacturing each vehicle.

If our government is going to regulate industry for the sake of preventing economic meltdowns, then it is also important to recognize and address the burden Unions place upon our economic system.

However, legislators are attempting to increase Labor Union power by implementing “card check”, and Obama’s Labor Department just repealed a financial disclosure law put in place by the Bush administration. This will reverse a measure put in place by Bush’s team, which increased Labor Union transparency.

Obviously, the AFL-CIO is calling the shots within the Obama administration.

Mark Mix, president of the pro-business National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, says "The department's decision not to protect simple union disclosure protections creates increased vulnerability for American workers and should serve notice to legislators that now is not the time to grant union bosses more unchecked power over workers and our economy"

Bush’s Labor Department had argued that their regulatory measures were implemented to "bring to light a wide variety of financial transactions and arrangements - whether proper or improper - that pose conflicts of interest arising from the relationships between unions, their officers and employees, employers and businesses."

I’m all for protecting the rights of workers, however, we have witnessed an overextending AFL-CIO and UAW singlehandedly tearing apart our auto industries.

Once again, it appears Obama is simply ignoring the reasons for our economy’s collapse for the sake of political correctness and expediency.

More Government Control

"With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people? It sure sounds like it." - James Inhofe

As if the US economy and industrial sectors are not already feeling the perils of high taxation and regulation, House Democrats, Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, are proposing a sweeping climate change bill that aspires to a 20% reduction in Carbon emissions by 2020.

Yes, Carbon……the bogeyman of the Left. With Carbon particles taking up 30 out of 100,000 air particles, one can imagine how a 20% reduction will save humanity.

Al Gore and Newt Gingrich both testified on the hill today.

Al Gore says this proposed legislation is “One of the most important pieces of legislation ever introduced in the Congress.”

“I believe this legislation has the moral significance equivalent to that of the civil rights legislation of the 1960s and the Marshall Plan of the late 1940s,” he says.

Although I do appreciate a reduction in pollution, let’s do so for the sake of air quality rather than under the guise of global warming.

Gingrich says, “Make no mistake about it: This bill amounts to a $1 to $2 trillion energy tax levied on a struggling economy, which is destructive and wrong.”

He is correct. Our struggling economy does not need the extra tax burdens imposed by this ridiculous legislation. Obviously, this will translate into higher energy prices for the consumer, which Obama has approved of in the past. With higher energy prices, alterative energy will slowly become more attractive.

Isn’t it painfully obvious what is occurring here? The $1 to $2 in new taxes will be enough revenue to pay for Universal Healthcare. It is a crafty scheme: Dupe the American people into fearing Armageddon-like effects from Global Warming, which will justify higher taxes on energy producers, which will break the pocket books of consumers, which will justify a need for free healthcare, which will be paid for by taxing the energy companies…..yada yada yada.

As well, we are losing manufacturing jobs daily to China, which is intelligent enough to dismiss the erroneous claims of manmade global warming. Without their help, our efforts to curb Carbon and save the planet will be fruitless anyway.

Our loss of manufacturing and energy sector jobs to China will diminish America’s economic standing even further and lend more credence to the need for regular citizens to depend on government intervention.

It is a slippery slope, folks……….

ACLU and Obama on Same Page

The ACLU filed a petition under the 2003 “Freedom of Information Act” to have confidential photos of Afghanistan and Iraqi prisoner abuse made public. The ACLU sued our government to force release of these photos. A judge ruled in their favor and, of course, Obama complied.

First of all, there is absolutely no reason why these photos must be released. What do we hope to gain by this? Obama has declared he will not permit extraordinary measures against prisoners of war under any circumstances, so the photos are obviously not needed as a preventative.

Secondly, he has vowed not to punish or prosecute any of those who carried out extreme measures, right? Since the ACLU is acquiring these photos, it is painfully obvious they will work with the “victims” in order to launch civil suits against our government. Obama is cooperating and encouraging lawsuits against those who did their best to keep us safe in “unprecedented” times.

By allowing the release of these photos, Obama is essentially laying down the groundwork for embarrassing and costly lawsuits against all officials involved in extreme interrogations, as well as our own government.

He could have continued to fight the lawsuit by the ACLU and taken it all the way to the Supreme Court.

But we have realized Obama has no shame, and his attempts at strengthening our integrity and credibility will have the opposite effect. Obama claims that our “torture” policies have incited hatred of the US and served as recruiting tools for Al Qaeda. It’s naïve to believe Radical Islamists simply hate America due to our treatment of Radical Islamists while in our custody….obviously there is a more compelling reason why Religious extremists attack Western interests.

I’m wondering what these pictures will do for terrorist recruiting?

His strategy is obviously to continue to besmirch and cloud the image of our previous administration…as if that is even necessary. This way he can always push blame on Bush and continue to deflect blame like a Teflon coated weasel.

Daniel Ortega Bends Barack Over

I was reflecting this morning on Obama’s first 100 days in office. I am relieved and frightened at the same time that he is everything I knew he would be….relieved, because I am glad I do not have a reason in the world to like this guy. Nice to have a clear villain, isn’t it! Frightened, because he is a radical who aspires to loot this country of our founding principles.

One of my many concerns during the election was that Obama is an apologist for America and shameful of our past. We all saw the tell-tale signs. Although America has done some reprehensible things in the past, so has every other country.

How often do we hear other leaders apologize for their country's past actions? Why should we?

And I refuse to accept a president that simply exploits the negatives. How are we to trust he will act in our best interest when he makes no indication of his pride in our country? He simply speaks of our “potential” rather than acknowledging our beauty in its current form.

Try doing that with your wife!

This type of aloof indifference toward our country was evidenced this past weekend during the “Summer of the Americas” love/hate fest in Trinidad and Tobago.

Obama sat through a 50-minute diatribe against America by Nicaraguan president, Daniel Ortega. He ranted against our imperialistic nature and blamed most of the conflicts in Central America on The United States. He said, "We all got together, united so we could defeat the expansionist policy of the United States."

Obama countered with a speech of his own and made no effort to dispel the hostility toward our country. Instead, he chose to simply remove any doubts or blame against Obama himself.

Narcissist??

"I'm grateful President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old," Said Obama. Everything is not you, Barack. You are the leader of our country, so you must at least pretend to represent us and not filter between personal attacks and attacks on our country.

When asked by a reporter what he thought of Ortega’s speech, Obama answered, "It was 50 minutes long. That's what I thought."

Wow.

Clinton was asked repeatedly about her thoughts on the hate filled speech. "I thought the cultural performance was fascinating," Clinton said. Asked again about the Ortega speech, Clinton said: "To have those first class Caribbean entertainers on all on one stage and to see how much was done in such a small amount of space, I was overwhelmed."

To simply avoid commenting is beyond the pale. And cultural performances usually suck, so don't try and gloss it over!

I refuse to accept as my president a man lacking the courage and conviction to defend my country against the rants of petty dictators. It appears he will not only allow for verbal attacks, but he seems to be inviting another terrorist attack by weakening our intelligence community.