Success comes from the truth, not from lies.
The U.N.'s climate chief is stepping down. From the Associated Press:
"De Boer, 55, was appointed in 2006 to shepherd through an agreement to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which required industrial countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions an average 5 percent.
He said the high point of his efforts was the agreement by developing countries, reached at the 2007 conference in Bali, Indonesia, to join in efforts to contain global warming in return for financial and technical help from the wealthy nations."
Is anyone else actually noticing? The poor nations joined hands in an effort to extort trillions of dollars from the richer nations. That is exactly what that last paragragh says. Gee, I wonder how hard it was to get poor countries to join forces to rob the rich. "Hey, Myanmar - if you join in on this hoax, you can get 2 billion dollars from the U.S. Since you are not an industrial nation, you don't have to do a thing except take the money and use it to build your anti-American army."
Another point worthy of note - De Boer resigns on the heels of the world discovering that the U.N.'s report on climate change is full of more holes than a swiss cheese, and contains more factual errors and outright lies than the liberals' rewriting of history.
Any future built upon lies is a dark future.
/
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Do You Believe In Magic?
Most educated, sane folks do not believe in magic. But apparently the Obama administration does. As I listened to his speech this morning (between bouts of laughter), I noticed that his administration not only believes in magic, but bases policies on it.
For example, Obama stated that he would increase the number of exports of American products. Now THAT would be magic of the highest order. For one thing, American products are so expensive because of the costs of unions and taxes that other nations simply do not want them - why import $50 shoes from America when they can import $10 shoes from China? Second, in order to SHIP product (assuming anyone wants to import them), we must first have product to ship. We do not. Very little is "Made in the USA" anymore. So, as usual, Obama "speechifies" a great speech, but it has no real content. It relies upon magic.
He went on to say that 95 million folks got tax cuts from his Stimulus Bill. First, according to the IRS only 60 million filers even pay any taxes. Therefore, IF his statement is true, then 35 million people who pay no taxes got a "tax cut". In other words, increased welfare. But in looking over his claim, I do not know of one single person who has claimed they saw any tax cut. I certainly did not see one. If there is ANYONE out there who saw a tax cut that was really a tax cut (and not simply a deferment on their withholding), I would like to hear from you.
Again, it would appear those "tax cuts" are some sort of magic - slight of hand.
Obama also said that Republicans, who voted against the Stimulus bill, were all too willing to attend ribbon cutting ceremonies of projects paid for by the stimulus. That, too, would be magic, since the GAO has already stated that of all stimulus money spent to date, 87% went to DEMOCRAT districts and for UNION jobs.
He then stated that he and Biden were proud to claim that the Stimulus bill did not include any earmarks. That is not magic - it is an out-right lie. Again the GOA gives data that shows over $4,000,000,000 of the stimulus money went for pork projects, including a water park in Florida, golf course maintenance, under-the-highway tunnels for turtles, and saving some mouse in San Francisco.
Frankly, I do not believe in magic. And I do not believe a word that comes out of Obama's lips.
/
For example, Obama stated that he would increase the number of exports of American products. Now THAT would be magic of the highest order. For one thing, American products are so expensive because of the costs of unions and taxes that other nations simply do not want them - why import $50 shoes from America when they can import $10 shoes from China? Second, in order to SHIP product (assuming anyone wants to import them), we must first have product to ship. We do not. Very little is "Made in the USA" anymore. So, as usual, Obama "speechifies" a great speech, but it has no real content. It relies upon magic.
He went on to say that 95 million folks got tax cuts from his Stimulus Bill. First, according to the IRS only 60 million filers even pay any taxes. Therefore, IF his statement is true, then 35 million people who pay no taxes got a "tax cut". In other words, increased welfare. But in looking over his claim, I do not know of one single person who has claimed they saw any tax cut. I certainly did not see one. If there is ANYONE out there who saw a tax cut that was really a tax cut (and not simply a deferment on their withholding), I would like to hear from you.
Again, it would appear those "tax cuts" are some sort of magic - slight of hand.
Obama also said that Republicans, who voted against the Stimulus bill, were all too willing to attend ribbon cutting ceremonies of projects paid for by the stimulus. That, too, would be magic, since the GAO has already stated that of all stimulus money spent to date, 87% went to DEMOCRAT districts and for UNION jobs.
He then stated that he and Biden were proud to claim that the Stimulus bill did not include any earmarks. That is not magic - it is an out-right lie. Again the GOA gives data that shows over $4,000,000,000 of the stimulus money went for pork projects, including a water park in Florida, golf course maintenance, under-the-highway tunnels for turtles, and saving some mouse in San Francisco.
Frankly, I do not believe in magic. And I do not believe a word that comes out of Obama's lips.
/
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Deja Vu
From a news release today: "In an interview on MSNBC this morning, newly retiring Sen. Evan Bayh declared the American political system "dysfunctional," riddled with "brain-dead partisanship" and permanent campaigning. Bayh stated that the American people needed to deliver a "shock" to Congress by voting incumbents out in mass and replacing them with people interested in reforming the process and governing for the good of the people, rather than deep-pocketed special-interest groups."
Now, if you have been reading my blogs for any length of time, you might remember that I have been calling for the voting out of ALL incumbents for years. The only way to clean house is to sweep ALL the floors clean and toss the dirt OUT.
I never thought I would see the day when a Democrat would agree with me. But Bayh has always been a man whom I have respected, though I may not have agreed with his beliefs. He has always been a man with honor.
Apparently my respect for him is well-founded.
/
Now, if you have been reading my blogs for any length of time, you might remember that I have been calling for the voting out of ALL incumbents for years. The only way to clean house is to sweep ALL the floors clean and toss the dirt OUT.
I never thought I would see the day when a Democrat would agree with me. But Bayh has always been a man whom I have respected, though I may not have agreed with his beliefs. He has always been a man with honor.
Apparently my respect for him is well-founded.
/
Thank You, Joe
I always appreciate a good laugh, and this time we were all treated to a great one.
As every person on the planet knows, then Senators Joe Biden and Barak Obama both voted against the surge in Iraq, and both worked tirelessly to give up in Iraq and pull out.
Now that Iraq has quieted down quite a bit because of the Bush "surge", Obama and Biden just jumped up with the statement, "Iraq may well be the crowning achievement of the Obama Administration."
The sheer, unmitigated gall of them trying to take credit for Iraq. I laughed so hard I nearly had to change my pants.
On second thought, the way the Obama administration is going, letting the Bush policy in Iraq work may well be his only achievement.
/
As every person on the planet knows, then Senators Joe Biden and Barak Obama both voted against the surge in Iraq, and both worked tirelessly to give up in Iraq and pull out.
Now that Iraq has quieted down quite a bit because of the Bush "surge", Obama and Biden just jumped up with the statement, "Iraq may well be the crowning achievement of the Obama Administration."
The sheer, unmitigated gall of them trying to take credit for Iraq. I laughed so hard I nearly had to change my pants.
On second thought, the way the Obama administration is going, letting the Bush policy in Iraq work may well be his only achievement.
/
Monday, February 8, 2010
Health Care Summit
President Obama wants a summit on health care, and has (finally) invited the Republicans to join in the discussion, supposedly in an attempt at bipartisanship. But is that what this is really about?
The president has already said he does not plan on changing what the Democrats have offered in their bill. He does not plan on starting over. So just what IS the game plan?
It's not a summit. It's a set-up.
I will go on record right here and now - I think the "bipartisan summit" is a sham, and an intentional sham. There will be no real attempt at bipartisanship, and I can almost guarantee that Obama and the Democrats will let Republicans speak, but will refuse to adopt any meaningful Republican ideas.
One of two things will happen:
1) Either the Democrats will reject any meaningful Republican ideas out of hand, and then go forward saying, "Gee, we tried to be bipartisan, but those obstructionist Republicans just would not cooperate." Or...
2) The Democrats will choose some small, meaningless part of a Republican idea and offer to include it if the Republicans will back the Democrat bill. Obviously, the Republicans would be forced to refuse because they really are not getting anything at all. And again the Democrats will go forth and say, "Gee, we tried to be bipartisan. We even offered to adopt part of their plan, but those obstructionist Republicans just would not cooperate."
In other words, it will be business as usual, the same old Chicago-style politics we have been witnessing for a year. The health care summit will only be a bogus attempt to make the Democrats APPEAR to be bipartisan while making the Republicans APPEAR to be obstructionist. But the reverse would actually be the truth.
Suffice it to say that I seriously doubt the Democrats have any intention of seriously listening to, or adopting any Republican ideas to cut health care costs and get more people covered.
Time will tell. But for the last year, the Democrat's idea of "bipartisan" means they write the bill, then Republicans shut up and vote for it. I have a newsflash for the Democrats - that line of thinking is why you are now losing so many Democrat strongholds like Massachusetts and New Jersey.
Bipartisanship means both sides get to provide input and write the bill, so members of both sides can vote for it. It's called compromise. But that is a word that the administration, Pelosi and Reid simply do not understand.
/
The president has already said he does not plan on changing what the Democrats have offered in their bill. He does not plan on starting over. So just what IS the game plan?
It's not a summit. It's a set-up.
I will go on record right here and now - I think the "bipartisan summit" is a sham, and an intentional sham. There will be no real attempt at bipartisanship, and I can almost guarantee that Obama and the Democrats will let Republicans speak, but will refuse to adopt any meaningful Republican ideas.
One of two things will happen:
1) Either the Democrats will reject any meaningful Republican ideas out of hand, and then go forward saying, "Gee, we tried to be bipartisan, but those obstructionist Republicans just would not cooperate." Or...
2) The Democrats will choose some small, meaningless part of a Republican idea and offer to include it if the Republicans will back the Democrat bill. Obviously, the Republicans would be forced to refuse because they really are not getting anything at all. And again the Democrats will go forth and say, "Gee, we tried to be bipartisan. We even offered to adopt part of their plan, but those obstructionist Republicans just would not cooperate."
In other words, it will be business as usual, the same old Chicago-style politics we have been witnessing for a year. The health care summit will only be a bogus attempt to make the Democrats APPEAR to be bipartisan while making the Republicans APPEAR to be obstructionist. But the reverse would actually be the truth.
Suffice it to say that I seriously doubt the Democrats have any intention of seriously listening to, or adopting any Republican ideas to cut health care costs and get more people covered.
Time will tell. But for the last year, the Democrat's idea of "bipartisan" means they write the bill, then Republicans shut up and vote for it. I have a newsflash for the Democrats - that line of thinking is why you are now losing so many Democrat strongholds like Massachusetts and New Jersey.
Bipartisanship means both sides get to provide input and write the bill, so members of both sides can vote for it. It's called compromise. But that is a word that the administration, Pelosi and Reid simply do not understand.
/
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Simple Fiscal Responsibility
Simple Fiscal Responsibility
Everyone knows our country is way too far in debt, and it is getting worse by the minute. And in spite of paying our representatives and their staff a total of over 5 billion dollars a year, they seem incapable of solving the problem. Strange, since the answer has always been right in front of them.
According to the Constitution, Congress should not be paying for ANYTHING that is not of significant national value. In other words, the family dude in Idaho should not be paying taxes to build a golf course in Florida.
Fully 30% of all federal income taxes are used for non-federal use, such as grants, local bridges, schools, and the list goes on forever (Congress recently approved $100,000 for some guy to put on a PUPPET SHOW!)
So, the solution is simple, and I will list it in steps:
1) Pass a constitutional amendment making it illegal for the federal government to spend any taxpayer funds on anything that does not have significant national purpose, for the general welfare of the nation as a whole, or the national defense etc.
2) This reduces the need for 30% of all income taxes, so all federal income taxes should be reduced by 20%. The remaining 10% excess taxes the government collects would be required, BY LAW, to be applied to the national debt until paid. Once paid, the remaining 10% would also be stricken from federal income taxes.
3) Since states would now be responsible (as they should be) for all local expenditures, they can raise state taxes to garnish 15% of the 20% the people are saving on federal taxes. That extra 15% would replace lost federal funding.
4) The average taxpayer saves a total of 5% of his taxes.
There you have it:
a) A balanced federal budget, with the deficit being paid down quickly and relatively easily
b) states regain their sovereignty
c) taxpayers save 5% on taxes
d) Congressmen cannot use pork to buy their seat in the next election - they will have to EARN their seats
e) Anyone wishing to put on a puppet show must do so at their own expense
Simple. And frankly, it is already in the Constitution.
/
Everyone knows our country is way too far in debt, and it is getting worse by the minute. And in spite of paying our representatives and their staff a total of over 5 billion dollars a year, they seem incapable of solving the problem. Strange, since the answer has always been right in front of them.
According to the Constitution, Congress should not be paying for ANYTHING that is not of significant national value. In other words, the family dude in Idaho should not be paying taxes to build a golf course in Florida.
Fully 30% of all federal income taxes are used for non-federal use, such as grants, local bridges, schools, and the list goes on forever (Congress recently approved $100,000 for some guy to put on a PUPPET SHOW!)
So, the solution is simple, and I will list it in steps:
1) Pass a constitutional amendment making it illegal for the federal government to spend any taxpayer funds on anything that does not have significant national purpose, for the general welfare of the nation as a whole, or the national defense etc.
2) This reduces the need for 30% of all income taxes, so all federal income taxes should be reduced by 20%. The remaining 10% excess taxes the government collects would be required, BY LAW, to be applied to the national debt until paid. Once paid, the remaining 10% would also be stricken from federal income taxes.
3) Since states would now be responsible (as they should be) for all local expenditures, they can raise state taxes to garnish 15% of the 20% the people are saving on federal taxes. That extra 15% would replace lost federal funding.
4) The average taxpayer saves a total of 5% of his taxes.
There you have it:
a) A balanced federal budget, with the deficit being paid down quickly and relatively easily
b) states regain their sovereignty
c) taxpayers save 5% on taxes
d) Congressmen cannot use pork to buy their seat in the next election - they will have to EARN their seats
e) Anyone wishing to put on a puppet show must do so at their own expense
Simple. And frankly, it is already in the Constitution.
/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)