Tag Archives: President Obama

You didn’t succeed on your own museum planned

19 Jul

Days after President Obama stated that no one succeeds in America without government help, the Mars candy company has given $5 million dollars to open an American Enterprise exhibit at the Smithsonian Museum.

The exhibit will showcase American business and innovation dating back to the 1700’s.

Have to wonder if the main exhibits will be American inventions and success stories or samples of the the government assistance that got made them successful like the book anchor sized rules and regulations book?

I for one hope they have a live-action example of a government bureaucracy office so we can see just what they do all day. Of course even better would be a government lawyer in action. Perhaps they can include an interactive piece as well, maybe one where the visitors attempt to sneak a cupcake into a cafeteria.

M&M maker Mars gives Smithsonian $5M for exhibit from CBSNEWS


Russia Pre-empt’s a call for foul

5 Jul

From the LA Times; Russian official: Romney’s hard line could bring ‘full-scale crisis’

This is what Russia is saying in reply to a comment by Mitt Romney about Russia still being the biggest threat to the United States.

“We don’t think that for us Romney will be an easy partner,” said Pushkov, an ally of President Vladimir Putin. “We think that Romney will be, on the rhetorical side, a replay of the Bush administration.”

Sounds like a problem for Russia, but good news for the United States. Shouldn’t a country put its own interests before prioritizing those of other nations? Until the day Russia does something that’s not in its own interest but that of another nations, we’re best worrying about ourselves and our prosperity(and its rate of disappearance) than of Russia.

And guess what, Romney’s right. Russia is the biggest threat to the United States. China may be the economical powerhouse, but Russia still has the means to throw it’s weight around. While they may be in the early stages of rebuilding their military structure and thus aren’t fully prepared to stand toe-to-toe with the United States, who’s the country that’s been assisting Syria, Iran, Somalia, Zimbabwe, and a dozen other nations? Oh yeah Russia, that’s who.

Never in the course of history has Russia cared about any nation other than itself.  Nor does it care of the means and its affect on other nations in its search for success and dominance. From the Czars of old to present day, Russia looks out for number 1.

Why should the United States be any different? Russia may no longer be communist, but I sure as heck don’t want to live there and I don’t want that influence having any more presence than the minimum. Particularly if it comes from U.S. pussy footing.

The National Review has an excellent summary article up right now titled, The Obama Foreign Policy, by the ever respected Victor Davis Hanson. If you can stand seeing how fall we’ve fallen it’s a quick informative read.

The Presidents right, except he’s confused

23 Jun

Nope, I’ve got someone else in mind

Today’s popular trending story is about the Presidents statements that we need a “bottum-up” economic system instead of the “top-down” economic system.

He’s right, we need a system of economics built by the owners, workers, entrepreneurs, customers, and market needs.

So why is he continually pushing for more miniscule, uselss, headache-inducing laws and regulations on business and even life itself.

Much like freedom, an economic system that focuses on the needs of the population is more dynamic and resilient than one in which central planning and government/big business preferences are put ahead of common sense and reality.

There’s two problems with the President’s statement. First is the assumption that Republicans would take every single law and regulation off the books. Last I checked Republicans and Anarchists don’t sit too close on the political spectrum.

Second is the Presidents failure to realize he has the ability to enable this “bottom-up” system he speaks of, only he’s actually moved things in the other direction.

You know how I know you’re gay…

10 May

Do I care if gays can get married? No, what does that have to do with me? But it matters for a lot of other people and now the President has stated his “evolved” position on the issue. Taking personal opinions out of the issue, let’s look at this from a pure policy point of view. Here’s the video of his answering the question.

So the President has “evolved” his position from just a few years ago and now supports gay marriage, but thinks it’s the states individual right to decide the issue for themselves. Interesting that he takes that position on this issue, but not on things like healthcare or immigration.

This entire to do is another demonstration of this Presidents spineless manner of leadership. If it wasn’t for Vice President Bidens forcing the issue, it would have never come up. For all the gay excitement over his new position they don’t realize he would have never done anything had he not been forced to.

Because of this the gay community shouldn’t get too excited, because as soon as it’s politically expedient, he’ll throw them under the bus, just like he does with everyone else.

My gut feeling is that the President will lose votes on this issue. The gays were already going to vote for him, but now he risks alienating those who would be against this position.

The Presidents biggest problem isn’t that his decisions are polarizing like this, it’s that he’s not a leader. Every time there’s a problem it’s someone else’s fault and his measures just haven’t had enough time to work or Congress won’t let him do what he wants. A real leader doesn’t make excuses, they get results.

The gay marriage issue will polarize some people, but the President still has to run on his accomplishments, of which he has very little. Sadly that still won’t stop millions of people from voting for him.

For an interesting look at this issue, visit gaypatriot.net

Julia, we hardly knew ya

4 May

Credit goes to Dan Mitchell for finding this. I’m mooching his story about moochers, but with good reason as it is one of the best blogs about economics today. It’s a regular must-read for anyone who thinks it good to know what you’re doing and have a plan.  Bookmark it or follow it if you’re on wordpress. http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/

Mitchell has discovered this nifty little timeline called The Life of Julia that can be found on BarackObama.com. The Life of Julia is one of government handouts, though you could say demands just as easily. The timeline chronicles Julia’s life from age 3 to 67. Info is provided on random ages about what Julia is receiving in government benefits in her lifetime thanks to President Barack Obamas policies.

I don’t know what’s stranger, that the President is proud of people being supported by handouts or that it’s one of those rare moments that he’s taking credit for something rather than playing the blame game like he usually does.

What the internet really needs is a montage of all the times President Obama has denied having any responsibility while blaming someone else. I just couldn’t find one.

You can be anything, as long as it’s approved by the government

The tuition is too damn high!

22 Apr

President Obama addressed the nation on Friday. He spoke about the need for a college educated population for the United States to recover and that the cost of that education was now to high and more money must be spent in order to make it more affordable.

Where to start?

Do more Americans need college degrees? 30% of Americans over 25 have a Bachelors degree and a further 10% have an Associates or similar degree. 40% of the population has a degree and that’s the highest it’s ever been, but apparently in order for the United States to grow that number must be higher.

And for what? As of the first Quarter we had a 14.8 percent total-unemployment rate. 88 million Americans are unemployed, while only 64 percent of Americans have a job. Do they really need an education or would they be better off in a climate that gave them a job instead?

Fact is we need more qualified people in certain fields, but those fields aren’t likely to see more students just because more people are going to school to for free. Just because we need more engineers and IT professionals doesn’t mean we can get them with a snap of the fingers. Kids that weren’t taught math in primary school aren’t just going to turn into engineers. Rather than more graduates what the United States needs is more apprenticeship style education and certification programs. Make it easier for more people to prepare directly for specific work and then make it easier for them to get jobs by getting the government out of the hair of businesses.

Then theirs the simple economic question the President fails to understand. To be fair, it’s one of those really tough Econ-101 principles. Supply and Demand. The President seems to think we need to place more importance on education and fails to realize it’s already the biggest consideration and as such college enrollments have increased accordingly. The more people who want to go to college, the more demand there is and when there is more demand, the price goes up. Therefore it’s safe to assume that by giving more money away by the billions to help even more people go to college isn’t in fact going to help the situation.

It’s really quite simple, which is probably why it’s completely misunderstood by politicians.

Financial Water Torture

2 Apr

Today’s link is brought to us by thinkprogress.org.

In 51-47 Vote, Senate Republicans Protect Big Oil Subsidies As Gasoline Profits Soar.

I’m disappointed the bill didn’t pass, but not for the reason you’d think. I like oil and gas and I like what they do and how they let me live my life. I want cheaper gas for two  reasons, 1) cause it means we’ve strengthened the dollar to get it cheaper, and 2) so I can drive a high-octane guzzling piece of classic Detroit steel.

Oil subsidies should be cut, in this case $24 billion for the five biggest companies in that field. The common reply to the idea of cutting subsidies is that the cost is simply passed on to consumers. This is certainly true. No company would let it’s margins take a hit without at least thinking of alternatives measures.

But I’d rather pay straight up for the extra cost through the price, rather than through what the government taxes me for it. Seems fair.

Why not go a step further while Congress and the President have their eyes and ears tuned to a subsidy debate and see what other industries are getting government support.

  • $15-35 Billion a year for agriculture, over 60% of which goes to commercial scale farming operations
  • $721 Billion was the original DoD budget for 2011, while I could not find subsidy information, surely it exits in such a large program
  • $70 Billion for K-12 education programs and administrivia
  • $30 Billion for Higher education programs
  • $11 Billion for Ethanol Excise Tax Credit
  • $5 Billion for Renewable Energy Credit
  • $125 Billion for varied Health and Human Services subsidies
  • $30 Billion for HUD

That’s only 8 of the 15 major federal departments. Also could be included is Commerce, Interior, Justice, Labor, State, DOT, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs. That’s still being generous considering there are countless other government offices and organizations that don’t even fit into those departments.

I’m not advocating we cut all these services from the government. I am however suggesting that if we are to cut subsidies on Energy, we should cut subsidies everywhere. It’s the only fair way to do it. As much as the President wants to vilify the oil companies the truth is that everybody needs to tighten up and make some budget cuts and favoritism simply cannot be tolerated.

However that might prove to be difficult since the Presidents proposed 2013 budget of 3.7 Trillion dollars, was absolutely destroyed in the House last week 414-0.

Though according to the White House,

The President’s 2013 Budget is built around the idea that our country does best when everyone gets a fair shot, does their fair share, and plays by the same rules. We must transform our economy from one focused on speculating, spending, and borrowing to one constructed on the solid foundation of educating, innovating, and building. That begins with putting the Nation on a path to living within our means – by cutting wasteful spending, asking all Americans to shoulder their fair share, and making tough choices on some things we cannot afford, while keeping the investments we need to grow the economy and create jobs

In a way that makes sense. Everyone gets a fair shot, because everyone gets everything they want, like a whiny 16-year old birthday queen. That’s why we play by the same rules, the rules that were written based on one persons declared interests.

As of this morning the Federal Deficit is $15.6 Trillion dollars and the 2013 budget proposed by the President would add an approximate $1 Trillion to that existing tally.

While the Federal deficit grows by $5 billion dollars a day, the best we can do is try and cut $24 billion over time?

With figures like these I wonder just what the White House means when it refers to “tough choices on things we can’t afford, while keeping the investments we need to grow the economy”? There’s not going to be an economy left if it’s crashed it into the ground, but what do I know.

In Case of Emergency; Seize All The National Resources

23 Mar

From examiner.com President Obama signs Executive Order allowing for control over all US resources.

Apparently President Obama IS capable of long-term thinking. Since the Executive Order he created gives him the power to take control at will over the United States energy, production, transportation, food, and water resources at any time.

But surely he would only do such a thing in an “emergency”, when his judgement alone is the only one capable of making the “correct” decision and the vote of congress is nothing but a hindrance to the achievement of progress in the United States. That has to be the truth, otherwise I can’t imagine why this Order would stipulate that it is permissible in “peacetime” as well as in “war”. He’s just being prepared right? We would want to be caught surprised and then have Congress hold sideshow contraception hearings instead of handling the crisis or…actually I don’t know, what is a peacetime crisis called actually? A domestic disturbance perhaps?

Surely we don’t need to worry about constitutionality in this issue. He would never intend to DO such a thing as is allowed by this law, no no, he clearly just wants everyone to be more comfortable knowing that we have a leader who can rapidly seize any asset in the country at will. Seriously, how many times do we find ourselves, as a nation, asking “Gee if we could only just take what we need and not have to pay or care who it belongs to”.

Since the President is clearly trying to be prepared for “disaster” or those pesky “domestic disturbances”, I am soon expecting another Executive Order to come down that gives the President the right to chain the workers of the seized assets to their work stations. You know, in case they’d rather go home and be with their family when the nation needs them to forcibly work to continue it’s fight for good.

The only problem I see with this issue, is that the news media is making way to big of deal of it. I mean this is really nothing and yet just look at all the coverage it’s getting. The media clearly has it out for President Obama, I mean they hardly even touched on the PATRIOT Act when we had President Bush. It’s completely unfair and biased.

Enough of the sarcasm, and if you couldn’t pick up on that, I suggest you attempt to improve your 5th grade reading level or lay off the hooch. Regardless of my sarcastic method of delivery the issue remains serious.

Ironically if President Obama would have waited a week and signed the Executive Order today, it would mark the 79th anniversary of the passing of the Enabling Act of 1933.

The Enabling Act (German: Ermächtigungsgesetz) was passed by Germany‘s Reichstag and signed by President Paul von Hindenburg on 23 March 1933. It was the second major step, after the Reichstag Fire Decree, through which Chancellor Adolf Hitler legally obtained plenary powers and established his dictatorship. It received its name from its legal status as an enabling act granting the Cabinet the authority to enact laws without the participation of the Reichstag. The act stated that it was to last for four years unless renewed by the Reichstag, which occurred twice.

While the Germans put the motion through the full legal process, it still is exactly the same as this Executive Order. “granting the Cabinet the authority to enact laws without the participation of the Reichstag”.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the United States soon has it’s own “Reichstag fire”.

Let’s take tax breaks for oil and give them to green energy?

19 Mar

So anyone who knows there memes might recognize the title of the article as being a “pushing patrick” but it’s still a rage inducing topic.

Obama to Congress: Kill oil industry’s tax breaks is an AP article on yahoo.

If you aren’t able to tell from the headline, let me summarize the articles content. President Obama want’s to end tax breaks for oil companies, and thinks we should give them to “green energy” companies.

“They can either place their bets on a fossil fuel from the last century or they can place their bets on America’s future,” Obama said.

Funny thing I actually think the President is on to something here, too bad he got off at the wrong exit.

There’s two reasons to support ending tax breaks. 1) To save money. 2) To keep a level playing field.

Even though federal discretionary spending is a small budget off the annual deficit, when you have a $15 trillion deficit and growing, it’s more of an attitude than ability thing and you have to start somewhere.

Plus if we want to do this whole “tax the rich, fair share” thing, shouldn’t the marketplace be fair too? All industries pay the same tax rate regardless of industry or profit size. That way the things people actually want to buy and support will survive and those that don’t will have learned valuable lessons to apply next time.

If green energy is that important and impactful it will find work, however if it doesn’t fit or viably work, then you are a damn fool to think you can make it fit.

On top of that, as i’ve said before what difference will it make if in 20 years we have simply replaced the “big oil” cronies and lobbyists, with the “big green” cronies and lobbyists? (“Big Green” doesn’t quite have the necessary sinister ring to it, so the floor is open to better suggestions).

I thought the hope and change message of 2008 was to transform the way business was conducted in Washington DC. I suppose we misinterpreted that. Rather than changing “how” business is done, we want to change “who” business is done with. Nobody to blame but ourselves right, (except most people can’t even do that still, but that’s a story for another time)

%d bloggers like this: