THIS IS AN EXCELLENT COMMENTARY AND SHOULD BE READ BY EVERY AMERICAN!!!

 

THIS IS AN EXCELLENT COMMENTARY AND SHOULD BE READ BY EVERY AMERICAN!!!

 

 


(When you have read what Pat Boone wrote about Obama(below), you may want to click on the link to “Snopes”, which brings up a page telling you that this is an actual letter written by Pat Boone – and very well written, I might add.)


The President Without A Country

 

 

By Pat Boone

 

“We’re no longer a Christian nation.” – President Barack Obama, June 2009

” America has been arrogant.” – President Barack Obama

“After 9/11, America didn’t always live up to her ideals.”- President Barack Obama

“You might say that America is a Muslim nation.”- President Barack Obama, Egypt 2009

Thinking about these and other statements made by the man who wears the title of president. I keep wondering what country he believes he’s president of.

In one of my very favorite stories, Edward Everett Hale’s “The Man Without a Country,” a young Army lieutenant named Philip Nolan stands condemned for treason during the Revolutionary War, having come under the influence of Aaron Burr. When the judge asks him if he wishes to say anything before sentence is passed, young Nolan defiantly exclaims, “Damn the United States ! I wish I might never hear of the United States again!”

The stunned silence in the courtroom is palpable, pulsing. After a long pause, the judge soberly says to the angry lieutenant: “You have just pronounced your own sentence. You will never hear of the United States again. I sentence you to spend the rest of your life at sea, on one or another of this country’s naval vessels – under strict orders that no one will ever speak to you again about the country you have just cursed.”

And so it was. Philip Nolan was taken away and spent the next 40 years at sea, never hearing anything but an occasional slip of the tongue about America. The last few pages of the story, recounting Nolan’s dying hours in his small stateroom – now turned into a shrine to the country he foreswore – never fail to bring me to tears. And I find my own love for this dream, this miracle called America, refreshed and renewed. I know how blessed and unique we are.

But reading and hearing the audacious, shocking statements of the man who was recently elected our president – a young black man living the impossible dream of millions of young Americans, past and present, black and white – I want to ask him, “Just what country do you think you’re president of?”

You surely can’t be referring to the United States of America, can you? America is emphatically a Christian nation, and has been from its inception! Seventy percent of her citizens identify themselves as Christian. The Declaration of Independence and our Constitution were framed, written and ratified by Christians. It’s because this was, and is, a nation built on and guided by Judeo-Christian biblical principles that you, sir, have had the inestimable privilege of being elected her president.

You studied law at Harvard, didn’t you, sir? You taught constitutional law in Chicago? Did you not ever read the statement of John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and an author of the landmark “Federalist Papers”: “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers – and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation – to select and prefer Christians for their rulers”?

In your studies, you surely must have read the decision of the Supreme Court in 1892: “Our lives and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent, our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian.”

Did your professors have you skip over all the high-court decisions right up till the mid 1900’s that echoed and reinforced these views and intentions? Did you pick up the history of American jurisprudence only in 1947, when for the first time a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson about a “wall of separation between church and state” was used to deny some specific religious expression – contrary to Jefferson’s intent with that statement?

Or, wait a minute: were your ideas about America’s Christianity formed during the 20 years you were a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ under your pastor, Jeremiah Wright? Is that where you got the idea that “America is no longer a Christian nation”? Is this where you, even as you came to call yourself a Christian, formed the belief that “America has been arrogant”?

Even if that’s the understandable explanation of your damning of your country and accusing the whole nation (not just a few military officials trying their best to keep more Americans from being murdered by jihadists) of “not always living up to her ideals,” how did you come up with the ridiculous, alarming notion that we might be “considered a Muslim nation”?

Is it because there are some 2 million or more Muslims living here, trying to be good Americans? Out of a current population of over 300 million, 70 percent of whom are Christians? Does that make us, by any rational definition, a “Muslim nation”?

Why are we not, then, a “Chinese nation”? A “Korean nation”? Even a “Vietnamese nation”? There are even more of these distinct groups in America than Muslims. And if the distinction you’re trying to make is a religious one, why is America not “a Jewish nation”? There’s actually a case to be made for the latter, because our Constitution – and the success of our Revolution and founding – owe a deep debt to our Jewish brothers.

Have you stopped to think what an actual Muslim America would be like? Have you ever really spent much time in Iran? Even in Egypt? You, having been instructed in Islam as a kid at a Muslim school in Indonesia and saying you still love the call to evening prayers, can surely picture our nation founded on the Quran, not the Judeo-Christian Bible, and living under Sharia law, can’t you? You do recall Muhammad’s directives [Surah 9:5,73] to “break the cross” and “kill the infidel”?

It seems increasingly and painfully obvious that you are more influenced by your upbringing and questionable education than most suspected. If you consider yourself the president of a people who are “no longer Christian,” who have “failed to live up to our ideals,” who “have been arrogant,” and might even be “considered Muslim” – you are president of a country most Americans don’t recognize.

Could it be you are a president without a country?

 


To all of you who love your Christian beliefs and your country, forward this message to all in your address book. We simply cannot be subjected to another term by this president!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/patboone.asp

Advertisements

Perry talks about his faith, forsaking talk of jobs for a day

Perry talks about his faith, forsaking talk of jobs for
a day

By ,
Wednesday, September 14, 9:34 AM

LYNCHBURG, Va. — Texas Gov. Rick Perry is a man of faith, and one of the big
questions about him has been whether he will seek the presidency more as an
evangelist or as a job creator.

On the debate stage, Perry has done the latter. But he demonstrated Wednesday
that he will not shy away from cloaking his candidacy in his Christianity,
delivering an address here at the late Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University that
presented his life in deeply spiritual terms and cast his political aspirations
as destiny.

In perhaps his most reflective and personal remarks as a Republican
presidential candidate, Perry never once said the word he utters just about
everywhere else: “jobs.” His 20-minute speech was shorn of policy prescriptions
and denouncements of President Obama.

Instead, the evangelical Christian governor spoke the language of the
movement with ease. He talked about the many nights in his 20s he spent
pondering his purpose, “wondering what to do with this one life among the
billions that were on the planet,” but knowing that God’s answers would be
revealed to him in due time.

Perry mused about his personal failings: not realizing his dream of becoming
a veterinarian because he flunked organic chemistry, being ordered to do
push-ups as a college cadet when his superiors in morning inspections discovered
insufficiently shined shoes, straying from his faith and being “lost” as a young
Air Force pilot overseas.

“He who knows the number of drops in the ocean, he counts the sands in the
desert, he knows you by name. . . . He doesn’t require perfect
people to execute his perfect plan,” Perry said before an estimated 13,000
students and faculty members who filled the basketball arena here for their
thrice-weekly convocation.

Then, invoking Moses and David of Scripture, he added: “God uses broken
people to reach a broken world. The mistakes of yesterday say nothing about the
possibilities of tomorrow.”

Recent past presidents spoke comfortably about their faith, including George
W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter. Bush shared a narrative
of his religious conversion — that he went on a walk with the Rev. Billy Graham,
joined a Bible study group and overcame his alcoholism.

“Rick Perry’s a more overt, less subtle guy than George W. Bush, and he is
going to be more overt in his policy statements and his statements about his
faith,” said Richard Land, a longtime leader of the Southern Baptist Convention
who has spoken with Perry about his faith. “He talks about his faith in terms
that evangelicals will find completely identifiable.”

Before he began his campaign in August, Perry drew 30,000 people to a revival
prayer session at a Houston stadium. Behind the scenes, he has been courting
evangelical leaders
, including at a recent retreat on a remote Texas ranch.
But it remained unclear how directly he would discuss his evangelism in
public.

He answered that question on Wednesday.

“This is one of his early attempts to say: ‘This is who I am,’ ” said Michael
Cromartie, director of the Evangelicals in Civic Life program at the Ethics and
Public Policy Center.

“It’s like he had somebody like Rick Warren helping him write,” he added.
Warren’s book “The Purpose Driven Life,” Cromartie said, “is
about how there’s a plan for everybody. That’s what Perry’s trying to say, that
God has a plan for him, and it’s a really big one — to be the next president of
the United States.”

A lifelong Methodist, Perry regularly attends Lake Hills Church, a relatively
new and modern evangelical megachurch in Austin, where the Rev. Mac Richard
incorporates live music, movies and drama in his services.

Perry’s advisers say he neither wears his faith on his sleeve nor covers it
up. He usually prays before meals and, as governor, has spoken at prayer
services and has issued executive orders to pray for rain.

“You wouldn’t necessarily notice it on a daily basis, but he is not at all
self-conscious or shy about talking about faith or displaying it when he feels
like it’s called for,” said Ray Sullivan, Perry’s communications director. “It
is just who he is.”

William Martin, a professor at Rice University who studies religious
conservatives, has questioned the compassion of Perry’s health-care and
socioeconomic record.

“I looked at his policies, and they didn’t seem to be something that would
flow from a heart full of Christian love, so I was thinking he had found
religion conveniently,” Martin said. “But as best I can tell, it seems to be a
long-standing conviction of his.”

Several other Republican presidential candidates also speak openly about how
their faith guides their public service, including Rep. Michele Bachmann
(Minn.), who is scheduled to speak at Liberty University later this month. Jerry
Falwell Jr., the college’s chancellor, said she would be the fifth of the eight
top GOP hopefuls to visit the campus.

Falwell said he would not endorse a candidate in the race, but he gave Perry
a particularly enthusiastic introduction, calling him “one of the most pro-life
governors in American history” and likening him to Reagan.

Absent from the list of those who’ve made a pilgrimage here is Perry’s top
rival for the nomination, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who has
rarely, if ever, publicly discussed his Mormon faith during his current
campaign.

With his speech here, Perry drew one of his sharpest contrasts with Romney,
as well as former Utah governor Jon Huntsman Jr. The contrast was not only over
religion — Huntsman, too, is Mormon — but also over their backgrounds. Romney
and Huntsman grew up in privileged families, but Perry spoke at length about his
more humble origins.

Perry said the only world he knew while growing up was “that little place
called Paint Creek.” The closest post office to his home was 16 miles away, he
said, and there were only two places of worship nearby: “a Methodist church and
a Baptist church — your choice.”

The only exposure he had to someplace else, he said, came in 1964, when he
traveled to the East Coast for the National Boy Scout Jamboree.

“For me, indoor plumbing was a bit of a luxury until I was about 5 years
old,” Perry said. “And I didn’t worry about the latest fashions; my mother sewed
most of my clothes. I didn’t know that we weren’t wealthy in a material sense. I
knew that we were rich in a lot of things that really mattered — in a spiritual
way.”

Perry said he turned to God not because he wanted to but because “I had
nowhere else to turn. I was 27. I had been an officer in the United States Air
Force, commanding a fairly substantial piece of sophisticated equipment, telling
men and women what to do, but I was lost — spiritually and emotionally. And I
didn’t know how to fix it.”

Stop Calling the Tea Party Extreme. It Isn’t.

Stop Calling the Tea Party Extreme. It Isn’t.

By Mercer
Tyson

The left-leaning mainstream media and liberal
Democratic politicians continue to refer to the Tea Party as extreme, wacko, and
out of touch with the American public.  Clear evidence indicates exactly the
opposite.

Many of us are getting increasingly annoyed when we
hear the Tea Party called extreme, right-wing wackos, or other unbecoming names
along that vein.  Of course, almost everyone I know decidedly left of center
deems him- or herself centrist.  My knee-jerk liberal neighbor thinks he’s a
centrist.  I have gone back through every posting on his blog, and they are all
as far left on whatever subject he is writing about as one can
be.

But then, he also thinks Obama is a centrist, as do
large segments of the MSM, Hollywood, and other liberal groups.  Universal
health care, unconditional amnesty for everyone, taxing enough life out of our
valuable corporations to drive them to other countries (good riddance!  I mean,
who wanted those high-paying jobs anyway?), subsidizing green energy schemes
that cost a fortune and make no economic sense — it goes on and on.  I guess
that, given their viewpoint, it’s no wonder they think the Tea Party is
extreme.

Now, I know it’s pointless to try to convince a
liberal that reality isn’t a whipped-cream world where all you have to do is
wish and it will come true.  However, with the hope that some late arrivals to
politics and those “independents” who seem to ride the fence and fall on
whatever side has greener grass at the moment are open-minded and willing to
listen, I will present some very obvious facts that have been dramatically
confused by the various liberal cults that want to paint the Tea Party as
extremist.

First, make no mistake about the MSM; they feign
honesty, but their decidedly slanted viewpoint denies them the ability to
present things in a straightforward manner.  There are some who argue that they
purposefully distort the truth and paint those on the right side of the aisle as
loonies, either directly or subtly.  I choose to believe that, being in the news
business, they are merely hopeless liberals without a clue about reality, and
believe they are representing the news fairly.  Regardless, they have the
ability to affect opinions.  Depicting the Tea Party as extreme is an issue that
really needs to be exposed.

So, exactly what does it mean to be extreme?  We all
know, but I will present a definition
anyway from Dictionary.com (with some minor editing):

1.  of a character or kind farthest
removed from the ordinary or average.

2.  utmost or exceedingly great in
degree.

3.  farthest from the center or
middle; outermost; endmost.

4.  farthest, utmost, or very far in
any direction.

5.  exceeding the bounds of
moderation.

6.  going to the utmost or very great
lengths in action, habit, opinion, etc.

So what exactly is extreme about the Tea Party?  Just
how are they “of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or
average”?

Let’s analyze their viewpoints.  The Tea Party is not
an official organization, but from the TeaParty.net
website, the main “planks” are:

  • Limited federal government
  • Individual freedoms
  • Personal responsibility
  • Free markets

Limited Government

A recent Rasmussen poll
(from US News and World Report) indicated that considerably more respondents
believe the federal government has too much power as opposed to too little.
According to the survey:

75 percent of Republicans believe the federal
government has too much power over the states while a plurality of Democrats (37
percent) believe the balance is about right.  Among those not affiliated
with either major party, 52 percent say the federal government has too much
influence while 9 percent say not enough
.  [Italics
added.]

And from a January ABC News article:

ABCNEWS tested the issue with two questions: Half the
respondents in this poll were asked if they trust the government to do what’s
right when it comes to handling national security and the war on terrorism.
Sixty-eight percent said yes. The other half were asked if they trust the
government to do what’s right when it comes to handling social issues like the
economy, health care, Social Security and education.  Far fewer — 38 percent —
said yes.

On this issue, the Tea Party is decidedly
centrist.

Individual Freedoms

A December 2010 poll
from Rasmussen Reports clearly shows how important individual freedoms are for
Americans; “[a]mong moderate voters, a plurality (48%) agrees with the
conservative perspective with a focus on protecting individual rights.”
Interestingly, “[t]he widest gap as is often the case is between the Political
Class and Mainstream voters.  Seventy percent (70%) of those in the Mainstream
say the primary role of a government is to protect individual rights.  Fifty-one
percent (51%) of Political Class voters say insuring fairness and social justice
should come first.”  Wow.  A whopping 70% of the Mainstream class!
Those are big numbers.

On this issue, the Tea Party is decidedly
centrist.

Personal Responsibility

While polls asking the direct question of how
important personal responsibility is in general are hard to find, specific polls
show Americans believe in the concept.  From a Gallup poll on the subject of
personal responsibility in the matter of health care, “89% of Republicans, 64%
of independents, and 61% of Americans overall say Americans themselves — rather
than the government — have the primary responsibility for ensuring that they
have health insurance.”  Fairly large numbers support the Tea Party
position.

Hardly anything that can be called
extreme.

Free Markets

No surprise here.  According to a GlobalScan
poll,
the free-enterprise system and free-market economy together decidedly constitute
the best system on which to base the future of the world.  In the U.S., this
opinion is shared by 71% of the people surveyed in contrast to 24% who
disagree.  (Worldwide polling shows 61% agreement as opposed to 28% who
disagree.)  Concurrence again.

So, concerning all four “planks” of the Tea Party, the
majority of the public is clearly in agreement.  However, as we know, the Tea
Party is vocal in its support or opposition to other specific issues as well.
Regarding some of their more important issues:

  • A July 11 CNN/ORC
    poll shows that 66% of the respondents support Cut, Cap, and
    Balance.
  • In the same poll, 74% Support a Balanced Budget
    Amendment.
  • On the budget deficit, many would agree that the Tea
    Party believes in the cuts-only or mostly spending cuts approach.  According to
    the following chart from Gallup,
    67% think the deficit should be reduced by only or mostly spending cuts.  Even
    those who believe in spending cuts alone account for 26%.  Hardly
    extremist.

 

 

  • CNN
    poll
    , January 2011, 71% of people want to cut spending in
    general (although they don’t agree as to what should necessarily be
    cut).
  • Finally, from an LA Times article:
    “according to most polls, about 20% of voters are liberal, substantially less
    than the about 40% who identify themselves as conservative.”

So how is it the Tea Party is labeled extremist when,
on virtually all their important issues, the evidence is clear that most
Americans are in substantial agreement with it?  And why did a Gallup
survey
conducted April 20-23 of this year find that only 30 percent of Americans
describe themselves as Tea Party supporters?

Clearly, the American public has been mislead by the
MSM and by the propensity of liberal politicians who customarily preach the
left-wing viewpoint to hurl charges of racism or other unflattering words at
anyone who does not agree with them.  Serious misunderstanding of the Tea Party
and the American people is apparent in Nancy Pelosi’s famous comment
referring to the Tea Party movement as astroturf instead of
grassroots.

The result of this misrepresentation is the
marginalization of the Tea Party to segments of the American public who pay
little attention to politics and believe what they hear on the 6:00 news at
dinnertime.  It’s time the “teabaggers” passionately disclaim the extremist
label.  People who make that claim should be stopped in their tracks
immediately, and the conversation should cease until that claim is
contested.

No, the Tea Party is not extreme.  It is merely the
“Silent Majority” no longer being silent.

Morning Bell: Five Ways to Create New Jobs in America

Morning Bell: Five Ways to Create New Jobs in America

Posted By Mike Brownfield On September 8, 2011 @ 10:01 am In Enterprise and Free Markets | No Comments

Two years ago, President Barack Obama was bold in his optimism for job growth in America, promising that his stimulus spending plans would create 3 million jobs by the end of 2010. It didn’t work, the Obama jobs deficit now stands at 6.7 million jobs, and tonight the President will present a jobs plan chock full of new promises. Unfortunately, that plan appears to be a retread of the same policies that have blocked job growth in America.

The good news is that there is another way, and there are things the President can do to pave the way for businesses to create new jobs.

1) Do Less, Not More: For the last two-and-a-half years, we have seen the federal government spend more and regulate more. Instead, the government should step back and free America’s businesses to grow, thereby creating jobs. Heritage’s J.D. Foster writes [1]:

At this stage the primary focus should be on government doing less to the economy in its attempt to do anything to spur recovery. The basic strengths of the American economy remain undiminished and undamaged by recent events. What is lacking is not smarter nostrums from Washington, but a chance to breathe, more clarity, and a respite from the flurry of “do somethings” that have spewed from the nation’s capital.

2) Restore Confidence, Eliminate Uncertainty: One of President Obama’s favorite talking points is that wealthier Americans should “pay their fair share” [2] of taxes, threatening to raise rates on small businesses and investors. That rhetoric might play well in populist circles, but his calls for the redistribution of wealth at the expense of the most productive elements of the economy has a real cost–provoking uncertainty.

The President should stop proposing tax hikes and instead focus on instilling confidence in the economy. He can do that by pressing Congress to make current tax policy permanent or, at the very least, extend current policy until the economy returns to near full employment.

3) Get Spending Under Control: President Obama has tried massive government spending to stimulate the economy, and today we’re seeing the results. Deficits, 9.1 percent unemployment, 14 million unemployed, no new jobs created in August, and a reduced credit rating.

Instead of more spending, the President should focus on getting spending under control, reforming entitlements, and setting the United States on a fiscal path with greater economic certainty.

4) Eliminate Unnecessary Regulations: In the first six months of the 2011 fiscal year, 15 major regulations were issued with annual costs exceeding $5.8 billion. Since Inauguration Day, the Obama Administration imposed 75 new major regulations with annual costs of $38 billion. The regulations that are on the books–and the ones that are yet to come–drive up the cost of doing business, discourage investment, and leave businesses waiting on the sidelines until they have more certainty about their future. Instead of regulating more, Washington should end the regulatory assault, eliminate unnecessary regulations, and free our businesses to grow and create jobs.

5) Repeal Obamacare: The President’s signature health care law brings with it more spending, costly mandates and regulations, and higher taxes, all of which weigh heavily on individuals and businesses. Repealing Obamacare would go a long way toward getting America back on the job creation path. Heritage’s Nina Owcharenko explains [3]:

Obamacare is perhaps the most damaging of the Administration’s policies that are impeding the country’s recovery. At a time when there should be a focus on cutting spending, [4] reducing regulation [5], and lowering taxes [1], Obamacare does the complete opposite. It spends more, imposes costly new mandates and regulations, and raises taxes on individuals and businesses. This is no way to get the economy up and running again.

Today, there are 1.7 million fewer Americans working than when the President’s stimulus bill was enacted. Bigger government did not deliver on the promise of creating more jobs for Americans. And though many on the left see an even bigger government and more spending as the cure for America’s stagnant job growth, that simply has not worked. Instead, it’s time for the President and Congress to look away from government–not toward it–have Washington get out of the way, and allow job growth to return to the fruited plain.

Welcome, Union Brothers and Sisters

Welcome, Union Brothers and Sisters

by Sarah Palin on Tuesday, September 6, 2011 at 1:50am

In my speech on Saturday in Iowa, I said: “Between bailouts for Wall Street cronies and stimulus projects for union bosses’ security and ‘green energy’ giveaways, [Barack Obama] took care of his friends. And now they’re on course to raise a billion dollars for his re-election bid so that they can do it all over again.” This was shamefully on display yesterday at President Obama’s taxpayer-funded campaign rally in Detroit. In introducing the President, Teamsters President James Hoffa represented precisely what I was talking about as he declared war on concerned independent Americans and on the freshman members we sent to Congress last November by saying, “Let’s take these son-of-a-bitches out!”

 

What I say now, I say as a proud former union member and the wife, daughter, and sister of union members. So, as a former card-carrying IBEW sister married to a proud former Laborers, IBEW, and later USW member, please hear me out. What I have to say is for the hard working, patriotic, selfless union brothers and sisters in Michigan and throughout our country: Please don’t be taken in by union bosses’ thuggery like Jim Hoffa represented yesterday. Union bosses like this do not have your best interests at heart. What they care about is their own power and re-electing their friend Barack Obama so he will take care of them to the detriment of everyone else.

 

To the same degree Americans are concerned about irresponsible, greedy corporate execs who got cushy bonuses from taxpayer-funded bailouts, we should also be concerned about greedy union bosses who are willing to tank our economy just to protect their own power. As union history shows, power and greed corrupt. Just because you claim to represent union members doesn’t mean you are on the side of the angels. The greed of too many of these union bosses has all but destroyed the labor movement in this country, helped chase away our jobs, and is killing the American dream.

 

To see where this leads, look at what’s happening to the working class in our industrialized cities. These cities are going to hell in a hand basket thanks to corruption, crony capitalism, and the union bosses’ greed. The union bosses derive their power from your union dues and their promise to deliver your votes to whichever politician they’re in bed with. They get their power from you, and yet their actions ultimately hurt you. They’re chasing American industry offshore by making outrageous, economically illogical demands that they know will never work. And now that they’ve chased jobs out of union states, they’re trying to chase them out of right-to-work states like South Carolina, so eventually the jobs will leave America altogether. But these union bosses will still figure out a way to keep their gig, and so will their politically aligned corporate friends. As long as these big corporations have a good crony capitalist in the White House, they can rely on DC to bail them out until the whole system goes bankrupt, which, I am afraid, is not very far off. When big government, big business, and big union bosses collude together, they get government to maximize their own interests against those of the rest of the country.

 

So, now these union bosses are desperately trying to cast the grassroots Tea Party Movement as being “against the workingman.” How outrageously wrong this unapologetic Jim Hoffa is, for the people’s movement is the real movement for working class men and women. It’s rooted in real solidarity, and not special interests and corporate kickbacks. It represents the needed reform that will empower workers and job creators. We stand with the little guy against the corruption and influence peddling of those who collude to grease the wheels of government power.

 

This collusion is at the heart of Obama’s economic vision for America. In practice it is socialism for the very rich and the very poor, but a brutal form of capitalism for the rest of us. It is socialism for the very poor who are reduced to a degrading perpetual dependence on a near-bankrupt centralized government to provide their every need, while at the same time robbing them of that which brings fulfillment and success – the life-affirming pride that comes from taking responsibility for your own destiny and building a better life through self-initiative and work ethic. And Obama’s vision is socialism via crony capitalism for the very rich who continue to get bailouts, debt-ridden “stimulus” funds, and special favors that allow them to waive off or help draft the burdensome regulations that act as a boot on the neck to small business owners who don’t have the same friends in high places. And where does this collusion leave working class Americans and the small business owners who create 70% of the jobs in this country? Out in the cold. It’s you and your children who are left paying for the cronyism of Obama and our permanent political class in DC.

 

Ask yourself if the folks you heard demonize concerned, independent Americans yesterday really speak for the working class when they’re all too happy to burden your families with the bill to bail out the President’s friends on Wall Street.

 

We should not forget that for all his lofty rhetoric, President Obama is a Chicago politician. Graft, cronyism, and quid pro quo are the well-known methods of an infamous Chicago political machine, of which Barack Obama emerged. This corruption isn’t just the result of a few bad apples. It’s the nature of a skewed system that’s typical of one not allowing a level playing field. If one desires opportunity for all, then the only solution is sudden and relentless reform. I know of what I speak. I too served in public office in a state that had a corruption problem. The difference is that I fought the corrupt political machine. Barack Obama used the machine in his state to advance. He never challenged it. And he’s evidently brought the same Chicago “pay-to-play” practices to the White House.

 

It’s sad to see much of the labor movement fall lock step behind a President whom Hoffa calls upon to partner in “waging war” against patriotic Americans. I will never forget that as a governor, in trying to be a friend to the working men and women in our unions, I gave a speech on August 27, 2008, at the annual AFL-CIO meeting in Anchorage. There, union members humbled me with a standing ovation for fighting the corruption in Alaska and for bringing parties together for progress on energy development projects. Then just two days later I landed on the national stage as John McCain’s running mate, and the union leadership turned on me from that day forward even though I had not changed one iota in my plans, principles, vision, and commitment to jobs for working class Americans. The only difference was I was challenging the politician the union bosses were committed to electing. It was almost comical, this lesson learned with their new spots revealed so quickly.

 

Recently someone commented: “I’m a union member. I’ve been a Democrat all my life. Now I’ll vote for anyone with a plan to save America.” I know what that person is feeling. I want all good union brothers and sisters to know that there is an alternative. The grassroots, independent Tea Party Movement articulates a real alternative rooted in free men and free markets, not the cronyism of Barack Obama and the permanent political class in DC. Their cronyism is why we have no job growth, massive unsustainable debt, and a housing market in the tank. Too many politicians are simply addressing the economic symptoms instead of fighting the underlying disease. The path forward is through reform. On Saturday, I outlined some ideas about that reform, and I will continue to do so.

 

In the meantime, good union brothers and sisters, don’t let Hoffa tell you what to do. He doesn’t represent the real interests of working men and women. He’s not doing you any favors. He’s just living off your paychecks.

 

– Sarah Palin

The Tea Party, Right About Everything

The Tea Party, Right About Everything

By Randall
Hoven

The false narrative is that the Tea Party is a bunch
of stubborn nuts, if not outright racists.  In truth, the Tea Party has been
right about everything, while almost everyone else has been nuts, especially the
“experts.”

Minimum wage.  One of the first
things Democrats did after taking back Congress in 2007 was raise the federal
minimum wage 41% from 2007 to 2009.  Result?  The unemployment rate went
from 4.4% in May 2007 to 10.1% in 2009.  It is 9.2% even today — four years
later.

As for teens, the
unemployment rate went from 14.9% to 27.1%, the highest ever recorded, meaning
since 1948.  Today it is still a high 24.5%.  And for blacks:
from a low of 7.9% in 2007 to 16.5% in 2010.  It is still a high
16.2%.

The Democrat Congress also decided to apply the same
minimum wages to American Samoa.  Results?
Near-decimation of its economy, one that had been based largely on low-cost tuna
canning and textile work.

… employment fell 19 percent from 2008 to 2009 … tuna canning employment fell 55 percent from 2009 to 2010… Average inflation-adjusted earnings fell by 5 percent from 2008 to 2009 and by 11 percent from 2006 to 2009.

Of course, some of the increase in unemployment was a
result of the Great Recession.  But the Employment Policies Institute did
a study to separate the effects for the most vulnerable group: males aged 16-24
without high school diploma.  EPI’s answer: the minimum wage increase killed
over 100,000 jobs (31% of the lost jobs) for that demographic.

TARP.  Unless you were a politician
or executive of a large bank, you were likely against the Troubled Asset Relief
Program.  I would guess that most anyone now calling herself a member of the Tea
Party was against TARP in 2008.  But Senator Barack Obama voted for it, along
with most of his Democrat colleagues.  Also the top brains of the Stupid Party
pushed it: Henry Paulson, George W. Bush, and John McCain.

On October 3, 2008, Congress authorized Treasury
Secretary Paulson to use up to $350 billion under TARP to do what was needed to
stave off financial disaster.  By December, after using $267B, Paulson said he
was done, crisis averted.
(Of course his successor, Tim Geithner, was not done.)

Here’s the funny thing: while Paulson was lending out
less than $0.3 trillion, the Federal Reserve was
lending out over $16T to do about the same thing!  By my calculations, Paulson’s
TARP slush fund was less than 2% the size of the Federal
Reserve’s.

Do you think that 2% was critical to staving off
financial apocalypse?  (FYI, over 3T of the Fed’s emergency loans were to
subsidiaries of foreign-owned banks.)

When the dust cleared, the federal government owned
two bankrupt car companies and the god-awful home mortgage portfolios of Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac — entities that had nothing to do with the original purpose
of TARP.

Global markets were
so enamored with TARP that there was an immediate sell-off of about 20% in
global stock markets the moment it went into effect.  I also credit TARP, and
McCain’s reaction to it, for McCain’s loss to Obama.  Ever since, all budget
discussions have involved units of trillions instead of mere billions.  The
world has not been the same since TARP.

Stimulus.  Opposition to Obama’s
stimulus was the origin of the Tea Party.  Now we know the
story.

How the stimulus was sold: It would create three
million jobs or more.  It would keep the unemployment rate under 8%, instead of
9% without a stimulus.  It would cost $787B.  The jobs were
shovel-ready.

What really happened:
There are 1.2 million fewer jobs now than when the stimulus was
passed.  Unemployment went over 10% (vs. prediction of 8%) and is still over 9%
(vs. prediction of about 6.8% at this time).  It cost $814B or
more.  Maybe 6% of it went to infrastructure projects.
Obama’s reaction?  A
little joke
:
“Shovel ready was not as shovel ready as we expected.”

Of course, Obama and his minions simply blame this on
their underestimating the size of the mess they inherited from Bush.  But that
has
been studied
by
economists at the University of Western Ontario and Ohio State University.  The
verdict: the stimulus itself cost about one million private-sector jobs; the net
job loss was about 595,000.  We’d have been better off without any “stimulus” at
all, just as the Tea Party said.

ObamaCare.  ObamaCare was sold as a
way to bend the health “cost
curve
” down.  As it turned out, it is bending the cost
curve up — health care will be more costly than it would have been
without ObamaCare.  It’s so great that in its first year about 1,500 companies,
states, and unions were granted waivers.

ObamaCare strangled the recovery in the crib.  The
private sector has
been generating only 6,400 jobs per month since it was passed, compared to
67,600 before.  We would never return to pre-recession unemployment
levels at the current pace.  ObamaCare is costing us over 60,000 jobs per
month.

Drilling moratorium.  According to a
new study by IHS
Global Insight
,
merely picking up the pace in granting oil drilling permits would go a long way
in producing jobs throughout the US, adding to GDP and reducing dependency on
foreign oil sources.  In 2012 alone it could mean 230,000 new jobs, $44B more in
GDP, 150 million more barrels of oil, and $15B less in imported
oil.

Budgets.  Now we find ourselves in
another budget fight, with the Tea Party getting the blame from much of the
media and liberal punditry.  The truth is that Democrats have not even written,
much less passed, a budget of any kind in over two years; they simply kill
everyone else’s.

  • The Republican-led House passed a budget on schedule
    in April.  Senate Democrats voted it down.
  • Obama proposed a budget in February.  The
    Congressional Budget Office scored it as having a 10-year cumulative deficit of
    $9.5 trillion.  The Democrat-led Senate voted that down too, 97-0.
  • The House proposed the only written plan for
    addressing the debt ceiling — the Cut, Cap and Balance plan.  Senate Democrats
    voted that down, too.

It shouldn’t take a keen insight to see that Senate
Democrats are the “Party of No” and the obstacle to resolving budget and debt
issues.

Uncertainty and arbitrariness.  Just
last December Obama said keeping Bush’s tax rates was critical to keeping the
recovery going.  He and the Democrat Congress at the time extended them for
another two years, plus added over $300 B in additional tax
cuts
and credits
.
Now, just seven months later, Obama insists that any deal to raise the debt
ceiling must include tax increases.

Like ObamaCare, the Dodd-Frank bill to regulate all
finance in the country is a thousand-page-plus piece of legislation.  As the New York
Times
understated it just after its passage, “[a] number of the details have
been left for regulators to work out.” Got it? Those thousand-plus pages did not
include the details.

The EPA now has power
to regulate

every use of fossil fuels in this country, as well as every breath we take, if
they so deem.  What will it do with that power?  You get to guess.  If you think
it wouldn’t do anything too stupid, know that the FDA
just outlawed

common inhalers for asthma sufferers.  Their reason was, get this, those
inhalers are blamed for contributing to upper-atmosphere ozone
loss.

Even if you think CFCs contribute to ozone loss, how
much do you think the CFCs released by asthma inhalers have to do with it?  And
how much is the indirect and ambiguous loss of ozone worth compared to the
direct and known suffering of asthma patients?  Such is the wisdom of government
regulators.

The list is endless.  If you were thinking of starting
a business or making an investment that might not pay off for five or ten years,
would you feel like you know the rules and could depend on them?  No, you’d
hunker down, which is exactly what everyone with any money left is doing right
now.

This jobless recovery is not some mystery.  It is very
clearly the result of decisions — decisions made by Obama and the Democrats.
At every opportunity they grew government, shrank the private sector, and viewed
budding enterprises as little more than beasts of burden — something to whip
while healthy and carve up and eat when not.

As Robert Mugabe viewed white-owned farms, Obama views
corporations not yet in Chapter 11.

Nothing Democrats did helped; everything they did
hurt.  Everything.  Min wage.  TARP.  Stimulus.  ObamaCare.  The Gulf oil spill.
Every budget they ever proposed, written or not.  Every little czar they put in
place to spend other people’s money and to bully the only productive people
still toiling away at the thankless tasks of making stuff and providing
jobs.

At every point, the Tea Party and its sympathizers
tried to stop these idiocies, only to be called ignorant racists.  You might
want to ask yourself why so many people talk of the “Tea Party,” whatever that
is, the way Lenin and Stalin talked of kulaks and saboteurs, whoever they
were.

Do “taxed enough already,” “stop spending,” and “obey
the Constitution” sound that crazy to you?  If so, you might want to think about
why you think so.

Randall Hoven can be followed on
Twitter.  His bio and previous writings can
be found at randallhoven.com.