I find myself wondering: When will Obama and people stop blaming George W. Bush? Every elected official inherits what their predecessor left. The moment you raise your hand and take the oath, it is your responsibility.
There is a saying: " Playing the hand life deals to you ", It is time this President, this administration and this government man up and take full responsibility for their actions.
However let's look at some issues here. First, did not Bush inherit problems too? I remember a problem with a certain dot.com bubble busting. Just consider the following information:
The stock market began its decline in mid-January 2000, dropping from an all-time high of more than 11,700 in the Dow to below 9,800 in early March 2000, on its way to its first calendar year loss since 1994.The dot.com bubble also burst in 2000. The Nasdaq, site of some of the largest IPOs in history, peaked on March 10th, 2000. And by December 2000, the time of our meeting in Austin, it had dropped by more than 50 percent.The economy itself began slowing in the third quarter of 2000 as GDP declined by an annual rate of 0.5 percent. And, all of this took place before George W. Bush set foot in the Oval Office.
Bush inherited this problem and 9/11 to boot. But we came together and worked our way through it. We, the people, not the U.S. Government. I cannot remember Bush coming out week after week blaming Clinton. He could have but I can't recall it.
The second issue:
A President is to establish a budget and submit it to Congress. The budget submitted does not mean that the end result of the actions taken by Congress will match completely what gets passed and signed into law. Congress reviews the budget and determines what they feel are good programs to be enacted and which require additional discussion between Congress and the President. The relationship between Congress and the President is part of a checks and balance which was established in our Constitution. This is important!.
Congress has many responsibilities in conducting their business. Their main responsibility is to enact legislation that is right for the country considering the proposed budget submitted by the President. It is also important to note that the language of legislation must be agreed upon by both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Does this not mean Congress at anytime could have stopped George W. Bush from any spending? Now consider why the Democrats did not. At no time did Bush have a super majority like Obama. They could have filibustered him at anytime. Also remember that when Bush won in 2000, "Jumping" Jim Jeffords, who changed party affiliation to independent, but caucused with the Democrat party once he was promised a committee chairmanship by Democratic Leader Tom Daschle. Jeffords was given the committee chairmanship of Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. This gave the Democratic party the majority and the hands down ability to stop anything Bush wanted to do, did it not? Even later when Bush had majorities in both the House and Senate the Democrats had the numbers to stop Bush.
While Bush was a social conservative he was a liberal spender. His tax cuts transformed the economy taking it from recession to growth every year except the last year of his presidency. Had Bush cut spending as well as the tax cuts we would be talking about a very different legacy.
If governments could prevent or stop recessions and depression, why have we had so many? In fact they cannot and history has shown over and over that they in most instances caused or contributed to the problem, often causing them to be longer and more severe. While the jury is still out as to what caused this recession, the first domino seemed to be the housing industry where Democratic leadership insisted, promoted and applied legislation which gave unqualified people housing loans. There is overwhelming written and video evidence proving this, showing Republicans and some Democrats voicing concern of the collapse of this industry. Did not these toxic loans take down the banking industry? Why did the Democratic party allow this? At anytime they could have stopped it. The answer is simple: While it was not the level of spending and entitlements they wanted, it was at least some of what they wanted. So it is time the pot stops calling the kettle black. The House of Representatives and the Senate are equally responsible for the mess we find ourselves in.
Let's move forward now that Obama won and the Democratic party is in total control. With the super majority by Obama and the Democrats we have lost the check and balance established by our Constitution. Leading up to this moment words like "crisis", "unrecoverable economical disasters" and "the worse economy since the great depression" were used. So what was their answer or solution? Obama and the Democratic leadership's answer was to spend not one, not two, but four times the money Bush spent on the budget and entitlements. This created deficits you can hardly fathom. The Media and the People seemed alarmed by billion dollar deficits. Welcome to Obama's multi-trillion dollar deficits. Now each day passes with something new that this Administration and Congress wants to do. Taking over banks, GM and now healthcare. Healthcare having it's own price tag of over 1.5 trillion dollars, if you believe government estimates. History shows that the governmental estimates of cost to run these new agencies or programs is never right usually being somewhere from 6 times to 100 times more. Using the historical average of miscalculation would mean that Healthcare reform would be somewhere between 6 and 100 trillion not the 1.5 trillion this Administration or Congress is promoting. We cannot afford this level of entitlements and spending.
It is unreasonable to think you can tax your way out of it either. Those who make 250,000 and above will not be able to bear this load of over-taxation. History shows: Tax the rich and you will always see the poor and middle class paying for it. Raise taxes on the oil companies: Will you not see the price everyone pays at the pump increase? Are you really buying that only the rich will feel and see these tax increases? Add a surcharge tax to businesses and you will see an across the board rise in everything you purchase. Big business and small business will pass the addition cost along to everyone. Are you buying that the rich will not pass these costs along? Why does it seem that their only answer is to tax and tear down the rich? Why is it never: Let's raise the poor? Why can't the Bill Gates and Oprah's of the world say: " Let us use our extra resources and take people off the rolls of welfare and put them in college or trade schools"? This would raise the poor out of poverty and make them productive members of society, not to mention the valuable service they would be doing for their government and the general welfare of all Americans. This American would even be willing to give anyone who does this a tax break for the money they spend funding this.
The greatest of America is that you can be as great or as small as you choose. This is the magnet that draws everyone from all over the world here. You cannot mandate equality. How do you force someone to be something they choose not to be? Point being here for example: Has lowering the standards at schools stopped dropouts? No, and it never will. Which is why the founding fathers put "the pursuit of happiness" in our Constitution. You cannot mandate contentment. One person making thousands can be content while for another it takes millions.
The solution here for this American is to change things in a very different way. If you want to fix things like healthcare and social security, it's much easier than you think. First, let's put every Congressman and Senator
on the same plan they come up with for us. Let them live on Social Security like the rest of us. No more of this serve one term and get your salary for life. This should include the President. After all, everyone of them are usually millionaires anyway. Next, let's vote for a balanced budget amendment except in times of war or natural disaster. Finally, let's remove the 3/5 or 60 vote majority in both the House and Senate and move it back to 2/3. This would promote true bipartisanship instead of what we see today.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Obama's blunders
I find it very interesting that Barack Obama first patted himself on the back for the voter turn out in Iran. Then, the news broke before the polls closed that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won in a landslide. This was one time when the silence was deafening, compounding the problem by not supporting the voters who were disenfranchised and who had voted in a new leader. No, instead he said: " I will work with whom ever is there and there is not any difference between the two". What!? No difference between someone who is legally elected and someone who is not? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is an anti-Israel and anti-America bigot who denies the holocaust even happened.
It is safe to say that the blood of Iranians is on Obama's hands. Iran responded by closing off all media reports and cracked down on those who are protesting and in fact won. The last time they did this hundreds of thousands died but this time it is with Obama's blessing. Oh well so much for Islam being a religion of peace, looks to me like they are killing anyone who disagrees with them.
Then, move forward to Honduras. In Honduras the elected president decides he can violate their constitution by being president again. His ouster came hours before polls were to open on a constitutional referendum that Zelaya was pushing ahead even after the Supreme Court and the attorney general said it was illegal. The constitution bars changes to some of its clauses, such as the ban on a president serving more than one term.
Their Supreme court, the highest in the land, rules that his action is unconstitutional. But Obama backs Zelaya and condemns Honduras Supreme courts action which ordered the ouster. Why would Obama back anyone who violated not only the constitution but the nation's highest court ? Obama sees the Constitution as a hindrance not something that is required to be followed, either theirs or ours.
Rep Jose Serrano (D-NY), introduced H.J. RES. 5 earlier this year, and the media doesn't talk about these things until they actually come of something, a House Joint Resolution to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the United States Constitution. For all of you who are not Constitutional scholars like myself, this is the Amendment that limits the number of terms a President can serve to two. With Obama having super majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, is there any doubt that this could become a factual vote?Shouldn't we demand our elected officials follow and honor our constitution and honor other nations' constitutions?
Below is the actual text of the bill:
Here is the text of the legislation H. J. RES. 5:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification
It is safe to say that the blood of Iranians is on Obama's hands. Iran responded by closing off all media reports and cracked down on those who are protesting and in fact won. The last time they did this hundreds of thousands died but this time it is with Obama's blessing. Oh well so much for Islam being a religion of peace, looks to me like they are killing anyone who disagrees with them.
Then, move forward to Honduras. In Honduras the elected president decides he can violate their constitution by being president again. His ouster came hours before polls were to open on a constitutional referendum that Zelaya was pushing ahead even after the Supreme Court and the attorney general said it was illegal. The constitution bars changes to some of its clauses, such as the ban on a president serving more than one term.
Their Supreme court, the highest in the land, rules that his action is unconstitutional. But Obama backs Zelaya and condemns Honduras Supreme courts action which ordered the ouster. Why would Obama back anyone who violated not only the constitution but the nation's highest court ? Obama sees the Constitution as a hindrance not something that is required to be followed, either theirs or ours.
Rep Jose Serrano (D-NY), introduced H.J. RES. 5 earlier this year, and the media doesn't talk about these things until they actually come of something, a House Joint Resolution to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the United States Constitution. For all of you who are not Constitutional scholars like myself, this is the Amendment that limits the number of terms a President can serve to two. With Obama having super majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, is there any doubt that this could become a factual vote?Shouldn't we demand our elected officials follow and honor our constitution and honor other nations' constitutions?
Below is the actual text of the bill:
Here is the text of the legislation H. J. RES. 5:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
tea party
Hello,
My name is Gary Smith. I'm writing to you today about the tea parties that occurred on 4/15/09. This is not a Republican, Democrat, Independent or Libertarian movement. This is a grassroots movement of Americans who are exercising their protected Constitutional rights. I was offended by the Speaker of the house, who called it an astro-turf movement of rich people who did not want their taxes raised. So you know, I am a man who is raising his family of three on 50k a year, not hardly a rich man by anyone's imagination. The majority party and the Media ignores us, even laughing at us and disrespecting our rights. So let me give you my point of view about what I am protesting. In 1773, Americans had a tea party, throwing tea into Boston harbor protesting taxation without representation. In 2009, Americans gathered to protest on 4/15, tax day. The majority of Americans were against all the spending that went on including me. I contacted my representatives and let them know; they proceeded anyway, spending and taxing against my desires or wishes. Is this not taxation without representation? So what am I protesting? That's easy to explain. 1. OUT OF CONTROL SPENDING 2. UNFAIR TAXATION AND 3. VIOLATIONS AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION. The Obama administration put out a report calling anyone who basically disagrees with them a Right wing extremist or domestic terrorist. They even had the audacity to call Veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan extremists. I served my country with honor and would gladly serve it today, even if it meant death. I am no extremist, I am a patriotic man who has the right to disagree with this administration or any other. I call on the person who wrote this report to be fired and for a public apology from President Barack Obama who is responsible for it. No veteran of any war should be labeled "extremist".
As I mentioned above the tea parties happened on 4/15/09 and they were laughed at and disrespected. I ask you to do the math. 1000 tea parties in all 50 states. The reports I heard there were parties who had anywhere from 1,000 to 20,000 people. Using a very conservative average of 2,000 per party means 2 million Americans protested. Using a more realistic average of around 4,000 per party means 4 million Americans protested.
This is hardly a fringe movement or a laughing matter. The people I encountered were of all genders, races, nationalities and ages. I can not tell you how proud I was of my fellow countrymen and women. Now that this day has passed we must not let this movement die out. My brother pointed out that the civil rights movement had a million man march on Washington, DC. Why can't we do a Multi- Million man march on Washington DC again? I agree with my brother. My son picked the day, July 4th,2009. Could there be a better day than this to declare our independence? Let's join forces in Washington, DC on September, 2009. Americans standing together, united as one. Standing for our Republic, Standing for freedom, Standing for fair taxation of all Americans, Standing united against out of control spending by any party and Standing up for our Constitution who no man or no party has the right to violate. I ask that if you agree with this send this to all your friends and associates. Join me, an average American, in Washington DC.
Gary Smith
My name is Gary Smith. I'm writing to you today about the tea parties that occurred on 4/15/09. This is not a Republican, Democrat, Independent or Libertarian movement. This is a grassroots movement of Americans who are exercising their protected Constitutional rights. I was offended by the Speaker of the house, who called it an astro-turf movement of rich people who did not want their taxes raised. So you know, I am a man who is raising his family of three on 50k a year, not hardly a rich man by anyone's imagination. The majority party and the Media ignores us, even laughing at us and disrespecting our rights. So let me give you my point of view about what I am protesting. In 1773, Americans had a tea party, throwing tea into Boston harbor protesting taxation without representation. In 2009, Americans gathered to protest on 4/15, tax day. The majority of Americans were against all the spending that went on including me. I contacted my representatives and let them know; they proceeded anyway, spending and taxing against my desires or wishes. Is this not taxation without representation? So what am I protesting? That's easy to explain. 1. OUT OF CONTROL SPENDING 2. UNFAIR TAXATION AND 3. VIOLATIONS AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION. The Obama administration put out a report calling anyone who basically disagrees with them a Right wing extremist or domestic terrorist. They even had the audacity to call Veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan extremists. I served my country with honor and would gladly serve it today, even if it meant death. I am no extremist, I am a patriotic man who has the right to disagree with this administration or any other. I call on the person who wrote this report to be fired and for a public apology from President Barack Obama who is responsible for it. No veteran of any war should be labeled "extremist".
As I mentioned above the tea parties happened on 4/15/09 and they were laughed at and disrespected. I ask you to do the math. 1000 tea parties in all 50 states. The reports I heard there were parties who had anywhere from 1,000 to 20,000 people. Using a very conservative average of 2,000 per party means 2 million Americans protested. Using a more realistic average of around 4,000 per party means 4 million Americans protested.
This is hardly a fringe movement or a laughing matter. The people I encountered were of all genders, races, nationalities and ages. I can not tell you how proud I was of my fellow countrymen and women. Now that this day has passed we must not let this movement die out. My brother pointed out that the civil rights movement had a million man march on Washington, DC. Why can't we do a Multi- Million man march on Washington DC again? I agree with my brother. My son picked the day, July 4th,2009. Could there be a better day than this to declare our independence? Let's join forces in Washington, DC on September, 2009. Americans standing together, united as one. Standing for our Republic, Standing for freedom, Standing for fair taxation of all Americans, Standing united against out of control spending by any party and Standing up for our Constitution who no man or no party has the right to violate. I ask that if you agree with this send this to all your friends and associates. Join me, an average American, in Washington DC.
Gary Smith
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Addiction
Our government has an Addiction. It is addicted to our money and it does not matter what level it is at. City, State and Federal government; all addicted to money. They do not care how they get it: taxes, fees, licenses and any other name they can come up with. Let them collect trillions; they will spend more than they bring in everytime. Let there be hard economic times and they will still spend more than they bring in everytime. What is it they say about insanity :" doing the same thing everytime expecting different results"
Now we see Obama changing the very fabric and form of our government. When asked, "What kind of government did you give us?", Benjamin Franklin answered " We have given you a Republic. Now go and see if you can keep it." We are a Republic of the people, for the people and by the people. Hence these truths came forth.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, That among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to serve these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, Deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
The people did not want bail outs, but the government ignored us. The people did not want to bail out the auto industry, but the government ignored us. The people did not want cap and trade, but the government ignored us. Our government has forgotten they derive their power from us not the other way around. Czars appointed with no checks and balances other than the Obama administration and the Democratic House and Senate, hence changing the very form of government. They say California leads the way often in our country. In the last special election, Californians stood up for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They sent the government a clear message: no excessive taxes, no excessive spending. It is time to cut the addict off. This Californian was proud of my fellow statesmen and women. Hopefully the rest of the nation will wake up and cut off the addiction. The alternative is waking up in a country of the government, for the government and by the government. Is this the change we voted for? Not I.
Gary Smith
Now we see Obama changing the very fabric and form of our government. When asked, "What kind of government did you give us?", Benjamin Franklin answered " We have given you a Republic. Now go and see if you can keep it." We are a Republic of the people, for the people and by the people. Hence these truths came forth.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, That among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to serve these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, Deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
The people did not want bail outs, but the government ignored us. The people did not want to bail out the auto industry, but the government ignored us. The people did not want cap and trade, but the government ignored us. Our government has forgotten they derive their power from us not the other way around. Czars appointed with no checks and balances other than the Obama administration and the Democratic House and Senate, hence changing the very form of government. They say California leads the way often in our country. In the last special election, Californians stood up for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They sent the government a clear message: no excessive taxes, no excessive spending. It is time to cut the addict off. This Californian was proud of my fellow statesmen and women. Hopefully the rest of the nation will wake up and cut off the addiction. The alternative is waking up in a country of the government, for the government and by the government. Is this the change we voted for? Not I.
Gary Smith
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
