Bama in Space!

Once again the Bama administration is blaming its own inept handling of the economy on Bush. This time it has to do with the budget for NASA and the increasing unlikelihood that the United States has a future in Space.

Shortly after seizing power, Bama concocted a panel to review the viability of Bush's proposal to put men on Mars and return to the moon by 2020. Bush proposed this back in 2004, while he was still very popular, and his goal was offered in the spirit of JFK's promise to put a man on the moon. He obviously knew it would be up to his predecessor's to fulfil the promise, as Kennedy did before him.

But instead of assuming the mantle of responsibility and taking action, Bama's panel has decided it's just not economically feasible, and is "...one of the many failed promises of the Bush administration - to set out a very good program without providing the resources to fund it." That quote is from John Lodgson, Bama crony.

Hey John, that's your responsibility now, a-hole! When will Bama ever step up to the plate?

Oh, and the best part - the panel wants to take several more months to ascertain the feasibility before offering an official recommendation. That seems prudent - NOW WHY NOT DO THAT WITH HEALTH CARE!!!

Quick Hit: Bama Administration Admits it Does not Trust Private Business

There's this quote from HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius over the weekend that says it all.

On the inclusion of a public option:
"...the essential part is you don't turn over the whole new marketplace to private insurance companies and trust them to do the right thing."

First of all, the marketplace is not new; it's very well established, and there's nothing to turn over. The insurance companies are the insurance market. What is she even talking about? The only thing that is clear and coherent is that she doesn't trust private businesses to make good decisions.

Hey Kathy, guess what? Most Americans don't trust government to make good decisions!

I love that Bama and the cronies, after slamming the operation of Medicare and the VA under Bush, are now singing their praises as if they are the epitome of efficient government performing a service the private sector could not. It's the worst kept secret in America that these institutions are bureaucratic black holes with out of control budgets about to explode as the population steamrolls toward perpetual government assistance. Who's going to pay for that??

I wish Bama would have just stepped up, instead of misleading the public about everything, and sad, yes, we are instituting death panels. If you are very old and need a new hip, too bad! Not that I agree with that, but if he really wants a public option there's simply no way around rationed care, not if the US economy is to remain solvent.

Still not sure that Bama's true goal isn't exactly the insolvency of the US economy...

The President's Case

It's not so much that he's making a case for government health care anymore as it is him blaming conservatives for all the world's ills. His argument, perhaps to weakest political argument ever made, is that opponents of the plan are "bogeymen" who spread "misinformation" through Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. As I noted in my previous post, the opponents have very specific concerns derived directly from the language of the bill, but Bama and his cronies refuse to answer those concerns - because they are unanswerable - instead desperately hoping their reverse scare campaign works.

I'm sure Bama was one of history's worst lawyers, given his total inability to construct a logical counter-argument using fact. Your average high school Mock Trial lawyer would eat him for lunch and ask for seconds. It's no wonder he had to find work as a community organizer where his emotional appeal could be utilized with similarly weak-minded people. The people who filled the room in New Hampshire fit this mold - the mindless automatons who hang on his every word without subjecting those words to any kind of reason. I can guarantee he gets the same reception wherever he goes - the event handlers will go to all means to make sure he's got a partisan crowd that loves him to make it look like everyone still loves Bama and supports his great ideas. Don't be fooled - the majority of the country holds the opposite opinion of the obfuscator-in-chief.

Rest assured, things do not look good for Bama and the Dems. AARP recently reversed their support of the bill and congressmen continue to get drowned out by legitimate concerns across the country, all the while the Democrat leadership attacks instead of explains the bill. Nancy Pelosi is the biggest ally the opposition could ask for - her total disregard for anyone else's point of view and complete lack of social etiquette - inferring that protesters are nazis and attacking them in an Op-ed in USA Today - just makes her seem detached from reality and certainly the public, so if she's supporting the plan it must be full of crazy garbage.

While I was certain a month ago that the Dems would push this thing through regardless of public opinion, today I'm not so sure, and I have our inept President to thank. Without his total bungling of this issue America wouldn't have had a chance to speak. We finally have hope.

Bama Self-Destructs!

First the airing of grievances: Only a month ago Bama and Biden were on the defensive about the economy, pointing fingers at Bush while noting the "Stimulus" plan was supposed to take 18 months, even though immediate results were promised at the time of signing.

Now that the media has declared the recession "over", Bama is taking credit for it, and the media is trumpeting his economic policies as the saving grace. Absurd. Let me ask this question - if it wasn't for the media, would 90% of us even know there was a recession? Of course not. Bama's "stimulus" has done nothing, and in the long term, once the inflationary impact of his horrendous spending plan is realized, the impact will slow or kill any natural recovery that occurs as a result of capitalism.

A president is always blamed more than he deserves for a bad economy and given more credit than he deserves for a good economy, except when the economic principles that run the whole thing are egregiously violated, as in Bama's case. He will deserve every bit of blame for the ultimate downfall of the American economy, if it happens.

Next, have you noticed that when Bama and his congressional automatons talk about the Health Care bill they only used talking points without referring to one specific complaint about what's in the bill? Bama keeps saying conservatives are using "Scare Tactics." I have to agree with him - this bill is fricking scary. Conservatives have pointed to dozens of of instances, using language straight from the bill, to explain why this thing is awful for Americans. Meanwhile, Democrats only accuse us of spreading lies, without any specifics, and completely dodging all opposition to the actual content of the bill. Would someone in the media PLEASE point that out???

And then there was this gem from Bama today: "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine... It's the Post Office that's always having problems."

Hmmm, which of those 3 was a government entity that was so far in the red the government finally gave up trying to run it. I'll give you a hint - it's not UPS or FedEx. Isn't that a very good reason not to let government run any part of health care? Excellent observation, Bama!

Stone-Cold Lead Pipe Lock #1: The Cash For Clunkers Buyer Bailout

I guarantee we will have a multi-billion dollar bailout for idiots who bought cars they could not afford because of the stupid Cash for Clunkers program. I give it 2 years.

You would have thought Democrats learned their lesson when, 4 years after Bill Clinton famously decreed "Every American has the right to own a home," the country suffered an economic collapse that had been built on the paper mache foundation of home mortgages for people who could not afford to buy homes, regardless of the initial terms.

File this under the "Here we go again," category. By the time this is over, 750,000 people will have purchased new vehicles through the program, amassing approximately $15 Billion in new consumer debt. Now, if a person could afford to pay cash for a car they probably weren't waiting around for this program to do it, so we can safely assume almost all buyers in the program are taking on debt and monthly payments.

Don't bother looking for data - there isn't any. I feel confident in my assumptions, and here are a few more to support my case. First, who is it that owns a vehicle that they are willing to trade in for this program? Does it stand to reason that if you had previously purchased a new vehicle that gets less than 19 mpg, and were still paying it off, that you would want to take on the additional payment? Of course not. This logic also applies to any vehicle that is currently being financed, or at least it should. Also, the vehicles being traded in should have considerable wear on them - you wouldn't trade in your 5 yr old Hummer for $4500 - that's silly. So these cars are typically, well, clunkers.

Well-established adults may be interested in the program, but at the same time are significantly less likely to own a vehicle that meets the above criteria. The middle class family with kids should be disinclined to take on the burden of a monthly car payment, unless they are stupid. Working and non-working lower-class are the most likely to own such vehicles, but again, these people are in no situation to buy a new car. Young people entering the workforce are the most likely group to participate, which brings us to the economy as a whole.

The kid fresh out of school who buys a new vehicle after getting a decent job then gets let go. Uh-oh, now what? And what of the stupid lower-class and middle-class families that buy in and then quickly realize they can't afford the payments?

It's a nightmare situation for Democrats, who effectively incentive debt with this program but have no management of who is qualified or not qualified to take on the debt. It's the mortgage crisis all over again, if on a slightly smaller scale. Once people start defaulting on car loans the Dems will have no recourse but to bail them out. The American taxpayer to the rescue!

My advice to anyone who has participated in Cash for Clunkers is to wait 4 months and then stop paying your car payment and immediately call your congressman, senator, and anyone else who will listen and tell them your sad story. There is no chance they can let all of those people lose their cars and worse, let the auto industry fall flat again! The Democrats stupidity is your gain!

The Republican Party is Back!

On NPR this morning the lead story was about the protests at all the Democrat town hall meetings across the country dealing with the issue of Health Care reform. You've almost certainly heard by now that these local events are the venue for the public's displays of frustration and concern about the current bill and the President's plan to destroy, err, fix health care. Polls show that more than 60% of the public disapprove of the current health care proposals, but the President doesn't care what the people think - he's intent on ramming this monstrosity down our throats.

The NPR story was focused solely on the protests. Have you noticed that when liberals protest something, like with everything Bush did over the last 8 years, its a "spontaneous", "patriotic", "exercise of first amendment rights", but when anyone else protests something they're an "angry mob", "organized by lobbyists", or "ignorant people whipped to a fervor by Rush Limbaugh and Fox News."

Believe me, this characterization is deliberate. The White House is desperate now, and what they are hoping is by painting people who have legitimate concerns about the future of health care as radical, unscrupulous whackos, they can cause a backlash to spur renewed support in their plan. Yes, the White House is directing this effort. All you need to do is listen to the coverage - the talking points are all the same, and NPR was a perfect example of this.

What's more, the White House this week on its blog encouraged good little Democrats to turn in their friends, neighbors, and coworkers if they suspect them of spreading "misinformation" about health care. A new era of McCarthyism is in the works, but this time the paranoia is decidedly pro-communism in the image of Bama's domestic policy.

The problem with Rahm and Bama's backlash theory is that a majority of people actually think they're wrong on this issue. It's hard for Democrats to believe this about their president, so the only possibility in their minds is that the rest of us are lunatics, and the fact that Republican groups are encouraging unrest in the policital discourse is proof enough for them

But what really gets them pissed is that conservatives and Republicans are finally fighting back, and we're using a page out of the liberal playbook that we've never effectively used before - the protest. They hate having their own tactics used against them more than anything, and that coupled with the fact that most people are not on the side of the president on this issue has them very, very concerned.

So pundits like Juan Williams - who is occasionally fair but incurably liberal - say things like, "The Republican party is imploding," when he really means to say "Democrats are scared shitless that in just 6 months they've wasted all the political capital gained by the anti-Bush media offensive staged during the last 6 years." The blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the president, but he won't take it - he's not half the man Bush is.

The truth is the Republican Party is back. We don't need someone to lead us, to think for us, we think for ourselves and are lead by our convictions. That's something liberals don't understand - they are the ones who react emotionally and are whipped to a fervor by media pundits, not us. We dissect information, understand how it applies to us and react accordingly. What the protesters are doing is finally letting the liberal elite know their place. Politicians are not better than the rest of us, and its about time the American people stand up and let Washington and Bama know they work for us! We will never work for him.

How Democrats Win Elections

Al Franken won by a certified margin of 325 votes over Norm Coleman in 2008. It shouldn't have been close, but Coleman ran a weak campaign and let Franken and the media tell him and the public what was acceptable, labeled him a negative campaigner and let it ride in the press. The fact that Franken's campaign was also predominately negative toward Coleman was never a story. Coleman stopped addressing Franken's lies in TV adds and allowed himself to be swift-boated, and many right-leaning voters turned out for the 3rd party. Coleman's passivity and willingness to yield to the media's broadcast perception of him cost him a landslide reelection victory over one of the least-qualified and angriest human beings to run for office in recent memory. That Franken is consumed by hate and is simply mean-spirited was barely touched on in the campaign, and never by Coleman. Surprise, surprise, among Franken's first official acts as a U.S. senator is to go after the people in Florida who he thinks stole the 2000 election from Gore. This piece of human garbage has a list, believe me, and he will be attempting systematically to destroy his enemies for the next 6 years. Great job, Minnesota! Another fine addition to your embarrassing list of political oddities.

The 325 votes is really the point. Remember after election day Coleman had a lead of more than 800 votes. The recount was automatic. Within a week two sets of votes were "discovered", the first in the trunk of a polling staffer's car and the second in a box hidden away behind a cabinet in another polling place. These two stockpiles did not contain one single vote for Coleman, while totaling 350 additional votes for Franken. The staffers who discovered these votes claimed to not know how the votes gor to where they did. I'm sure many of us are driving around town with completed ballots wedged in around the spare tire, and almost no one questioned the authenticity of the ballots. Of course - ballots are cast anonymously, so who would know? At the time Sean Hannity was the only significant national media participant making a fuss, and the counter argument was, and I remember this clearly, that why 350 votes - that was not enough to make up the margin, so of course it wasn't plausible that the votes were fraudulent. And yet in the end, those mystery ballots were just enough to cover Coleman and provide a slight cushion.

Democrat vote manipulation is a tradition as old as the party itself. The fathers of the Democrat Party, Jefferson and Madison, conspired to destroy the reputation of then President John Adams for the express purpose of getting Jefferson elected. Jefferson wrote the book on how Democrats get elected to office, and the party has never wavered from the word. Recently, Al Gore tried his best to steal Florida, in the most obnoxious and obvious fraud attempt in our country's history. Handle the ballots enough times and hey, is that chad loose? Clearly that's another "vote" for Gore! Thank God the Court put a stop to that nonsense, although the US Supreme Court went party line - again, they never stray.

Al Franken knew he would eventually win. Once the recount gears start, it always finds enough votes for the Democrat, and the reason goes back to Jefferson. The man was absolutely unscrupulous and immoral, characteristics which modern democrats quietly embrace. While Republicans have pigeon-holed themselves as the party of Morality, the Dems are content to be the opposite, though the media would never label them as such, but for a Democrat to lie to the public or cheat on his wife or steal from the people, it's no bog deal. No one is shocked by it. Sure there's a small fervor, but it's short lived because we expect it of them. Since they don't usually pretend to be otherwise too loudly we can't label them hypocrites - Republicans have no such allowance.

And so it comes as no surprise that Democrats in the State of Wisconsin are once again trying to legislate vote fraud. Why bother with the occasional scandal when you now have the power to make it legal? This effort is centralized around a proposal to let people vote by phone. While I'm not opposed to leveraging technology to improve voting accuracy, this idea can only facilitate the opposite effect, and play into the hands of those most inclined toward fraud - Democrats. The major problem is that voting is still anonymous. Voting by phone could actually work if anonymity was not a requirement. Today, when you walk into a polling place, they ask you who you are and where you live, but not "Who did you vote for". When you walk out of the polling place the media exit pollsters ask "Who did you vote for" but not "Who are you". Nobody has both pieces of information, and as long as that's true Democrats will try to manipulate the system to lubricate the machinery of vote fraud.

So what's the big deal? We tell people all the time who we voted for. Many people advertise it on behalf of their candidate. Why not just get rid of the anonymity requirement and make people stand by their vote - take responsibility for your right!

Either that or watch Democrats continue to steal elections. Their argument is that if you had to identify who you voted for you would be susceptible to intimidation, and then just not vote. Too bad. Apparently you didn't have the conviction to go pull the lever for your candidate, or maybe you were intimidated or manipulated to vote for that person, and if questioned you might have to reveal your little secret. Or maybe you're only voting based on sex, or skin color, and not ideas - wouldn't you look stupid on television when you admitted that, so just stay home. I say those are all excellent reason to make people justify their vote. 97% of blacks voted for Bama. Good, now ask them why. People who have no clue should be disincentivized to vote instead of the opposite.

But of course that wouldn't be any good for Democrats.