Get fired up!

If you have not seen this one you better check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

Scratching my head!

It has been awhile. I felt I had to get back on. We can officially say our debt matches the GDP. What the hell? When will America wake up and realize we must stop this madness? Also, on the same day it was announced that in a recent Bloomberg poll that, Americans think that the rich should cough up more. Again, the typical American has proven just how stupid they are. Lets tax the rich to death. Who creates the much needed jobs? Have any of the boobs really crunched the numbers. The richest Americans couldn't give over their entire fortunes and come even close to putting a dent in this mess. Wake up people! Demand that Congress stop the crazy spending. We do not need "Cap and Trade", a health care bill, TARP, Bail Outs. Cut the spending, cut the taxes. Allow working America to get it done, not big headed politicians in Washington!

Lord Christopher Monckton

If you haven't heard this name before check it out. He is an expert when it comes to the Global Warming debate. And he is one of the good guys! This highly intelligent man uses commonsense and real figures to disprove the religion known as "climate change". He recently revealed the true possibility of a "new world government" that is based solely on the myth that the world is getting warmer. It is really scary stuff. Get digging and arm yourself with the knowledge he can provide.

The TIme Has Come!

As you probably are aware by now, the Senate Finance Committee, approved the passage of a Health care reform bill. If the bill itself isn't scary enough. Did you know it wasn't even on a piece of paper. For the first time anyone can think of, a bill got through committee without even being a written bill. I think a certain party is getting to big for it britches. The time is now, you must react. Tell the Senate you do not support a bill that will change health care and cost the average American family $4000 more per year. I can't afford it and you probably can't either. Tell your Senator now. Make a point to make that very important phone call everyday. Let them know we will not stand for it any longer. Just like you brush your teeth each morning. Pick up the phone and make a quick call to let them know it's not OK. Together we can get our country back before the Red flag waives in your front yard!

You can use the resources below, which means save this site to your favorites.

Al Franken - 202.224.5641
Amy Klobuchar - 202.224.3244

Call now call often! Visit here again for more ideas!

Yikes!

Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) Was interviewed on "the Chris Baker show" Thursday 10/8. During the interview she revealed that the House only temporarily cut off funding to the group known as ACORN. The taxpayer was led to believe that there funding had been cut off permanently. Below is the line in the conference report that accompanied H.R.2918

ACORN: The CR would prohibit funds from this or any prior law from being provided to Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its affiliates. This provision would expire on October 31, 2009.

Are you surprised?

They just don't listen!

Are you tired of trying to get your point across to a liberal? Do they just not seem to listen? Make them face the facts! Next time you come across one of them and you do not have the time or energy to engage in discussion, make this challenge. Politely tell them to check out www.thefreeenterprisenation.org

From there they should click on "Oh My"

I was Black before I took office?!

What in the hell is he talking about? On Monday night President Obama, once again trying to buy support, was on the always crappy "Late Show with David Letterman". He pointed out to us really stupid Americans that he was black before he took office. Duh..... We already know this Mr. President! Your buddys in the media remind us all of the time. Any person showing opposition to you, your administration or your policy is called a racist. Frankly, nobody cares what color you are. Most of us (55% the last time I checked) think you are a bad President. I for one hoped that the election of the first black president, even a bad one at that, would finally end the race discussion. But, it has only seemed to increased it. Let's drop the race and get to the nuts and bolts! Is anyone supprised that Letterman brought the topic up? Was he asked to by the presidents handlers? What are you people so scared of?!

"You Lie"

Rep. Joe Wilson, much like the rest of us, had heard enough. He called out the President. During Obama's address to the join houses. Wilson from South Carolina let the Commander and Chief know, he had heard enough. Anybody who has looked into what the "actual" proposal could tell you Barack was lying, in fact he did several times. So, the question I ask you is. Should Wilson have yelled it out during the speech? Yes, enough is enough let him have it. Or, no that is not the time or the place, it doesn't help the cause. How do you feel? Let me hear it!

Profound little statement!

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it"

Scared, Stupid or Dishonest?

Why are our elected politicians not answering the questions? American are finally paying attention. Showing up at town hall meetings, writing the Congressmen/women and just plain getting thier voices heard. But, with all of the questions being asked why are there not any answers. I have a perfect case-in-point. Watch teh video of Chris Baker from KTLK talking to Sen. Franken-furter. He asks the same question 4 times. I guess I shouldn't complain, the longer they dance around the faster Obama and his band of follers see the approval ratings sink.
Check out Chris' blog and watch the debate video. Scroll half way down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DDJ8Y226W4&feature=player_embedded

Hummm

According to snope.com there is a lot of debate on the name of the true author of this piece. I posted it because it seems relevant. I do remember much of what I learned in History class. I did pay attention to what Hitler said and did. It scared the crap out of me. And although we don't know whos words these truly are the feelings seem popular. Hopefully this is all wrong!

I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy.. Why?We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?
Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and I know precisely what I am talking about) - the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.. It is potentially 1929 x ten...And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important.)
Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.And that is only the beginning..As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s In those times, the "savior" was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory. Conservative "losers" read it right now.And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did - regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand - the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course, How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe, and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .... . .. change. And the people surely got what they voted for.If you think I am exaggerating, look it up. It's all there in the history books.So read your history books. Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me..I choose to believe the evidence. No doubt some people will scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe-and why I believe it.I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next elections.

The current must read!

Pastor's wife's letter
How's this for apocalyptic literature. This was written by a pastor's wife in biblical prose as a commentary of current events. It is Brilliant.



~~~~~~~~~~
And it came to pass in the Age of Insanity that the people of the land called America , having lost their morals, their initiative,and their will to defend their liberties, chose as their SupremeLeader that person known as "The One".
He emerged from the vapors with a message that had no meaning; but He hypnotized the people telling them, "I am sent to save you.My lack of experience, my questionable ethics, my monstrous ego, and my association with evil doers are of no consequence. For I shall save you with Hope and Change.

Go, therefore, and proclaim throughout the land that he who preceded me is evil, that he has defiled the nation, and that all hehas built must be destroyed." And the people rejoiced, for even though they knew not what "The One" would do, he had promised that it was good; and they believed.
And "The One" said "We live in the greatest country in the world. Help me change everything about it!"And the people said, "Hallelujah! Change is good!"Then He said, "We are going to tax the rich fat-cats." And the people said "Sock it to them!"
"And redistribute their wealth."
And the people said, "Show us the money!"
And then He said, "Redistribution of wealth is good for everybody"

And Joe the plumber asked, "Are you kidding me? You're going to steal my money and give it to the deadbeats??" And "The One" ridiculed and taunted him, and Joe's personal records were hacked and publicized.

One lone reporter asked, "Isn't that Marxist policy?" And she was banished from the kingdom!Then a citizen asked, "With no foreign relations experience and having zero military experience or knowledge, how will you deal with radical terrorists?"

And "The One" said, "Simple. I shall sit with them and talk with them and show them how nice we really are; and they will forget that they ever wanted to kill us all!"

And the people said, "Hallelujah!! We are safe at last, and we can beat our weapons into free cars for the people!"
Then "The One" said, "I shall give 95% of you lower taxes."

And one, lone voice said, "But 40% of us don't pay ANY taxes."

So "The One" said, "Then I shall give you some of the taxes the fat-cats pay!"

And the people said, "Hallelujah!! Show us the money!"Then "The One" said, "I shall tax your Capital Gains when you sell your homes!"

And the people yawned and the slumping housing market collapsed.

And He said, "I shall mandate employer- funded health care for EVERY worker and raise the minimum wage.. And I shall give every person unlimited healthcare and medicine and transportation to the clinics."

And the people said, "Give me some of that!"Then he said, "I shall penalize employers who ship jobs overseas."

And the people said, "Where's my rebate check?"Then "The One" said, "I shall bankrupt the coal industry and electricity rates will skyrocket!"

And the people said, "Coal is dirty, coal is evil, no more coal! But we don't care for that part about higher electric rates."

So "The One" said, "Not to worry.. If your rebate isn't enough to cover your expenses, we shall bail you out. Just sign up with ACORN and your troubles are over!"Then He said, "Illegal immigrants feel scorned and slighted. Let's grant them amnesty,Social Security, free education, freelunches, free medical care, bi-lingual signs and guaranteed housing..."

And the people said, "Hallelujah!!" And they made him King!And so it came to pass that employers, facing spiraling costs and ever-higher taxes, raised their prices and laid off workers. Others simply gave up and went out of business and the economy sank like unto a rock dropped from a cliff. The banking industry was destroyed. Manufacturing slowed to a crawl. And more of the people were without a means of support.Then "The One" said, "I am the "The One" - The Messiah - and I'm here to save you! We shall just print more money so everyone will have enough!"

But our foreign trading partners said unto Him, "Wait a minute. Your dollar is not worth a pile of camel dung! You will have to pay more..."

And the people said, "Wait a minute. That is unfair!!"

And the world said, "Neither are these other idiotic programs you have embraced. Lo, you have become a Socialist state and a second-rate power. Now you shall play by our rules!"And the people cried out, "Alas, alas!! What have we done?"

But yea verily, it was too late. The people set upon "The One" and spat upon him and stoned him, and his name was dung. And the once mighty nation was no more; and the once proud people were without sustenance or shelter or hope. And the Change "The One" had given them was as like unto a poison that had destroyed them and like a whirlwind that consumed all that they had built.

And the people beat their chests in despair and cried out in anguish, "Give us back our nation and our pride and our hope!!" But it was too late, and their homeland was no more.You may think this is a fairy tale, but it's not.
It's happening RIGHT NOW !!!

Interesting Way To Put It.

Please read, even if you are an Obama fan. It is legitimate, written by respected, Lou Prichett, formerly of Proctor and Gamble. Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America 's true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management. ! Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.
_______________________________________________________

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America ' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

TRUE - CHECK: http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.asp

Make Minnesota A Red State!

What do we do to make our liberal state a RED one. I am asking the question with a hope to get many good ideas.

Was the President ok to say this?

Cambridge Cop, Disappointed in Obama's 'Stupidly' Comment, Refuses to Apologize
Sgt. James Crowley who arrested renowned black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. said Thursday he's disappointed President Obama said officers acted "stupidly" without knowing all the facts.

AP
Thursday, July 23, 2009


WASHINGTON -- A white police sergeant who arrested renowned black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. said Thursday he's disappointed President Obama said officers acted "stupidly" without knowing all the facts.
Sgt. James Crowley responded to Gates' home near Harvard University last week to investigate a report of a burglary and demanded Gates show him identification. Police say Gates at first refused and accused the officer of racism.
Gates was charged with disorderly conduct. The charge was dropped Tuesday, and Gates has since demanded an apology from Crowley.
Obama was asked about the arrest of Gates, who is his friend, at the end of a nationally televised news conference on health care Wednesday night.
"I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry," Obama said. "Number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home. And number three -- what I think we know separate and apart from this incident -- is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that's just a fact."
In radio interviews Thursday morning, Crowley maintained he had done nothing wrong in arresting Gates.
"I support the president to a point, yes, I think it's disappointing that he waded into what should be a local issue and something that plays out here," Crowley told WEEI. "As he himself said ... he doesn't know all the facts."
Crowley did not immediately respond to messages left by The Associated Press on Thursday.
Gates has said he was "outraged" by the arrest. He said the white officer walked into his home without his permission and only arrested him as the professor followed him to the porch, repeatedly demanding the sergeant's name and badge number because he was unhappy over his treatment.
"This isn't about me; this is about the vulnerability of black men in America," Gates said.
He said the incident made him realize how vulnerable poor people and minorities are "to capricious forces like a rogue policeman, and this man clearly was a rogue policeman."
Crowley, 42, said he won't apologize. And his union has expressed "full and unqualified" support for him.
Fellow officers, black and white, say he is well-liked and respected on the force. Crowley was a campus police officer at Brandeis University in July 1993 when he administered CPR trying to save the life of former Boston Celtics player Reggie Lewis. Lewis, who was black, collapsed and died during an off-season workout.
Gates' supporters maintain his arrest was a case of racial profiling. Officers were called to the home by a woman who said she saw "two black males with backpacks" trying to break in the front door. Gates has said he arrived home from an overseas trip and the door was jammed.
The president said federal officials need to continue working with local law enforcement "to improve policing techniques so that we're eliminating potential bias."
"What I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there's a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately," Obama said. "That's just a fact."
Gov. Deval Patrick, who is black, said he was troubled and upset over the incident. Cambridge Mayor Denise Simmons, who also is black, has said she spoke with Gates and apologized on behalf of the city, and a statement from the city called the July 16 incident "regrettable and unfortunate."
The mayor refused Thursday to comment on the president's remarks.
Police supporters charge that Gates, director of Harvard's W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research, was responsible for his own arrest by overreacting.
Black students and professors at Harvard have complained for years about racial profiling by Cambridge and campus police. Harvard commissioned an independent committee last year to examine the university's race relations after campus police confronted a young black man who was using tools to remove a bike lock. The man worked at Harvard and owned the bike.
Richard Weinblatt, director of the Institute for Public Safety at Central Ohio Technical College, said the police sergeant was responsible for defusing the situation once he realized Gates was the lawful occupant. It is not against the law to yell at police, especially in a home, as long as that behavior does not affect an investigation, he said.
"That is part of being a police officer in a democratic society," Weinblatt said. "The point is that the police sergeant needs to be the bigger person, take the higher road, be more professional."

One of America's greatest voices!

"I would hope the show appeals to the real silent majority. Right now, the two major political parties are essentially playing between the forty yardlines. Democrats are socialists and Republicans are afraid to really defend capitalism on such things as energy, education, and health care. And both parties seem to be charter members of the big government nanny state, whether it's no-smoking bans, a failed war on drugs, or a creeping environmental dogma that routinely tramples property rights.
Let's be blunt here--we are not a family with legal obligations to support one another. We are a nation of free individuals whose only hope in getting along lies in respecting the rights of our neighbors--including those who simply wish to be left alone."
----Jason Lewis, March 2009

If you havn't heard Jason its time. Catch him on KTLK 100.3 or on the internet. See link below. In our favorites.

Because I am fair!!!! Hats off.

Thank you for sharing with me your opposition to the Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act (H.R. 45). I appreciate hearing from you concerning this issue.

H.R. 45, which was introduced by Representative Bobby Rush on January 6, 2009, would prohibit an individual from possessing a firearm unless he or she has been issued a firearm license. This legislation is awaiting consideration in the House Judiciary Committee.

Rest assured that I will continue to oppose efforts to undermine Second Amendment freedoms.

As we deal with this and other gun-related matters in the 111th Congress, it is good to know that I have your support.

With best wishes.

Sincerely,



James L. Oberstar, M.C.

JLO/jjr

More Blah, Blah, Blah? No Way!

I appreciate your sharing with me your thoughts regarding health care reform.

Currently, there are 46 million Americans without health insurance and health care costs are spiraling out of control. In this climate, it is clear that something must be done to reform the health care status quo.

For over two years, Congress has been laying the groundwork for health care reform. Since February 2007, House committees have held 79 bipartisan hearings to thoroughly explore this complex issue. On July 14, 2009, the chairmen of the three committees with jurisdiction over health policy in the House of Representatives introduced America’s Affordable Health Choices Act (H.R. 3200), comprehensive health care reform legislation. As the weeks progress, a number of additional hearings and markups will be held by the committees of jurisdiction. You can view more information at these links:

• House Education and Labor Committee: http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/07/americas-affordable-health-choices-act.shtml
• House Energy and Commerce Committee: http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1706:house-democrats-introduce-bill-to-provide-quality-affordable-health-care-for-all-americans&catid=122:media-advisories&Itemid=55
• House Ways and Means Committee: http://waysandmeans.house.gov/MoreInfo.asp?section=52

It is important to note that H.R. 3200 will increase choice among an array of private and public insurance options. Most importantly, if you like the insurance that you have, you can keep it. Opponents of health care reform are spreading a number of myths, among them that health reform means fewer choices and that individuals will be forced out of their current plans. Consistent with President Obama’s goals, the legislation builds on what works in the current health care system by strengthening employer-provided care, while fixing what is broken with it. The legislation ensures that individuals will not have to worry about being denied insurance based on a pre-existing condition, or being without coverage if their employers drops coverage, if they lose their job, or if they change employers.

H.R. 3200 is paid for by achieving significant efficiencies and savings in Medicare and Medicaid and through a surcharge on the wealthiest 1.2 percent of Americans. The legislation ensures that middle-class Americans will see no tax increases. All families with adjusted gross incomes below $350,000 and all individuals with adjusted gross incomes below $280,000 will not see their taxes go up.

There will continue to be much discussion and debate as the 111th Congress works to build consensus on this critical issue. I am hopeful that opponents of health care reform will offer input on this issue as opposed to circulating myths.

With best wishes.

Sincerely,



James L. Oberstar, M.C.

JLO/wed

From FOXNews.com - July 16,2009

Congressional Budget Director Warns Health Care Bills Will Raise Costs
On the heels of the Senate health committee's approval Wednesday of a plan to revamp U.S. health care, three House committees with jurisdiction over the issue shifted into action. But the director of Congress' budget office warns the proposals will raise costs.


The director of the Congressional Budget Office issued a warning to Democrats Thursday that their health care proposals would raise costs, not lower them.
One day after a Senate panel approved its version of the health care reform plan, the first committee to do so, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf gave a dose of bad medicine to a separate committee.
Asked by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., whether costs would be lowered -- also known as "bending the curve" -- Elmendorf responded: "The curve is being raised."
Subsidies to help uninsured people would raise federal health care spending, which is already growing at an unsustainable rate, Elmendorf explained at the hearing. The Medicare and Medicaid cuts that lawmakers have offered to pay for the coverage expansion aren't big enough to offset the cost trend, particularly in the long term, he said.
House Republican Leader John Boehner seized on the comments, calling on Democrats to scrap their plans in light of the assessment.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell called it a "wake up call" for Democrats.
"The director of the Congressional Budget Office confirmed today what we have been saying for weeks -- the health care spending plan that some are trying to rush through Congress would actually make things worse," McConnell said.
CBO's numbers come at an inopportune time for Democratic leaders who are trying push through and merge several different health care reform plans in the coming weeks, on orders from President Obama.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid voiced frustration with Elmendorf, who in recent months has set back health care efforts with his office's cost analyses of the plans being floated.
"What he should do is run for Congress," Reid said, suggesting he found the CBO estimate to be partisan in its results.
Elmendorf endorsed taxing health benefits as a way of paying for reform, though Obama has spoken out against that idea.
How to pay for the plan is generating a big problem for Congress. The Senate Finance Committee, which is hammering out what could be the only bipartisan bill remaining, is struggling to come up with about $320 billion in revenue to pay for the reforms. Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., was clearly frustrated Thursday and criticized Obama for opposing a tax on employer-provided benefits.
"The president is not helping us," he said.
Meanwhile, House Democrats on Thursday pushed ahead with legislation that would deliver on Obama's promise to remake the health care system and cover some 50 million uninsured, despite concerns from their own party's moderate and conservative lawmakers that the $1.5 trillion plan costs too much.
On the heels of the Senate health committee's approval Wednesday of a plan to revamp U.S. health care, three House committees with jurisdiction over the issue shifted into action.
The Education and Labor Committee passed an amendment to speed up the bill's guarantee of access to health insurance for people with pre-existing medical conditions. The bill as written would have stopped insurance companies from denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions, beginning in 2012. The panel agreed Thursday to move up the implementation date for group plans to six months after the bill takes effect.
It was one of about 50 amendments before the committee, which planned to meet throughout the day to complete work on its portion of the bill by day's end.
The tax-writing Ways and Means Committee also was working on its portion of the overall legislation, which seeks to provide coverage to nearly all Americans by subsidizing the poor and penalizing individuals and employers who don't purchase health insurance.
A third House committee, Energy and Commerce, also was considering the measure Thursday, but the road was expected to be rougher there. A group of fiscally conservative House Democrats called the Blue Dogs holds more than a half dozen seats on the committee -- enough to block approval -- and is opposing the bill over costs and other issues.
Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., who chairs the Blue Dogs' health care task force, said the group would need to see significant changes to protect small businesses and rural providers and contain costs before it could sign on. "We cannot support the current bill," he said.
The Energy and Commerce Committee's Blue Dogs met Wednesday to consider what amendments they would offer, and the panel scheduled vote sessions daily through next Wednesday in what promised to be an arduous process to reach consensus.
Obama was doing all he could to encourage Congress to act. He scheduled White House meetings Thursday morning with two potential Senate swing votes, Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine. On Wednesday, he met with a group of Senate Republicans in the White House in search of a bipartisan compromise and appeared in the Rose Garden for the latest in a daily series of public appeals to Congress to move legislation this summer.
Obama also pushed his message in network television interviews, and his political organization launched a series of 30-second television ads on health care.
The Senate health panel's $615 billion measure would require individuals to get health insurance and employers to contribute to the cost. The bill calls for the government to provide financial assistance with premiums for individuals and families making up to four times the federal poverty level, or about $88,000 for a family of four, a broad cross-section of the middle class.
But the 13-10 party-line vote on the bill signaled a rift in Congress -- including between Democrats. Some liberal-leaning Senate Democrats are eager to move forward with or without Republican support, while some moderates want to hold out for a bipartisan deal.
The bill would be paired with one from the Senate Finance Committee.
But a core group on Finance -- which, unlike the health committee, must come up with a payment mechanism for the bill -- continued to labor toward bipartisan agreement. Because it might be difficult to secure support from all Democrats, Baucus insisted after daylong meetings Wednesday that a bipartisan bill was needed.

Our "leaders" are nuts!

From The Heritage Foundation Website
July 9, 2009
A Third Stimulus? Don't Repeat the Same Failures
by J.D. Foster, Ph.D. and Rea S. Hederman, Jr.
WebMemo #2533
Calls for a new stimulus bill are growing almost as fast as the ranks of the unemployed. Many politicians and economists who had advocated for the huge $787 billion second stimulus bill are surprised that it has failed to help the economy. Already, unemployment projections by the Obama Administration have proven wildly optimistic, leading Vice President Biden to say that the Administration "misread the economy."
However, misreading the economy or the snail pace in spending the stimulus money does not explain why the second stimulus has not delivered economic recovery. The reason that the second stimulus is not working stems from the misguided belief that a government can spend the economy out of a recession. If Congress enacts a third stimulus bill with a focus on more government spending and infrastructure projects, it will fail for the same reasons that the second one is failing, only this time with much higher government debt.
One definition of insanity is repeating an action over and over and expecting a different result. Policymakers should not replicate repeatedly failed policies of government spending that can only produce huge increases in government debt and a diminished economic future. Instead, they should focus on truly pro-growth policies that will enable the private sector to produce jobs and wealth. These policies, such as cutting spending and reducing tax rates, would be a radical course correction for the President but one he may be forced to consider before long.
The Second Stimulus Bill
The February stimulus bill championed by President Obama was the second of its kind in less than 12 months. President Bush and Congress enacted a smaller stimulus bill worth $152 billion that focused on rebates and some small tax breaks for businesses. By historical standards this was a robust fiscal response, but it proved ineffectual because it was largely based on the naive principle of "putting cash in people's pockets" as opposed to the operative principle that guided the very effective 2003 tax bill of improving economic incentives through rate reductions. Taken together, these two stimulus bills equal almost a trillion dollars.
The Obama Administration touted the second stimulus bill, saying that it would lower unemployment by quickly spending money on "shovel-ready" projects. Two senior economists with the Administration predicted that the unemployment rate would level off and never exceed 8 percent with stimulus plan.[1]
These promises proved false as the unemployment rate climbed from 7.6 in January to 9.5 percent in June, which far surpassed the Administration's projections. Even jobs in the highway construction field have fallen faster in 2009 than they fell in 2008, despite promises that the stimulus bill would quickly boost infrastructure projects.
Some stimulus defenders say that the real power of the deficit spending will drive the economy in the coming months as more money is spent faster. However, as White House Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag notes, the General Accounting Office found that stimulus spending is ahead of schedule.[2] Ahead or behind schedule, the problem is not the pace of the spending; the problem is the spending.
Time to Change Course
The economic theory behind the Obama bill--and the 2008 Bush bill--is that deficit spending can increase demand in the economy and that growth and employment will follow. With all the focus on the Obama bill, it is easy to forget that absent any new policy the budget deficit increased dramatically from 2008 to 2009 due to the recession, from 3.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) to a whopping 11.9 percent of GDP, according to the Congressional Budget Office. If deficit spending were truly stimulative, an 8.7 percentage point jump would be more than enough to cause the economy to begin to overheat.
This is no longer an academic, theoretical discussion. We have had a very clear experiment in deficit spending as fiscal stimulus, and the experiment failed with or without the additional Obama deficit spending. It is time for the proponents of this theory to either explain what special circumstances can possibly exculpate their pet theory or admit their failure.
Why did the economy not respond? How does the theory fail? The simple explanation is that deficit spending must be financed. The additional deficit spending before and after the Obama bill is financed by borrowing. That borrowing reduces the amount of domestic savings available for investment and so reduces investment, or it increases the amount of foreign savings that must be imported and so results in an increase in the trade deficit. The composition of total demand changes, but the level does not, and so the level of economic activity is unaffected.
Dangers of a Third Stimulus
If Congress and the President pursue yet another spending-based, debt-financed bill, it will be as fruitless as its predecessors. It will also demonstrate that this Administration and this Congress are incapable of learning from past mistakes or deviating from the dictates of their ideology. Worse, they will be sowing more seeds for a harvest of higher interest rates and economic weakness.
These higher interest rates will cause the entire interest rate structure to rise from low risk to high risk for short-term and longer maturities, car loans, mortgages, business loans, and all other types of credit. These higher interest rates will sap business investment in all manner of projects, producing slower growth in the short term and slower productivity and wage growth in the longer run.
What Should Be Done
It is by no means too late to enact good economic policy. Congress and the President still have time to adopt policies to short-circuit the downturn, accelerate the recovery, and strengthen the economy for the long term. To do so, they need to focus on economic incentives and business confidence, on a rapid return to a responsible fiscal policy, and on a well-grounded confidence in a sound currency. In brief, they should:
Scotch all talk of another spending-based economic stimulus and, instead, immediately repeal the authorization to spending any remaining sums under the first Obama stimulus bill;
Set a target for additional, permanent spending reductions for 2010 of at least 1 percent of GDP below the existing spending baseline;
Explicitly affirm their intention to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax relief, including the AMT patch, for at least five years;
Reduce marginal individual and corporate income tax rates for at least five years;
Suspend any effort to pass climate change legislation involving additional levies of any kind on businesses now or in the future;
Delay the implementation of the scheduled hike in the minimum wage until employment has reached its previous peak.
These will be bitter pills to swallow for the President and the majority in Congress, but it is what must be done to turn the economy around.
A Failed Experiment
The United States has pursued a clear experiment in deficit-based economic stimulus, and the experiment has failed. Continuing the experiment can only increase the national debt and delay consideration of effective alternatives. Repeating the experiment with yet another round of legislated deficit spending would be simply irrational and irresponsible.
Congress and the Administration are not powerless in the face of the economic downturn. But they should jettison their ideology to pursue policies that will help the economy in the short and long term. They must embrace a new era of responsibility.
J. D. Foster, Ph.D., is Norman B. Ture Senior Fellow in the Economics of Fiscal Policy in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies and
Rea S. Hederman, Jr., is Assistant Director of and a Senior Policy Analyst in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah .... more of the same blah.

Recently, I asked my Star Rep to vote against CAP and TRADE.

Here is the lame duck explaination.......

Thank you for sharing with me your opposition to legislation that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I appreciate your advocacy.

On June 26, the House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454) by a vote of 219 to 212. I supported the bill after ensuring that several concerns I had about potential economic hardship to the 8th District were addressed. The resulting language makes important progress toward promoting clean energy and reducing carbon emissions in the United States.

The legislation would create millions of new, clean energy jobs; enhance America’s energy security by reducing our dependence on imported oil from countries ruled by dictators; and protect the environment for many generations to come.

Additionally, this legislation would help America become the world leader in manufacturing clean energy technologies. For example, a single wind turbine contains up to 400 tons of steel and 8,000 parts. The clean energy economy will create jobs here in America to produce these technologies, and there is no reason American steel produced from Minnesota taconite cannot play a role in this new economy.

The Congressional Budget Office calculated that the legislation would cost the average U.S. household about $175 a year — a postage stamp a day.

I am pleased that agreement was reached to clarify the definition of renewable biomass to protect the 8th District’s vital wood product sector, as well as to make the iron ore industry eligible for emission allowances to prevent the loss of jobs on the Iron Range.

While we may respectfully disagree on this legislation, I hope to earn your support on the principle of an energy policy that moves our country toward energy independence and clean electricity generation. The legislation is now under consideration by the U.S. Senate.

With best wishes.

Sincerely,



James L. Oberstar, M.C.





Than explain this!!

Why do the Brits get it?!

Is it just me?
by Gerald Warner

If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people - not even Jimmy Carter.
Obama's problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never abandoned the campaign trail.
That is why he opened Pandora's Box by publishing the Justice Department's legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques. He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley , Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda.
"Don't be discouraged by what's happened the last few weeks," he told intelligence officers. Is he kidding? Thanks to him, al-Qaeda knows the private interrogation techniques available to the US intelligence agencies and can train its operatives to withstand them - or would do so, if they had not already been outlawed.
So, next time a senior al-Qaeda hood is captured, all the CIA can do is ask him nicely if he would care to reveal when a major population centre is due to be hit by a terror spectacular, or which American city is about to be irradicated by a dirty bomb. Your view of this situation will be dictated by one simple criterion: whether or not you watched the people jumping from the twin towers...
President Pantywaist's recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys, excited the ambitions of America 's enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker they can really take to the cleaners. His only enemies are fellow Americans.
Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly?

Do you think they are rolling in their graves?