News for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited government, free markets, liberty & individual freedom. All content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles. Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor/Founder: Dr. Bill Smith [aka: OzarkGuru] - firstname.lastname@example.org
Saturday, October 06, 2012
MSM Exit Polling Change Skews Results To Obama, Reveals Bias
By the Blue Collar Muse: There has been a huge amount of conversation going on over the last couple of weeks, at least in Conservative circles, on the validity of the polling that is being reported on and commented on in US media for the Presidential race.
The contention is that the polling data is flawed based on bad, faulty or intentionally biased metrics and that the media . . . are, instead, merely reporting polling numbers as if they were gospel. . . .
The contention is that due to media bias, reflected in both reporting and results desired by media company polling, the media is intentionally reporting misleading results derived from bad sampling in order to help Barack Obama win.
The question is, of course, is there any proof? . . .
The Washington Post may have provided exactly that.
Today’s Nashville Business Journal ran a story that has the Washington Post reporting that this year, the “…National Election Pool — a joint venture of the major television networks and The Associated Press…” is dropping Exit Polling data from 19 states, including Tennessee. This is a break in a 20 year practice of including exit polling data from all 50 states.
Of the 19 states excluded from Exit polling, 16 of them are considered firmly for Romney. This represents 135 of the 170 electoral votes the Post reports as solidly for Romney. Only 5 states considered solidly in Romney’s camp will be included in exit polling. Texas, the GOP’s biggest prize, will not be included.
Just three states – Delaware, Hawaii and Rhode Island – are excluded from the solidly Obama column. They represent 11 of the 196 electoral votes the Post attributes to Obama. There will be 10 states from the Obama camp with exit poll data reported on election night. The three largest prizes – California, Illinois and New York will be included.
Exit poll reports will come from 16 undecided states, 10 states in the Obama camp and just 5 states from the Romney camp. What viewers, listeners and readers will hear is that state after state has decided to re-elect Barack Obama. Again, 16 of the remaining 19 states from which there will be no exit poll reporting would favor Mitt Romney.
Further, as the majority of Obama’s states are in the Northeast and many of the excluded Romney states are in the South, exit poll reporting will be of Obama sweeping states in the Eastern and Central Time Zones with no news at all from Romney states. This will have interesting implications for voters in Central, Mountain and Pacific Zones.
The media will be able to accurately and truthfully report the results of the exit polling as favoring Obama. But they will not likely report that their own media based consortium has skewed the participants in that polling in favor of the President. . . . [Full Article] Tags:2012 Election, Exit Polls, Media Bias, Media Polling, National Election Pool, Tennessee Excluded from 2012 Election Night Exit PollsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Bill Smith, Editor: It is always good to review the actions and regulations of the government through the eyes of the consumer. However, it is also good to view the impact big government "green regulations" through the eyes of those who own and grow one of our most valuable renewable "green" product in America - trees!
The following article should be of concern to all timber owners, timber buyers and the forestry industry as a whole in all states. As an Arkansas timber owner, the article garnered my immediate attention.
It amazes me, as well as threatens me and others, that so many other people within the U.S. Government, the United Nations, and even in State agencies, political parties like the Green party, and numerous "green" organizations desire to tell timbers owners what we can and should do with our own land and timber. The below article addresses action to circumvent owner property rights via the "green labeling" agenda which may reduce or even eliminates the market value of domestic grown timber.
In the Natural State, Arkansas’ timber and forestry industries will be seriously affected if the manufacturers using word products narrow their recognition of certification programs to just one. Arkansas is covered in approximately 18 million acres of forestland, thus this is an important issue that Arkansas as well as all other timber producing states need talking about.
Become informed and then inform your Federal and State elected official. At the end of following article, there is a link to American Consumer Institute where you may request further information on this issue. "It is irresponsible to allow the government to promote a monopoly on forest certification that will drive losses of tens of billions of dollars in domestic wood and paper markets, and the reduction of employment and tax revenues in local communities that follow – all in the name of sustainability that the policies do not ensure."
By Stephen Pociask, The American Consumer Institute: The familiar saying “you get what you pay for” applies in many circumstances. Under certain conditions, however, this statement can be very misleading. For example, when customers pay a higher price for wood and paper products with “green” labels, they may not actually be getting something that is better for the environment. A combination of misguided policies and organized pressure from environmental activists to elevate one forest certification program over all others is creating confusion in the marketplace. As a result, consumers are paying more for wood and paper products that may fall short of their “green” expectations.
The source of the confusion deals with an ongoing heated debate over forest certification programs, dubbed the wood wars. Forest certification takes place when landowners meet the established benchmarks of one of several organizations, thereby earning the right to put that organization’s eco-label on its products. There are more than 50 certification programs in the world, with the US most reliant on standards set by the American Tree Farm System (ATFS), Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI).
With North America accounting for 40 percent of the world’s certified lands, the US is a leader in forest certification -- but there is some bad news. The US’ edge in responsible forestry management is being forced to the sidelines by government actions and environmental activists that are working to establish one international standard, FSC, as the only legitimate standard in the US. Because over 90 percent of the world’s FSC-certified land is found in foreign countries, if the US adopts a monopoly standard, three-quarters of our nation’s certified lands could be excluded from the market. That exclusion could mean a significant reduction in domestic production, the loss of American jobs, and sending US dollars overseas.
The study found several troubling consequences of this de facto monopoly that undermine the very sustainability goals of these certification programs. The study noted that the FSC program did not have consistent standards at all; instead they used benchmarks and requirements that differ from country to country. No surprise, under the FSC program, the US landowners face the strictest FSC standards in the world, while in more environmentally risky countries, such as Russia, landowners are allowed to game the system.
What does this mean for consumers? These added certification costs are passed on to US producers and ultimately American consumers of timber products in the price range of 15 percent to 20 percent. The study estimates that if an FSC standard becomes a controlling requirement for American forests, consumer welfare would drop by an estimated $10 billion for wood products and $24 billion for paper products each year.
Moreover, an FSC-only approach may incentivize the procurement of timber in environmentally risky locations, given the organization’s disparity in standards across the world. Furthermore, importing additional foreign wood increases both environmental and transportation costs. It may also encourage consumers to substitute away from wood products to less environmentally-friendly materials, including metals, plastics and concrete. This does not mean FSC has no environmental benefit, or that it is not a sound choice for some landowners and businesses, but it does mean that consumers are being misled by a system that promotes so-called environmentally superior products without the basis to support these claims or additional costs.
The imposition of a single standard through procurement requirements – such as the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED rating system used many government agencies – creates significant costs without ensuring corresponding environmental benefits.It is irresponsible to allow the government to promote a monopoly on forest certification that will drive losses of tens of billions of dollars in domestic wood and paper markets, and the reduction of employment and tax revenues in local communities that follow – all in the name of sustainability that the policies do not ensure.
In order for consumers to be confident that “you get what you pay for” holds true for wood and paper products in the “green” market, an approach that levels the playing field for forest certification programs is needed. Such an approach is not only pro-consumer, but it is also pro-American jobs and pro-environment.
------------ Stephen Pociask is an economist at the American Consumer Institute Center for Citizen Research. ACI is a nonprofit educational and research institute that focuses on economic policy issues that affect society as a whole, and seeks to be a better and more reasoned voice for consumers. Tags:Arkansas, timber industry, timber owners, forestry, U.S. Government, green labeling, American Tree Farm System, ATFS, Forest Stewardship Councilm FSC, Sustainable Forestry Initiative, SFI, LEED rating system, U.S. Green Building Council, The American Consumer InstituteTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Another example of ineptitude and rabid environmentalism under President Obama's DOE is their effort to prop-up the company "Abound Solar" with government funds which we don't have and thus borrowed from China. Below, Heritage Investigates lays our the recent information regarding this company.
Michael Sandoval, Heritage Investigates: Abound Solar, a Department of Energy [DOE] $400 million loan guarantee recipient that went bankrupt earlier this year, is under investigation by officials in Weld County, Colorado.
The company, which received nearly $70 million in loan funding before payments were cut off by DOE in 2011, also received a $100,000 tax break from the Colorado county in 2010. The county decided not to extend that offer when the company failed to achieve prescribed benchmarks for the tax break.
The county is also seeking nearly $2 million in unpaid property taxes from 2011 and 2012.
Sources tell 7NEWS that the company’s finances are under scrutiny.
7NEWS obtained internal documents from 2012 that show orders for tens of thousands of replacement solar panels. The orders cite different reasons for the replacements including, “low performance,” “under performance” and “catastrophic failures.”
The orders are for replacements requested after the Department of Energy stopped stimulus money payments to Abound.
Rep. Cory Gardner, R-CO, has announced his intent to issue a letter to DOE “seeking records and information about what it knew while providing money to Abound.”
Gardner told 7NEWS that the document request would be comprehensive.
“We need to know, did the Department of Energy — did they close on the loan when they knew there were technical problems with the product?” Gardner told the station.
The revelation of an investigation into the shuttered solar manufacturer comes less than a week after The Daily Caller News Foundation cited sources that appear to corroborate the issue of faulty, underperforming, and even dangerous solar modules, one of which the outlet showed bursting into flames in a video released with their report:
Internal documentation and testimony from sources within Abound show that the company was selling a faulty, underperforming product, and may have mislead lenders at one point in order to keep itself afloat.
“Our solar modules worked as long as you didn’t put them in the sun,” an internal source told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
The company knew its panels were faulty prior to obtaining taxpayer dollars, according to sources, but kept pushing product out the door in order to meet Department of Energy goals required for their $400 million loan guarantee.
The DCNF’s sources also show agreement with the extraordinarily high number of replacement panels–nearly 160,000–due to underperformance issues. Faulty manufacturing, DCNF said, was apparently prompted, at least in part, by the necessity to meet loan guarantee production benchmarks issued by DOE.
The company’s financial statements, under investigation in Colorado, will form a major part of the Congressional inquiry launched by Gardner.
“Now the question is did the (Department of Energy) — did they know something that the rest of should have known? Did Abound not tell the DOE something? These are questions that need to be answered,” Gardner told 7NEWS.
Gardner noted, in a radio interview with 1310 KFKA’s Amy Oliver, that potential fraud by the company would be investigated by state and local authorities. However, the Congressman’s office would request as much documentation as possible from DOE Secretary Steven Chu.
At a Congressional hearing in July 2012 before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Abound’s former CEO Craig Witsoe blamed cheap Chinese solar modules and Chinese government subsidies for the company’s demise:
Company executives and DOE loan administrators blamed Abound’s demise on Chinese market pressures created by the subsidies and price-cutting, rather than incompetence or political pressures exerted on the part of government officials in the loan approval process.
“Chinese panel makers were able to sell below cost and put Abound out of business before we were big enough to pose a real competitive threat to China’s rapidly growing market share,” Witsoe said in his statement.
Abound’s chairman concurred. ”Such a severe market change made it difficult for Abound and others to survive,” said Thomas Tiller.
Salazar told Denver’s alt-weekly Westword, “Any time you’re dealing with an emerging future on energy, you’re always going to have successes and you’re going to have setbacks,” he says. “And President Obama and I remain very confident that we’re moving in the right direction.”
Abound also received more than $12.6 million in additional tax credits under a separate investment tax credit for renewable energy projects, Heritage’s Lachlan Markay reported in July.
When Abound ceased operations, it joined a graveyard of other taxpayer-funded failures like Solyndra Heritage’s Amy Payne wrote, citing a compilation by Heritage staff of at least a dozen companies that have filed for bankruptcy. Tags:Abound Solar, bankruptcy, China, Colorado, Craig Witsoe, Department of Energy, government subsidies, investment tax credits, Ken Salazar, loan guarantee, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, renewable energy, Rep. Cory Gardner, solar panels, Weld CountyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
By Claude Salhani, Oilprice.com: There is a popular belief in the Middle East that Washington's foreign policy, particularly as it relates to this precarious region, is largely driven by America's dependency on, and insatiable appetite for Arab oil. One can make a good argument for that.
Had Syria been a major oil producing country chances are the US would have already dispatched military forces to impose a pax Americana and to put a stop to the horrific fighting that has been slowly, but without any doubt, ripping Syria apart and dismantling the infrastructures that make the Syrian state what it is today. Even if the war was to end today it would take years for Syria to return to its pre-war position from an economic and military perspective.
Some analysts believe that oil is what drove the United States to become militarily involved in Kuwait in 1990-91, in Iraq in 2003 and more recently in Libya.
Asides from some stealth behind the scenes support to a few of the many rebel groups engaged in the conflict that has been forthcoming in the form of weapons (mostly light weapons) and some intelligence delivered to a handful of the multitude of forces demanding the departure of Syrian President Bashar Assad, the US-NATO-Saudi-Qatari alliance has refrained from moving to the next step; full scale military intervention. Last week the Qataris made some attempts at the UN General Assembly in New York to drum up support for an Arab military intervention in Syria but that did not seem to take any traction with other Arab countries.
In the 18 months since the Syrian strife began in earnest human rights groups claim that some 30,000 people have been killed so far and some 350,000 Syrians have fled their country seeking refuge in Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon. If the current pace of refugees continues – and there is nothing to indicate it will abate anytime soon -- human rights groups and the UN relief agencies anticipate that number to jump to a staggering 700,000 people by the end of this year. In a country with a total population of some 20 million, those are frightful numbers. Those are frightful numbers by any means and with winter just around the corner the fate of the refugees becomes even more concerning.
While Syria may not be a major oil producer, it does however have some oil, though not abundantly, therefor placing the country in a non-strategic second-tier position, as far as the interests of the United States and its allies in the region are concerned. Nevertheless, it is Syria's geographic location on the old caravan route between Turkey and Arabia, or as it used to be known in the days of old, between Constantinople and the Hijaz -- that still holds the same strategic importance today as it did in the days of the caravan trains.
The names on the maps may have changed, Constantinople becoming Istanbul and the Hijaz, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, but very little else has changed in the end game except for the caravans giving way to trade routes and oil pipelines. And unless the geography of the region can change (unlikely), Syria remains very much the pathway to the Arab hinterland.
During the last several decades Lebanon and Turkey have been described as gateways to the Middle East. And indeed, they often are. However, it is important to remember that just as double security doors that one finds in many banks where customers enter the establishment through two sets of doors, where the first set needs to shut before the second set can be opened, Syria plays the same role in the region today. Lebanon and Turkey may be the "gateways" to the Levant and beyond, however in both instances the next overland point for any overland traveler or goods goes obligatory through Syria. If people have to travel through Syrian territory to get to or from points beyond these traditional "gateways," then so do goods and natural resource such as oil and natural gas pipelines.
Understand that and you can begin to understand part of the on-going conflict in the Middle East today.
--------------- OilPrice.com is the leading online energy news site. Its news and analysis covers all energy sectors from crude oil and natural gas to solar energy and hydro. Tags:Civil War, impact on oil, oil fields, oil, natural gas, pipelinesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The following NRO editorial identifies, “Democrats have been saying — or, in the case of Joe Biden, trying to say — that Mitt Romney plans to raise taxes on the middle class. This claim is flatly untrue.”
The article then explains that President Obama “proposes ever-higher spending, which means, unavoidably, ever-higher taxes. Romney proposes to restrain spending and to reform the tax code in the hopes of turning around our sclerotic economy. But only one of the candidates is telling the truth about his tax proposals.”
Editors, National Review Online: Democrats have been saying — or, in the case of Joe Biden, trying to say — that Mitt Romney plans to raise taxes on the middle class. This claim is flatly untrue. The word “lie” probably is thrown around too casually in our politics, but this qualifies. Romney has no such plan, has forsworn taking such a course of action, and has in fact proposed to cut tax rates for the middle class — and everybody else who pays the federal income tax — by reducing all brackets by 20 percent.
Romney’s plan would be revenue-neutral, making up for forgone tax revenue by eliminating certain exemptions and deductions. How many and which of those deductions would need to be reduced or eliminated would be determined by the economic facts on the ground come January: If the economy is growing more quickly than expected, then fewer offsets will be required to keep tax revenue level. Romney has been nothing if not consistent in his guiding principles for tax reform: lower rates and fewer deductions, producing a system that is fairer and flatter.
Analysts at the Tax Policy Center estimated that Romney could not both cut rates and maintain revenue neutrality, and published an estimate that this would necessitate an $86 billion tax increase on the middle class. Many of the center’s assumptions were either tendentious or incorrect, as we argued in an earlier editorial, and as has been amply demonstrated by budget scholars at the American Enterprise Institute and elsewhere. The center later cut its $86 billion estimate by more than half. And even that doesn’t quite get the story: For example, Romney proposes to “pay for” repealing the taxes associated with Obamacare by (this is a subtle point) repealing Obamacare, and no further offset is required. According to AEI’s Alex Brill, the Romney plan could produce anything from a $14 billion shortfall that would need to be made up elsewhere to a $1 billion surplus, depending upon how the plan is implemented and how fast the economy grows. An extra one-tenth of 1 percent in annual economic growth substantially changes the federal fiscal picture for the better. That fact, of course, is the animating idea behind Romney’s tax-reform agenda, the point of which is not to lower federal revenue but to increase economic growth by simplifying tax law, lowering compliance costs, and reducing economic distortions.
The Obama campaign’s dishonesty about this is striking even by the very low standards of Democratic election rhetoric. But the White House is also misleading the public about the consequences of its economic policies, specifically about elevating levels of federal spending that have produced an unbroken chain of deficits exceeding $1 trillion — which ultimately will force a very large tax increase on, yes, the middle class and all other taxpayers.
Gigantic deficits such as these can be sustained for only so long, and the Democrats’ spending spree — and their unwillingness to try any approach to restraining entitlement spending that hasn’t already failed — puts the country in a very risky situation: Interest rates are at present very low, but if they should return to something like their historic average, the increasing costs of financing our national debt will be catastrophic. The president’s most recent budget proposal would add some $7.6 trillion in new federal debt. The additional debt-service costs would add up to an average of about $1,300 per family per year under the current tax system. Families of relatively modest means would see hundreds of dollars a year in new taxes, and better-off families would see thousands or tens of thousands of dollars a year in new taxes. But not until after the November election, of course.
Ultimately, a dollar in spending is a dollar in taxes. There are better ways to organize the tax code, such as the way Romney has proposed. And a tax code that encourages enterprise, work, savings, and capital formation encourages economic growth, and thereby makes the broader fiscal reforms the country needs much easier to achieve.
Obama proposes ever-higher spending, which means, unavoidably, ever-higher taxes. Romney proposes to restrain spending and to reform the tax code in the hopes of turning around our sclerotic economy. But only one of the candidates is telling the truth about his tax proposals.
------------- For further information contact National Review Publisher Jack Fowler: email. Tags:NRO, Editorial, Barrack Obama, tax hike, Mitt Romney, election 2012To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Tags:Hugo Chavez, Venezuela, Barack Obama, USA, redistribution of wealth, socialism, vote, vote for me, editorial cartoon, William WarrenTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Mitt Romney Campaign: Instead of creating jobs, President Obama is really creating debt. Over thirty cents of every dollar is borrowed—much of it from China. He's not just wasting money. He's borrowing it, then wasting it.
Tags:Facts, Facts are Clear, Barack Obama, creating debt, election 2012, Mitt Romney, Campaign adTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
CBO: Deficit Tops $1 Trillion For 4th Straight Year Under Obama
Topics Today in and outside of Washington, D.C. - Deficit and Unemployment.
Deficit:The AP reports this afternoon, “A new estimate puts the deficit for the just-completed 2012 budget year at $1.1 trillion, the fourth straight year of trillion dollar deficits on President Barack Obama's watch. . . . The bleak figures from the Congressional Budget Office, while expected, add fodder for the heated presidential campaign, in which Obama's handling of the economy and the budget is a main topic.”
CBO summarizes, “The 2012 deficit was equal to 7.0 percent of gross domestic product, CBO estimates, down from 8.7 percent in 2011, 9.0 percent in 2010, and 10.1 percent in 2009, but greater than in any other year since 1947.”
This is the second unfortunate fiscal milestone reached by the United States in the second half of this year, following the gross national debt exceeding $16 trillion a month ago.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said today, “Never before have a President and a majority party in the Senate done so little to address challenges as great as the ones our nation faces right now. Every single year the President has been in office, the nation has racked up a deficit of over $1 trillion, and now we have an unsustainable $16 trillion debt. Yet, Senate Democrats haven’t bothered to put together a budget in three years. Americans have been looking for leadership from the White House, and while the President claims to have offered a ‘balanced and comprehensive deficit reduction’ approach, his plan was so unserious that it was rejected by every single member of Congress. It’s time for leadership, time for a much different approach to get our economy growing and our nation on a sustainable path.”
Unemployment: The U.S. Department of Labor announced the September unemployment numbers. The non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) national unemployment number is 7.8%, down a bit from August. However, much of the gains were made in part-time jobs, while Americans have been unable to find full-time work. For the previous nine months, the nation’s labor force participation rate has remained below 64% as millions of Americans have stopped looking for work.
Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, remarked, "Apparently what hundreds of billions of stimulus dollars could not accomplish, a fast-approaching Election Day has accomplished. . . . Jack Welch, the legendary former chairman of General Electric and very much an establishment man. Welch tweeted, 'Unbelievable job numbers… these Chicago guys will do anything… can't debate so change the numbers.'"
Tim Phillips, President Americans for Prosperity noted, "This mornings job numbers report is further proof that President Obama's big-government agenda is failing Americans. This has been the most sluggish economic "recovery" in recent history. More Americans are unemployed under President Obama than there have been under the past 11 presidents combined. With a 7.8% unemployment rate, only 114,000 jobs were created in September. At this rate the Great Recession job gap won't be closed until 2025.
"There are still over 12 million Americans unemployed today! With 4.8 million of those Americans having been unemployed for more than 27 weeks. For many, the American Dream is disappearing. Our economy is being stifled by the big spending and over-regulation of the Obama Administration’s policies.All around the country, American families are suffering under policies that put the brakes on economic growth and leave millions jobless. Many American families are coming to grips with a crisis at the dinner table that is rarely expressed in statistics or campaign style rhetoric. With 12.1 million Americans unemployed, it's time to try something different. Find out more at www.afpjobsagenda.org
Bill Wilson, Americans For Limited Government responded to Obama's 13 million jobs gap. "In this recession, the economy has lost a net 3.4 million jobs from its 2008 peak that have not yet been recovered. Meanwhile the working age population has grown by more than 11.1 million since then — creating a 13.5 million and widening jobs gap. . . . Since the job market’s bottom in Dec. 2009, the meager jobs growth we are currently seeing at about 150,000 a month is still not keeping up with population growth of about 200,000 a month. Therefore, it is had little effect on the unemployed rate, which had been above 8 percent for 43 straight months, the longest period of sustained high unemployment since the Great Depression. 7.8 percent is still not where we need to be.
Paul T. Conway, former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Department of Labor, Generation Opportunity, said :For young Americans the reality is even worse. The youth unemployment rate for 18-29 year olds in September 2012 is 11.8% (NSA). To compound the problem, an additional 1.7 million young adults are not counted as "unemployed" by the U.S. Department of Labor, meaning they have given up looking for work due to the lack of jobs. If these 1.7 million were added into the overall figure, the actual unemployment rate for 18-29 year olds would be 16.6%. The youth unemployment rate for 18-29 year old African-Americans for September 2012 is 21.0 percent (NSA); the youth unemployment rate for 18-29 year old Hispanics for September 2012 is 12.1 percent (NSA); and the youth unemployment rate for 18–29 year old women for September 2012 is 11.6 percent (NSA). Tags:Defiticit, Unemployment, United States, September 2012, numbersTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Obama Gets Pretty Flustered When Someone Challenges His Nonsense
Herman Cain, Cain TV: Mitt Romney's not the kind of guy who will just stand there and let you get away with lying.
Barack Obama proved tonight that he knows can’t defend his record, so he tried the infamous tactic of the Big Lie. This means you make an outrageous statement and just keep repeating it. The fact that it’s complete fiction is irrelevant. You figure that if you say it enough, people will believe it.
The president kept repeating the lie that Mitt Romney is proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. That’s not true. Fortunately, Mitt Romney isn’t the kind of guy to just stand there and let someone lie about him, and he called the president out.
It’s about time someone called the president out on the nonsense he says. Governor Romney didn’t let him get away with claiming he was serious about cutting the deficit either. When Obama pretended he was putting a serious deficit reduction plan in front of Congress, Romney reminded him that he’s been president for four years and he’s run $1 trillion deficits every year!
When Romney explained the need to repeal Dodd-Frank, which has had a horrible impact on the banking industry, Obama tried to pretend Romney wants no regulation at all of financial markets. Romney didn’t let him get away with that either!
And when Obama tried to pretend that ObamaCare was based on Romney’s plan in Massachusetts, Romney pointed out that his plan didn’t raise taxes, didn’t create a board that would control people’s treatments and didn’t put people in a position to lose the insurance they already had, and liked.
Obama looked awfully uncomfortable being called out for the nonsense he says. He’s not used to it. The media certainly doesn’t do it to him. Thank goodness Mitt Romney did, and as a result, dominated this first debate.
Herman Cainis a national
speaker, American author, business executive, radio host, syndicated
columnist, and Conservative Tea Party activist from Georgia. He was a
candidate for the 2012 U.S. Republican Party presidential nomination.
His articles and speeches have appeared in the ARRA News Service.
Tags:Herman Cain,commentary, 1st debate, 2012 election, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Governor Mitt Romney emerged from the first presidential debate as the clear winner. There were a lot of good moments in last night's debate, but the best part was watching the heads of liberal commentators explode. The poster boy of this phenomenon was "MSDNC's" Chris Matthews.
You may recall that Barack Obama once gave Chris Matthews a "thrill up my leg." Matthews also confessed that it was his job to make sure Obama succeeded. Last night the thrill retreated down his leg as Matthews gave "O's" performance a 0. You can watch his on-air meltdown here. Andrew Sullivan of the left-wing Daily Beast wrote, "This was a disaster" for Obama.
After a good night's rest, I was curious to see how the liberal media would spin the debate this morning. There was no change. Every liberal commentator on TV this morning was dumbfounded. Before last night they thought the election was over. Clearly it is not. They thought the cool Obama would easily beat the stiff Romney. He did not.
The most difficult aspect of last night's debate to explain is the body language. Obama constantly refused to look at Mitt Romney, and instead spent much of the time looking at his notes. One commentator asked, "What was he doing? Preparing for the next debate?" A columnist for the Washington Times put it well when he wrote:
"Bewildered and lost without his teleprompter, President Obama flailed all around the debate stage last night. He was stuttering, nervous and petulant. It was like he had been called in front of the principal after goofing around for four years and blowing off all his homework."
Romney, in contrast, was confident, prepared, in command of his facts, and he made several points each time he was given those precious few moments to speak to the American people. He wasted no opportunities to make his case that Obama has failed and that we can do better.
On the substance, there were several good exchanges with Governor Romney coming out on top in virtually every one. Here are a few examples:
Despite the weak economy and high energy prices, Obama couldn't stop himself from attacking American industry. He specifically went after $4 billion in tax deductions claimed by the oil industry. Romney pounced:
"First of all, the Department of Energy has said the tax break for oil companies is $2.8 billion a year. And it's actually an accounting treatment, as you know, that's been in place for a hundred years. … And in one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green-energy world. … that's about 50 years' worth of what oil and gas receives. … 50 years' worth of breaks -- into solar and wind -- to Solyndra and Fisker and Tesla and Ener1. I had a friend who said you don't just pick the winners and losers, you pick the losers. So this is not the kind of policy you want to have if you want to get America energy secure."
Obama also trotted out another of left's tired old lies when he said he wanted to end tax breaks for companies shipping jobs overseas. Romney replied: "Look, I've been in business for 25 years. I have no idea what you're talking about. I maybe need to get a new accountant. But the idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is simply not the case." Watch it here.
When it came to job creation, Obama's big idea was to hire 100,000 teachers. The federal government does not hire teachers! Local school districts do that -- when and if their budgets (the taxpayers) can afford it. In contrast, Governor Romney emphasized his energy plan, which would allow private industries to create millions of new jobs.
Toward the end of the debate, the subject shifted to the role of government, and Governor Romney hit a home run. He said, "The role of government is to promote and protect the principles" found in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. He continued:
"In that line that says, 'We are endowed by our Creator with our rights,' I believe we must maintain our commitment to religious tolerance and freedom in this country. That statement also says that we are endowed by our Creator with the right to pursue happiness as we choose. …
"We're a nation that believes that we are all children of the same God… And we look for discovery and innovation, all these things desired out of the American heart to provide the pursuit of happiness for our citizens. But we also believe in maintaining for individuals the right to pursue their dreams and not to have the government substitute itself for the rights of free individuals." Watch their exchange here.
Going into last night's debate, the polls overwhelmingly predicted Obama would win. One national media poll released Monday found that 55% of likely voters believed Barack Obama would win the debate, compared to just 31% predicting Governor Romney would win. CNN did a snap poll of 430 adults who watched the debate and by a margin of 67% to 25%, they said Governor Romney had won. CBS polled 500 undecided voters after the debate and by a more than 2-to-1 margin, (46% to 22%) they also declared Mitt Romney the winner.
------------- Gary Bauer is is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families. Bauer was a former Republican presidential candidate and served as President Ronald Reagan’s domestic policy adviser. Tags:Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, election 2012, Presidential race, first debate, results, Mitt Romney wins, Romney, Obama,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Two viewpoints of tonight's presidential debate looking at the last four years under President Obama. Mitt Romney view: "What a shame." Obama could have been better. I will fix the problem. Barack Obama's view: "What a Drag." I don't have time for all of this -- you know -- I'm rather busy with my sport's interests. Toon by Dan Youra:
Tags:2012 election, debates, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, political cartoon, Dan YouraTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Tonight is the 1st Election 2012 Presidential Debate between Democrat incumbent President Barack Obama and Republican Governor Mitt Romney. The key topic for the debate will be Domestic Policy and be divided into six time segments of approximately 15 minutes each on topics to be selected by the moderator and announced several weeks before the debate.
The moderator will open each segment with a question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a discussion of the topic. Jim Lehrer, PBS: NewsHour, will host the debate at 9:00-10:30 p.m. Eastern Time from the University of Denver. NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, PBS, CNN, CNBC, Fox News, MSNBC, C-SPAN, and Univision will all broadcast it live.
While everyone may have been following their local TV or media ramp-up for the debate, below are a two articles of interest by two nonprofit conservative organizations addressing this evenings debate.
With the first presidential debate just hours away and the mainstream media spending its time talking about style, conservatives need to keep our eyes on the substance. Obama has something to try to hide—his record. While the pundits will pick apart every word of Romney’s performance, we must talk up the realities of Obama’s failed leadership and the reform necessary to make America strong again. It’s time for all of us to ensure people see through the Obama smoke screen.
Just like we saw during the Democrat National Convention last month, Obama's approach will likely be to blame, punt and twist his responses hoping to play upon the ignorance of the voting public. He’ll say a lot of things but you can remind people you know about what he won’t say:
The real unemployment rate is 15% with young people unemployed at levels not seen in generations.
With his current agenda and proposed second-term spending, Obama will increase taxes on middle class families by thousands of dollars each year.
Household income has dropped by more than $4000 per year under Obama.
Gas prices are more than double from when he took office.
The labor participation rate is at an all-time low and male employment has fallen to its lowest point on record.
Obamacare is expected to increase healthcare costs for American families by more than $3000.
Healthcare costs for young adults have already increased by 45 percent, affecting students and their future employers.
The National Debt has increased faster under Obama than under any president in history to a staggering $16 trillion.
Obama spent more than $1 billion of taxpayer money on failed companies like Solyndra instead of increasing domestic energy sources through initiatives like the Keystone XL Pipeline.
Despite all the claims of shovel-ready jobs, Obama’s $787 stimulus has failed to put Americans back to work.
Through a rambling narrative of twisted facts, Obama will attempt to reshape history. But we’re living it. He wants Americans to forget the effects of his record. But we’re daily faced with the damage. Obama may choose to ignore them, but Americans know the facts about taxes, jobs, debt, the deficit and the danger of Obamacare. And we won’t forget.
The ECONOMY A Non-Recovery Recovery
The August report shows that the labor market is continuing its non-recovery. Average job growth for 2012 is worse than average job growth in 2011. Fiscal policies from Washington have made the situation worse. While President Obama has promised to reduce regulations, which would help job creation, his largest initiative—Obamacare—will harm employment. The Obamacare tax hikes coincide with the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts in January 2013. This will throw the economy into another deep recession, and businesses are already delaying investment and hiring as a result.
Obama Could Prevent a Made-in-Washington Recession
Though Congress has recessed until mid-November, President Obama could and should immediately call it back to finish its bare minimum tasks for the year. At no time this year has President Obama made the resolution of Taxmageddon a priority, and in this he has joined with Congress in a conspiracy of inertia. But time remains to change course, to prevent the recessionary job loss and wealth destruction threatening the nation. If a slowdown or even a recession unfolds as CBO predicts, the blame will lie with this President and this Congress.
Runaway Deficit and Debt
For the fourth year in a row, the federal government in 2012 will run a budget deficit exceeding $1 trillion. The deficit is already $49 billion higher than CBO’s January estimate. Debt held by the public this year will reach $11.3 trillion by October, roughly three-fourths of the entire economy.
Government’s Proper Role in Creating Jobs: Top Five Actions to Take
In dealing with a weak economy, America’s elected leaders should stop overspending and overborrowing and instead focus on getting the government out of the way of the private sector. Government should reduce its unnecessary interference in the marketplace, which will help encourage America’s businesses to invest and create jobs. Congress should adopt the pro-growth, job-creating New Flat Tax; encourage development and use of America’s vast energy reserves; encourage free trade that opens foreign markets to American goods and services; stop unwarranted overregulation of the marketplace; and repeal the government’s labor price-fixing for federal construction.
HEALTH CARE Obamacare and the Individual Mandate: Violating Personal Liberty and Federalism
The individual mandate is an unconstitutional violation of personal liberty and strikes at the heart of American federalism. It threatens increased numbers of uninsured, more cost-shifting, and further market destabilization, and it invites an enforcement nightmare.
Obamacare and New Taxes: Destroying Jobs and the Economy
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) imposes numerous tax hikes that transfer more than $500 billion over 10 years—and more in the future—from hardworking American families and businesses to Congress for spending on new entitlements and subsidies. In addition, higher tax rates on working and investing will discourage economic growth both now and in the future, further lowering the standard of living.
Obamacare and the Budget: Playing Games with Numbers
A close examination makes it clear that the deficit reduction associated with PPACA is based on budget gimmicks, sleights of hand, accounting tricks, and completely implausible assumptions. A more honest accounting reveals the new law as a trillion-dollar budget buster.
GOVERNING Four Immediate Reforms to Change the Culture of Congress
We recommend reforms of both parties’ internal caucus rules in order to reverse the decades-long trend whereby House leaders have acquired enormous power at the expense of rank-and-file Members. We believe the reforms recommended here would enable rank-and-file Members to fulfill the responsibilities our Founders envisioned for them in the Constitution, consistent with the public demand for changing how Congress operates. Reforms that could change the culture of Congress:
The steering committee, rather than party leaders, should select all committee chairmen and members (including Rules, Administration, “select,” and “joint” committees).
Party leaders should no longer dominate or control the steering committee. In practice, this would dispense with the allotment of multiple steering committee slots to party leaders and would allow rank-and-file Representatives to nominate and elect the controlling votes on each steering committee.
Term limits should apply to all House and party leaders, including the Speaker, as well as to committee chairmen and ranking members.
A cap should be placed on the overall size of each committee—such as a 50-member maximum—to avoid scenarios where committees wield a disproportionate amount of influence over the House.
ENERGY No More Energy Subsidies: Prevent the New, Repeal the Old
In 2007, American taxpayers subsidized government-preferred energy sources to the tune of nearly $17 billion. Increasingly, it is politicians in Washington who decide how Americans produce and consume energy. But subsidies for special interests stifle competition, raise energy prices, and decrease economic opportunities. It is time for Washington to eliminate all government subsidies and special policy treatments that benefit certain industries at the expense of others. Energy companies should rely on innovation and efficiency, not American taxpayers, to thrive in a system of free enterprise.
Hydraulic Fracturing: Critical for Energy Production, Jobs, and Economic Growth
Energy production on private lands in the United States has been one of the most promising success stories in recent years, at a time when the country has struggled to grow economically. A large part of the success behind this tremendous oil and gas production and job creation is due to an energy-extraction process known as hydraulic fracturing. Misconceptions about hydraulic fracturing abound.
TAXES Taxmageddon: Massive Tax Hikes on the Horizon
Starting January 1, 2013, Americans will face a $494 billion tax increase, the highest ever in one year. The average middle-class American family would see its taxes rise by $4,100 in 2013 alone. And this is just for one year. Taxpayers would see even higher tax hikes in succeeding years. [Click here to see how Taxmageddon will impact you.]
INCOME MOBILITY Why Income Inequality Doesn’t Threaten Opportunity
The New Liberal Dream: The Left’s new dream is first and foremost about all that the federal government must do to create opportunity and ensure incomes are more equitably distributed. Individual effort takes a back seat to government spending, programs, and cradle-to-grave entitlements. But the American Dream is about ensuring equal opportunities for all to prosper. Tags:election 2012, presidential debate, October 3, 2012, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Univ. of ColoradoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
“Obama claims more than $4 trillion in deficit savings over the coming decade. But it you peel away accounting tricks and debatable claims on spending cuts, it’s more like $1.1 trillion. Republicans say it’s even less because of creative bookkeeping used to mask spending on Medicare reimbursements to doctors.” ((Associated Press, “"'Candidates' deficit plans don’t add up as government adds $1.1 trillion in debt,” October 1, 2012))
“The federal debt, which recently hit $16 trillion, is projected to grow to $25.4 trillion by the year 2022 under Obama’s budget… Independent experts panned the president’s budget for its ‘troubling’ reliance on gimmicks and accounting tricks to inflate the magnitude of the savings being proposed.” (Washington Free Beacon, “Phantom Savings,” September 28, 2012)
“Obama exaggerated when he claimed ‘independent experts’ say his deficit-reduction plan would reduce the federal deficit by $4 trillion over 10 years. Actually, one independent analysis criticized a central part of the president’s plan as a ‘gimmick.’” (FactCheck.org, “FactChecking Obama and Biden,” September 14, 2012)
“[President Obama] didn’t cut $1 trillion. Spending goes up over the next decade, not down… Only in Washington do people project spending to increase, then decide to increase it but by less, then say they cut spending.” (McClatchy, “Obama claim of cutting spending is not right,” September 28, 2012)
“I also worry that this plan doesn’t contain enough deficit reduction or entitlement reform. It does stabilize the debt, but at too high a level and in a way that isn’t robust over the long-run.” (Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget president Maya MacGuineas, “CRFB Reacts To The President’s FY 2013 Budget,” February 13, 2012)
“Unfortunately, [President Obama’s] proposal falls short of [$4 trillion in deficit reduction] by counting war savings that were already planned; and while it does (barely) stabilize the debt, it does so at a dangerously high level and with no margin for error.” (Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, “Our advice to the debt supercommittee: Go big, be bold, be smart,” September 30, 2011)
“Taken at face value, Barack Obama’s latest budget is a bold combination of fiscal rectitude, populist tax increases and industrial policy-lite… Do not take it at face value… Much of his purported spending reduction is accounting legerdemain.” (The Economist, “Barack Obama’s budget,” February 13, 2012)
“Independent budget experts said the blueprint that Obama unveiled Monday — which White House officials say would save more than $4 trillion when added to earlier budget deals this year — appears to fall short of his target. The plan also relies on an array of well-worn budget ploys that do little to advance the cause of bipartisan cooperation in taming the nation’s spiraling debt, the experts said.” (Washington Post, “Budget analysts say Obama deficit plan is likely to miss its targets,” September 19, 2011)
Tags:U.S. Senate, Budget committee, President Barack Obama, Budget Claims, Shredded, Journalists, Analysts, ExpertsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Everyone should listen to the following video while it is still available. It is a short message from Bishop E.W. Jackson to fellow black Christians about the evil being done by the Democrat party.
John Nolte on Brietbart said, "Note that Bishop Jackson is not endorsing Mitt Romney or the Republican Party and never once mentions Barack Obama. His testimony is merely an indictment of the Democrat Party, not from a racial or partisan perspective, but from a Christian one.
"Honestly, I would love to hear anyone attempt to argue against the points the Bishop makes about Planned Parenthood, same sex marriage, and most especially the Democratic Party's attacks against God, up to and including the booing of God last month at the Democratic convention in Charlotte (something the Bishop mentions in the video).
"Bishop Jackson has turned his beliefs into a moment called S.T.A.N.D. -- which stands for Staying True to America's Destiny. Here's the website."
Tags:Bishop E.W. Jackson, black Christians, Planned Parenthood, same sex marriage, attacks against God, Democrat party, evilsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
By Aaron Klein, WND: A top Democrat strategist and donor who served as President Obama’s lead auto-industry adviser recently conceded that the rationing of heath services under Obamacare is “inevitable.”
Steven Rattner advocated that such rationing should target elderly patients, while stating, “We need death panels.”
Rattner serves on the board the New America Foundation, or NAF, a George Soros-funded think tank that was instrumental in supporting Obamacare in 2010. Soros’ son, financier Jonathan Soros, is also a member of the foundation’s board.
Rattner was the so-called “car czar,” the lead auto adviser to the Treasury Department under Obama.
Last month, Rattner penned an opinion piece in the New York Times titled “Beyond Obamacare” in which he proclaimed “We need death panels” and argued rationing must be instructed to sustain Obama’s health-care plan. His comments have been virtually ignored by traditional media as the president campaign’s for a second term.
“We need death panels,” began Rattner. “Well, maybe not death panels, exactly, but unless we start allocating health-care resources more prudently – rationing, by its proper name – the exploding cost of Medicare will swamp the federal budget.” . . . [Full Story]
Steven Rattner, a "Death Rat", is an extreme progressive. As mentioned in the article, Rattner serves on the NAF’s 22-person board of directors alongside Jonathan Soros, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria and Google’s Eric Schmidt.
Soros’ Open Society Foundation is a primary donor to the NAF. Other major donors include the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google Inc. and the Rockefeller Foundation. Another donor is Free Press, also funded by Soros, a group that advocates for more government control of the airwaves and Internet. Free Press was founded by Robert W. McChesney, an avowed Marxist who has recommended capitalism be dismantled “brick by brick.”
NAF fellow Michael Lind wrote, “Our goal [is] not to repeal the New Deal [of Franklin Roosevelt] but to adapt it to the circumstances of the 21st century.”
Discover The Networks notes how the NAF approved of Obamacare because it would “offer a new image” of how Americans view dying; and it would help “patients and their families to recognize” that, “[S]ometimes ‘doing everything’ results in more burden than benefit. High-tech medicine can prolong life, but for some patients, it merely draws out the process of dying.” Tags:Obamacare, death panels, rationing, Democrat strategist, Steven Rattner, Obama CzarTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Administration’s End-Run on Purchase of Illinois Prison
Congress has repeatedly rejected the Obama administration’s effort to use taxpayer funds to purchase this [Thomson, Illinois] prison. It is clear that the funding law that Sen. Durbin voted for and President Obama signed does not suddenly authorize what Congress has repeatedly denied.’
Empty Prison in Thomson, Ill., bought by the Feds for for $165 million
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell released the following statement today regarding the Obama Administration’s decision to acquire the Thomson Prison in Illinois, despite signing a law that doesn’t authorize the purchase:
“Congress has repeatedly rejected the Obama administration’s effort to use taxpayer funds to purchase this prison. It is clear that the funding law that Sen. Durbin voted for and President Obama signed does not suddenly authorize what Congress has repeatedly denied. This election-eve purchase comes at the expense of delaying approved projects that are not in the President’s home state. And there is overwhelming, bipartisan opposition to the President’s plan to transfer terrorists from the secure detention facility at Guantanamo bay into the United States. Terrorists don’t deserve the same legal rights as the Americans they’re targeting. We should be focused on stopping terrorists, not defending them. And Americans would rather their tax dollars be spent preventing attacks from terrorists, than spent bringing them into their cities and towns as the Obama administration has repeatedly tried to achieve.”
*The passed "funding law" was J.Res. 117, "Continuing Resolution" to keep the present government operational for six months. Under President Obama's orders, DOJ AG Eric Holder moved forward to siphon $165 million to buy this new prison. But payback was owed to Illinois Senator Dick Durbin (D) who backed Obama's bills and promised Illinois the prison would be bought by the Government. With the fact that Obama might not be re-elected, they moved quickly to close the deal. So we have Illinois / Chicago style Obama dirty politics using taxpayers dollars for the CR to purchase a prison in Thompson, Illinois. I am sure Obama will claim he has now created more jobs in Illinois. Also Reads:
Agree with PatriotUSA: "Posting this exactly as I received from TexasFred." My comments are at the end of the article.
Texas Fred: Once again I have a piece sent to me via email that is so good that it has to be shared with my friends, family and readers. As I said, it’s from an email, there is no link to this piece, it is an opinion and presented exactly as I received it! Thank you NativeSon! FOR OUR COUNTRY
From: John Porter To: Americans everywhere
I was sitting at my keyboard halfway through my writing a letter to you about how Barack Obama was fulfilling his pledge to “Transform America” by “Changing the fundamentals of America”, so that our government would become the plantation, he the owner, and we the slaves, when this article by Steve McCann appeared in my in box. After checking it for accuracy, and finding it so, I put my writing on hold and here present it to you, for I could not say it better.
…Is it already too late?
Obama’s Second Term Transformation Plans
The 2012 election has often been described as the most pivotal since 1860. This statement is not hyperbole. If Barack Obama is re-elected the United States will never be the same, nor will it be able to re-capture its once lofty status as the most dominant nation in the history of mankind.
The overwhelming majority of Americans do not understand that Obama’s first term was dedicated to putting in place executive power to enable him and the administration to fulfill the campaign promise of “transforming America ” in his second term regardless of which political party controls Congress. That is why his re-election team is virtually ignoring the plight of incumbent or prospective Democratic Party office holders.
The most significant accomplishment of Obama’s first term is to make Congress irrelevant. Under the myopic and blindly loyal leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have succeeded in creating an imperial and, in a second term, a potential dictatorial presidency.
During the first two years of the Obama administration when the Democrats overwhelmingly controlled both Houses of Congress and the media was in an Obama-worshiping stupor, a myriad of laws were passed and actions taken which transferred virtually unlimited power to the executive branch.
The birth of multi-thousand page laws was not an aberration. This tactic was adopted so the bureaucracy controlled by Obama appointees would have sole discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws and enforcing thousands of pages of regulations they and not Congress would subsequently write.
For example, in the 2,700 pages of ObamaCare there are more than 2,500 references to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. There are more than 700 instances when he or she is instructed that they “shall” do something and more than 200 times when they “may” take at their sole discretion some form of regulatory action. On 139 occasions, the law mentions that the “Secretary determines.” In essence one person, appointed by and reporting to the president, will be in charge of the health care of 310 million Americans once ObamaCare is fully operational in 2014.
The same is true in the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which confers nearly unlimited power on various agencies to control by fiat the nation’s financial, banking and investment sectors. The bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress. This overall process was repeated numerous times with other legislation all with the intent of granting unfettered power to the executive branch controlled Barack Obama and his radical associates.
Additionally, the Obama administration has, through its unilaterally determined rule making and regulatory powers, created laws out of whole cloth. The Environmental Protection Agency on a near daily basis issues new regulations clearly out of their purview in order to modify and change environmental laws previously passed and to impose a radical green agenda never approved by Congress. The same is true of the Energy and Interior Departments among many others.
None of these extra-constitutional actions have been challenged by Congress. The left in America knows this usurpation of power is nearly impossible to reverse unless stopped in its early stages.
It is clearly the mindset of this administration and its appointees that Congress is merely a nuisance and can be ignored after they were able to take full advantage of the useful idiots in the Democrat controlled House and Senate in 2009-2010 and the Democrat Senate in the current Congress.
Additionally, Barack Obama knows after his re-election a Republican controlled House and Senate will not be able to enact any legislation to roll back the power previously granted to the Executive Branch or usurped by them. His veto will not be overridden as there will always be at least 145 Democratic members of the House or 34 in the Senate in agreement with or intimidated by an administration more than willing to use Chicago- style political tactics.
The stalemate between the Executive and Legislative Branches will inure to the benefit of Barack Obama and his fellow leftists.
The most significant power Congress has is the control of the purse-strings as all spending must be approved by them. However, once re-elected, Barack Obama, as confirmed by his willingness to do or say anything and his unscrupulous re-election tactics, would not only threaten government shutdowns but would deliberately withhold payments to those dependent on government support as a means of intimidating and forcing a Republican controlled Congress to surrender to his demands, thus neutering their ability to control the administration through spending constraints.
Further, this administration has shown contempt for the courts by ignoring various court orders, e.g., the Gulf of Mexico oil drilling moratorium, as well as stonewalling subpoenas and requests issued by Congress. The Eric Holder Justice Department (DoJ) has become the epitome of corruption as part of the most dishonest and deceitful administration in American history. In a second term the arrogance of Barack Obama and his minions will become more blatant as he will not have to be concerned with re-election.
Who will be there to enforce the rule of law, a Supreme Court ruling or the Constitution? No one. Barack Obama and his fellow-travelers will be unchallenged as they run roughshod over the American people.
Many Republicans and conservatives dissatisfied with the prospect of Mitt Romney as the nominee for president are instead focused on re-taking the House and Senate. That goal, while worthy and necessary, is meaningless unless Barack Obama is defeated. The nation is not dealing with a person of character and integrity but someone of single-minded purpose and overwhelming narcissism. Judging by his actions, words and deeds during his first term, he does not intend to work with Congress either Republican or Democrat in his second term, but rather to force his radical agenda on the American people through the power he has usurped or been granted.
The governmental structure of the United States was set up by the Founders in the hope that over the years only those people of high moral character and integrity would assume the reins of power. However, knowing that was not always possible, they dispersed power over three distinct and independent branches as a check on each other.
What they could not imagine is the surrender and abdication of its constitutional duty by the preeminent governmental branch, the Congress, to a chief executive devoid of any character or integrity coupled with a judiciary essentially powerless to enforce the law when the chief executive ignores them.
Conservatives, Libertarians, the Republican Party and Mitt Romney must come to grips with this moment in time and their historical role in denying Barack Obama and his minions their ultimate goal. All resources must be directed at that end-game and not merely controlling Congress and the various committee chairmanships.
Steve McCann, May 12, 2012
Apparently I am not the only writer that sees what is going to happen to the USA if Barack Hussein Obama is allowed to remain in office; rule by Executive Orders, martial law put in place, dictatorial rule, and it won’t be a benevolent dictatorship. It IS coming my friends.
Barack Hussein Obama must go! There is no NICE way to say it and I am not going to sugar coat it; if Obama doesn’t get thrown out of the White House, this nation is done for!
Indeed TexasFred, PatriotUSA Steve McCain, and John Porter are not alone in seeing what is happening. Many of us agree! But it won't make any "rats ass" difference in the direction we are headed if we don't both vote and rally the vote for Mitt Romney. There is no other alternative - forget wasting a vote on a third party candidate or skipping this election.
After having served a career in the military and then as a professional, I hate to admit that America is now at an unbelievable "do or die" point as a Republic. Obama's callowness, arrogance, and progressive agendas will not restore America. America was indeed facing severe economic problems at the end of the Bush Administration. However, Obama's offer of "Change" did not help us recover but eventually revealed itself as an attacked the very fabric of America which has lead us now to a fiscal abyss, a potential global threat, and the end of of America as envisioned by or forefathers and former Presidents.
Obama policies if not reversed will send any further opportunity for American excellence into the dust bin of history and may result eventually to the dismantling of our Nation. We must turn to a leader who loves America, respects the law, loves God and his commandments, reveres life and has the past experience of fixing and restoring broken entities. People often ask how will he do it. The news media is great at distracting the voters from the primary problem - Barack Obama policies, decisions and ineptness in leading America.
In my past careers, I was called upon to address major issue and problems that needed immediate fixing and or oversight. I was not asked those who needed me, "how will you do it?" They had already been down that road with others. I was a problem solver, they knew it, and I solved their problems. But this is not about me. I only use it as an example.
We've seen Romney's successful record of accomplishment. There is not time enough for all us to be schooled or to begin to understand the abilities of how Mitt Romney will fix the problem. For us, we will be taking the first critical step in fixing the problem by replacing Barack Obama, and thus, ALL his czars and department progressives. Yes, they will still be out there seeking to return to power. But that is not our most current problem. It is critical that we REPLACE Barack Obama with Mitt Romney as our president! Tags:Our Country, USA, dictatorial presidency, Barack Hussein Obama, Change, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Election 2012, Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act, Environmental Protection Agency, Eric Holder, Harry Reid, Justice Department (DoJ), Mitt Romney, Nancy Pelosi, Obama to Transform America, Obama's America, ObamaCare, The Supreme Court, U.S. Congress, Saving AmericaTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Comments by contributors or sources do not necessarily reflect the position of ARRA, its Officers, memberships or the Editors.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.