Tag Archive - Obama

Betrayal

June 3, 2010 in Politics with 2 Comments

The long-standing alliance with Israel is on shaky ground today because of one man – President Barack Obama. Let me explain:

Israel has been under the direct attack from terrorist organizations for many months. And when I say direct, rockets have been blowing up buildings (schools, hospitals, homes, etc.) – it doesn’t get much more direct than that. In an attempt to stop the attacks without just annihilating the enemy (which Israel can do), they set up roadblocks and naval blockades to facilitate inspection of humanitarian supplies.

Did you get that? Israel is looking for weapons that will be used directly against them. All other supplies are allowed to pass the blockades. Sounds reasonable to me. This has been an ongoing process for the past four years and the rules are simple. If you are asked to stop for inspection, you cut your engines and prepare to be boarded and your full cooperation is expected.

The other day, at least one supply ship didn’t follow the rules – they didn’t stop when asked to. So, the natural conclusion is that this particular ship doesn’t want to be inspected because they have something to hide. In a blockade situation, you don’t get to hide anything.

So, the Israeli navy forcibly boarded the ship and was met with active and aggressive resistance. Again, another violation of long-standing rules. In response, the Israeli solders defended themselves with lethal force. Their lives were in danger and they had a right to protect themselves. It’s easy for the media to portray this as a trigger-happy killing, but anyone with any military knowledge understands that lethal force is the last resort. You give enemy combatants every opportunity to prevent it, but there comes a time when it becomes you or them. Those are the rules.

So, we have a ship that didn’t stop when told to – STRIKE ONE.
We have a crew that didn’t cooperate with the inspectors – STRIKE TWO.
We have active resistance with weapons designed to prevent the inspection – STRIKE THREE.

Israel’s response was done by the book and in accordance with the PUBLIC rules of engagement for the blockade. The supply ship’s crew decided to disregard those rules and they paid the price. It is no different from my son choosing to disobey – he knows the cost, but does it any way and he has to suffer the consequences because of it. There’s a chain of events set into motion because of one choice.

Change the location of this conflict to NY harbor. The blockade is managed by the US coast guard and a supply ship from a known enemy sympathizer doesn’t stop for inspection. What would you expect to be the Coast Guard’s reaction? Do they use all necessary force to ensure a potential deadly cargo doesn’t get into the hands of people meaning to do you and me harm or do they allow the ship to go by. We stop them and we enforce the rules.

The latter invalidates the entire blockade and shows the rest of the world that it is a farce. I guarantee you that any other ship captains that are considering running the Israeli blockade are thinking twice about it right now.

And here comes the betrayal part of my story – President Barack Obama doesn’t tell the world that the US stands behind its ally Israel and reinforces the reason for the blockade. Nope – he condemns the action and hangs the only ally in that part of the world out to dry.

If you have any questions about the makeup of Obama’s character, look no further than this one incident. It isn’t complicated and doesn’t require a PhD in political science. An ally is someone you support – even in the face of unpopular opinion – especially when you know they are justified in their actions, which any reasonable American should be able to see.

UPDATE: Just saw this video of Sec. of State Clinton clearly condemning what happened.


Hidden Agenda – Hoax Part II

March 19, 2010 in Info, Politics with 0 Comments

As a continuation of the previous article, I’m compelled to help expose the hidden agenda of liberals – especially those in Washington these days. Whether it is job creation or universal health care or water allocations for the Central Valley of California – the truth isn’t readily apparent.

I’ve been told by a liberal friend that conservatives lack compassion and that is one of the reasons she votes for and supports Democrats. Is compassion bad? Surely not. But the distinction isn’t accurate or fair (and I’ll go into that in another post). On the surface, these federal programs do look to be meeting the needs to people that are hurting the most: the unemployed, the uninsured and the thirsty farmer.

In truth – they rarely accomplish anything that they are touted to do. When Obama and congress decided to pour over $1T into the economy to try to “stimulate” it rather than take a $1T hit on tax revenues by way of tax cuts, the result hasn’t been recovery, just more debt. Where has the stimulus been seen? GM is still in the tank, Wall Street is more unstable than ever and unemployment is still double-digits.

Ask any conservative what the biggest difference between liberals and conservatives is and you’ll hear a very common answer: conservatives desire less government and more personal responsibility. Why? Because there is a fundamental belief that the free-market, capitalist society in America will auto-correct anything that gets askew. Competition spurs innovation, which produces better products/services for less money.

Big government squelches competition because it takes away the accountability needed to keep the players honest and trades it for “stability” and broader access to privileges that have been turned into rights somewhere along the way.

Here’s the progression that liberals are working toward:

  • Big government produces services at no or little cost to the consumer
  • This entitlement removes the incentive to be creative and work hard
  • Private sector cannot compete with a government that doesn’t have to play by the same rules
  • The lack of competition has a direct impact on the price of goods/services from the private sector
  • People turn to government for intervention
  • Government obliges and offers a federal option
  • Taxes are increased to pay for it
  • Private sector is forced to cut jobs to meet shareholder expectations due to expanded taxes
  • Dependence on the government increases for more and more unemployed
  • Government programs grow to meet the need
  • Personal freedom is removed for the sake of the greater need
  • Taxes are raised
  • and so on…

That’s not the way this country is supposed to work. Here’s how it should work:

  • Private sector produces services at a fair market price
  • Innovation allows company A to offer same services at a lower price
  • Rest of market responds either with better services or still lower price
  • Consumer reaps the benefit of the battle for market share

Or

  • Private sector produces services at a fair market price
  • Company A decides to try to make more money by raising their price
  • Consumers respond by taking business to Company B
  • Company B is allowed to use additional revenue to offer better and better services – either by increased features or by lower price
  • Company A has to respond by adjusting price or adding features
  • Consumers decide who has the best value

You see – in a pure free-market economy, the consumer dictates the rules of the game. For the most part, we don’t have a pure free-market in core services because liberals have seen fit to create crutch programs that looked good on the short, but never took into consideration the effect on the long. And intervention is on the rise and threatens to undo the very thing that makes this country great – reward for hard work, innovation and creativity.

“But Steve, nobody would want something so devastatingly bad – right?” Wrong. If you give a man a fish rather than incent him to learn to fish, you have control over the man because of his dependence. He eventually can’t imagine a world without his daily fish and that is called job security for the fish vendor.

Yes, it comes down to simple security. Liberals want it through making people dependent on their programs, while conservatives want it based on the merit of their ideas and hard work. So, whether you are talking about health care reform or stimulus money, the goal of the current administration and democratic congress is to make us more dependent on the federal government and they will not let anyone or anything – including the Constitution of these United States – stand in their way.

Have you ever heard that if you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water, he’ll immediately jump out, but if you put him in the water and then turn the heat on, he’ll stay and literally be cooked alive? It’s time we realize we are the frog and the liberals have been turning up the heat for decades now – it is up to us to change the menu to something other than frog soup. Get involved and call your elected officials and the next time we get a chance to vote, may we look deeper than a catchy campaign slogan and feel-good promises.

Remember, it is more compassionate to teach a man to fish than to make him dependent on anyone or anything.

Job Creation Hoax

March 19, 2010 in Info, Politics with 0 Comments

Our president and elected officials have stated their number one job is to bring this country’s recession to an end as soon as possible.

I DON’T BELIEVE THEM!

I know…shocker, right? What you may not understand are all the reasons. Some probably assume that it is simply because the majority are Democrats and I’m a conservative and the two shall not mix…ever. That assumption, while true, isn’t why I’m writing – I think I can prove it without focusing on politics. It is simple logic and a slight understanding of how business works.

What do we need for more jobs to be created? A simple examination of why jobs are being eliminated should provide us the answers. A company, especially a publicly-traded company, is not owned by the business leadership, but rather by shareholders. People buy stock because they want to see a return (more money) from the money they use to buy the stock.

That return is realized when the company is able to make more money (net revenue) than they expected, which is one component of what drives stock prices up. There are two components to net revenue – profit and loss (income and costs). If a company says that they think they can produce a net revenue of $100K and are able to actually do $105K for a given time period, then people would buy the stock because the current price reflects the anticipated $100K and therefore undervalued and should go up. Make sense? If not, just know that doing what you say you are going to do in the stock market is good, and exceeding it is better.

All that to say is that the owners (shareholders) expect to be making money and therefore expect profits to be at least what you projected. To achieve this, in a recession, the focus gets put on the costs a company incurs. The most expensive line item on a company’s balance sheet is payroll and consequently the place where the biggest impact to the bottom line can be made. Eliminate jobs and you cut costs and directly affect net revenue.

So, if jobs are cut to help companies maintain net revenue and shareholder expectations and we want to stop that trend, what can be done help net revenue. The second largest cost on a company’s ledger is taxes and this is where we get to the meat of the issue. If you receive a paycheck and ever ventured to look at the amount of taxes that are taken out – you’d immediately get red in the face. What you need to know is that is nothing compared to what the business must pay.

There is a tie to payroll taxes and the overall picture for a company – if you have an employee that you hire at $50K, their take-home pay is affected by the taxes that are required to be taken out. A lower tax rate means that an employer might be able to hire the same person for $48K if the tax rates were lower. If you add that up over 1,000 employees, all of a sudden you’ve just found $200K of income that you can put into something else – like new jobs.

So, if you want to create jobs in America, the first place the government should be looking is to lower the federal taxes levied against employers. Decreasing the tax rate means more money stays with the company and can be reinvested immediately to stabilize and grow the business.

But this wasn’t even considered for more than a second in Washington. Reagan implemented this very tactic to successfully bring inflation under control and it has been successfully used time and time again to help stimulate the economy. There’s a proven track record and tons of evidence…so why haven’t we seen this as a proposed solution?

If you really want to know the full reason, read the next post. It is political…so be warned.

The short answer is that job creation, at least where most of us live (private sector), hasn’t been the goal at all. If it was, we would be seeing more money in our pockets each paycheck, which would allow us to go spend it on goods and services and really “stimulate” the economy.

All this to say, any talk about job creation coming out of Washington these days should be interpreted as creating federal jobs to support new programs intended to “fix” our country. Don’t be fooled for another second because now you know.

The Line

March 11, 2009 in Philosophy, Politics with 0 Comments

For me there exists a line – a tolerance line of lunacy. Lately, the area of my life where this line is being danced upon is our government.  Rather than rant ceaselessly, I thought it would be good to list out the series of bad decisions our new President and his “troop” are making that have a direct impact on me and mine.

  • FOCA | During the campaign, O’Bama touted his support of the Freedom of Choice Act – a bill that essentially removes a state’s right to decide how to implement Rowe v. Wade and places it in the hands of any doctor’s subjective and arbitrary decision to decide if an abortion can be performed.This bill never became law because it expired at the end of the congressional session.  This was also to be a “secure statutory right (13)”, which means that it isn’t an amendment to the Constitution and therefore doesn’t require Congress or the President to vote on it in any form or fashion.The fact that he (and other Democratic members of Congress) wanted to covertly push their pro-abortion agenda speaks volumes to the lengths they will go to get their way.
  • Cabinet appointees | O’Bama’s campaign used the term “change” and he included a new strategy to “cross the aisle” to bring about said change.  Since winning the office, he has done nothing but appoint (or try to – see Daschele) the most liberal Democratic cronies he can find to the most prominent positions in the government.From that – we have seen nothing but a check writing spree for every liberal program and agenda item that has been kept in check over the past 30 years.  All disguised in the “best interest” of the economy – but I’m getting ahead of myself…The point remains that he has not engaged (or required engagement of his team) the Republican leadership in any of his plans to move this country down the road.  In fact, it has been a first 50-days characterized as one-sided politics.
  • Economic “stimulation” | We’re engaged in a war on terror in the farthest reaches of the Earth – very expensive.  The average American has between $10 – $15k of credit card debt.  We tolerated $4/gallon gasoline for months.To say the economy has taken some hits is an understatement.  In fact, I think I can agree with O’Bama on at least one thing – this has been going on for a long time before he won the office.  He wants to attribute it to George Bush because it will help him justify his lunacy to the American people, but the fact is that this kind of regulatory mismanagement has been happening for much longer.So, his solution is to draft a 1,200 page bill, couch it as a way out of the economic slump we’re in, use his influence and the Democratic majority in Congress to push it through and spend almost $800 Billion ($800,000,000,000.00) that he doesn’t have and give it to companies that haven’t been fiscally responsible because he can’t stomach the capitalistic consequences this mismanagement brings.Change – no stimulus, more debt.  In fact, the economy continued its downward trend, so he introduces another $750+ Billion package and got it passed.  Then drafted a $600+ Billion healthcare reform package and a $410 Billion government spending bill that included over 8,500 Democratic projects that had nothing to do with stimulating the economy – just another vehicle for Democrats to get what they want.So, let’s see – $800B + $750B + $600B + $410B = … carry the one…add the…wow…that’s HUGE… = $2.56T that he’s proposed and of that number, he’s spent (signed into law) almost $2T.  And the stock market continues to hover around levels it hasn’t seen in 25 years.Change:  no stimulation, more debt in the first 50 days than all other president’s first 50 days combined…by a long shot!But, I’m OK (sorta) up to this point – it’s all money and I have a somewhat easy time giving our fate in this area to God.  BUT…MY President has now gone too far…
  • Embryonic Stem Cell Research | March 9th, 2009 marked the day that OUR President lifted the ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research thus abolishing the ethical, moral and political stigma this type of research has been held in check by.  Has this type of research been taking place in the US and other countries before the President’s decision – yes.  What benefit has that research yielded – very little, none if you really net it out.On a fiscal note, this is very consistent that O’Bama would throw taxpayer money at something that has no historical precedent of success.  On a ethical note, this frees research companies from the burden of convincing the private sector for funding – they essentially get money without anyone asking the hard questions.This freedom will create an enormous amount of energy for existing and new startups to divert resources to something that has the potential for $Trillions in Parkinsons treatments/cure alone.  The “profit lust” will move the medical community right by the ethical “embryonic life” questions and will most likely increase embryonic production for research purposes.

So The Line has been crossed by a President in the first 50 days of his administration as I see America being restructured and remade according to a liberal vision.  And there are at minimum, 1410 days left – I can’t even begin to fathom what life will look like at that point.

Mr. O’Bama – if you want to stimulate the economy, repeal the Self Employment tax, capital gains tax and suspend income taxes for all Americans for one year.  You’ll see companies open up and be able to hire people, consumer debt retired, consumer confidence increase and the pressure we all feel will be released and true economic innovation can be fostered.  Plus, it will cost the government far less than the $2.56T on the docket.

So, for you – has your line been crossed?