Posts Tagged ‘obama’

The Braying Jackass In Chief

Tuesday, July 26th, 2011

President Obama addressed the nation last night to supposedly bring us up to speed on what’s going on with the debt ceiling stalemate between the Republicans in the House and him & the Democrats. I didn’t see the live broadcast but did catch the video & read the transcript, and was completely disgusted afterward. I started writing a post about it but it was late so I didn’t get very far with it, so decided to quit & go to bed before my blood pressure got out of hand. This morning I found this video from Patriot Post Humor in my inbox this morning; it’s nothing short of perfect.

As tempting as it is to just leave it at that, I need to get a few things off my chest. First off, the impending crisis precipitating this stalemate is the very real threat that, “… our country’s Triple A credit rating would be downgraded…” But he claims, wrongly, that the way to dodge that bullet is to raise the credit ceiling so the country can continue to pay its bills; that’s only a temporary fix to a much deeper problem. The fact that we’ve run out of credit and risk defaulting on bond interest payments is only a symptom that we’re the government is spending too much. Way, way, way too much. The biggest problem as I see it is that neither of the plans being proffered by the House and the Senate adequately addresses the issue of spending beyond our means, and the proposed cuts won’t be enough to avoid the downgrade in the credit rating. All of the finger pointing and bickering will be for naught, and we’ll still have the “tax increase” resulting from higher interest rates.

He also said that raising the debt limit is something that other Administrations have done in the past, implying that it’s no big deal; what he doesn’t tell us is that the debt ceiling has already been bumped up three times since he entered the White House, by a total of nearly $3 Trillion (whereas previous increases have been much more modest and some only temporary.) And that mousy little bedbug Harry Reid is gaming to raise the limit by another $2.4 Trillion; $5+ Trillion in three years isn’t business as usual, as Mr. Obama would have us believe. Far from it.

He said:

For the last decade, we have spent more money than we take in. In the year 2000, the government had a budget surplus. But instead of using it to pay off our debt, the money was spent on trillions of dollars in new tax cuts, while two wars and an expensive prescription drug program were simply added to our nation’s credit card.

Really; no kidding? We’re spending more money than we take in? Thank you Professor Obvious. But excuse me, when can you “spend” a tax cut? In case someone at the White House needs to be reminded, the money does not belong to Washington, DC. It wasn’t spent, it wasn’t given away, it was simply not taken from its rightful owners, people who, for the most part, can use that money to do more to improve the economy than our illustrious elected leaders could ever do. And the code words for “It’s Bush’s Fault” are just a little too obvious these days; that excuse is wearing really thin.

He also said:

As a result, the deficit was on track to top $1 trillion the year I took office. To make matters worse, the recession meant that there was less money coming in, and it required us to spend even more – on tax cuts for middle-class families; on unemployment insurance; on aid to states so we could prevent more teachers and firefighters and police officers from being laid off. These emergency steps also added to the deficit.

Again with trying to blame Bush. True, Bush was no fiscal conservative and he didn’t do much to help things especially with that bailout fiasco in 2008, but continuing to try & pin the blame for the explosion of the federal debt over the last three years on him is just plain ludicrous. And spending more money that the government doesn’t have at a time like this is like throwing gasoline on a fire. If he and the Democrat-controlled House and Senate are the budget hawks he is trying to make them out to be now, why didn’t they take the opportunity when they didn’t have to worry about the pesky Republican to get the country back in the black? They were too busy ramming their version of Health Care Reform through and spending money like drunken sailors to repay the left-wing special interests. Funny that nobody was much concerned about bipartisanship then, when the Republicans were effectively shut out of the entire process (cue more eyeball rolling.)

And I love his line about the so-called “balanced approach” and “contributions”:

The only reason this balanced approach isn’t on its way to becoming law right now is because a significant number of Republicans in Congress are insisting on a cuts-only approach — an approach that doesn’t ask the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to contribute anything at all. And because nothing is asked of those at the top of the income scales, such an approach would close the deficit only with more severe cuts to programs we all care about – cuts that place a greater burden on working families.

It’s like a robber thanking the banker for his “contribution”. His definition of a balanced approach means cutting a little here & there and raising taxes as well, although he doesn’t have the courage to call them tax increases. And last I checked, when it comes to income taxes, the top 10% of those “wealthiest Americans” already pay nearly 70% of all federal income taxes. Just how much is their fair share, Mr. President? And the red herring he keeps throwing around about the private jet owners… This from the guy with the grandest of all private jets, and the one which we have the privilege of paying for (cue rolling of eyes.)

Yes, given the situation we’re in, the debt limit does need to be raised, but I’m convinced that it should only be temporary and only accompanied by drastic cuts that put the country on track to balance the budget. And sign me up as a supporter of a Balanced Budget Amendment; that’s one thing that is long overdue. If there’s one thing in Obama’s speech last night that I can agree with is that the fault for the mess du jour lies with both parties and all the politicians. Anything that We The People can do to put a bit in their mouths is a step in the right direction.

I also watched John Boehner’s response to Obama’s speech; the difference between the two men is striking. Boehner comes across as the adult in the room, looking much more like a leader than Obama does on his best day. Ever since the days of the 2008 campaign I’ve said that Barack Obama was not qualified for the job of President, and he’s spent the last two years proving he’s in way over his head. Last night’s speech just reinforced the fact.

The Sky Is Falling!

Tuesday, July 12th, 2011

Or at least you’d think so, listening to the President. He is now on record saying that he can’t guarantee that Social Security checks, veterans’ checks, disability checks, etc… will be able to be sent out on August 3 if Congress can’t resolve its differences over reducing the deficit/raising the country’s debt limit by then. Of course, a statement like that is pure sophistry, scare tactics, and the worst kind of politicking, but also of course, people will believe him.

This kind of crap just pisses me off to no end. And what makes it even worse is that the clown from CBS “News” (I use that term very loosely) didn’t even challenge those lies. It’s like Obama’s staff handed this bozo a list of softball questions and the interviewer is just reading a script.

The fact of the matter is that despite all the doom-doom rhetoric by the President and Tim Geitner, if the debt limit is not increased by August 3, the country will not automatically be in default. The country will not be able to spend more than it takes in, but reaching our debt limit will not suddenly stop all tax receipts. In fact, I will be getting my paycheck tomorrow and again two weeks from tomorrow, and I can guarantee that those checkstubs will show sizable (well, sizable to me anyway) “contributions” to the federal coffers. And millions of other people across the country will see the same thing.

What will happen if the debt limit is not increased and the country is prevented from borrowing more money than we already owe is that the President and Congress will then have to prioritize what gets paid and what does not. So IF those checks don’t go out on August 3 as President Obama has threatened, then guess who bears part of the blame for that… Of course, he’ll say that it’s all the Republicans’ fault.

Meanwhile, closer to home, the state of Minnesota remains mostly shut down because of a budget impasse, but many of the politicians causing the trouble are still accepting pay. This stuff is like comedy. But it’s not funny at all.

Magical Economics

Wednesday, March 17th, 2010

Wow; this guy is in-stinkin’-credible! Now he’s telling us that if his Health Care Insurance Reform somehow makes it through Congress, we and our health insurance providing employers will see 3000% reductions in our insurance premiums. Three thousand percent!

Of course, it was a slip of the tongue or more likely a teleprompter miscue, but still… If it had been George W. Bush making a mistake like this, the media would be all over it, but again, our President can do no wrong. This guy is supposed to be the brightest bulb to grace the White House in centuries; shouldn’t he have caught that flub or at least corrected himself after he said it? And what about the adoring crowd? Was no one listening to what the man actually said and applying any critical thinking before cheering madly?

It seems the man is in permanent campaign mode, constantly trying to sell us something, even when polls show that we don’t want what he’s selling, and the facts show him to be dead wrong. Even Congressional Democrats are afraid to vote on it fearing a backlash come November.

State Of The Union Bingo

Monday, January 25th, 2010

Five year update: Wow, how things have advanced since the 2010 SOTU show. Now we don’t just make a list and keep count; go to presidentbingo.com for your own customized bingo card!

The tiles are randomized every time the page is opened, so nobody should have the same card. Send the link around to friends before the show, and stay in touch while President Obama is speaking to keep score. You can even print up multiple cards so the whole family can play; print one, click the Create a new card button, and print again, as many times as you need. It’ll shake up the tiles so no two are alike.

I still think it’d be great if someone in the chamber jumped up at a serious moment in the speech and yelled, “Bingo!” I can totally see Joe Biden doing that!


Here’s a fun way to make President Obama’s State Of The Union address, coming up on January 27, fun for the whole family, and perk things up a bit;

… it would be fun and also a good exercise for those of us who are going to listen to Mr. Obama’s State of The Union Address on January 27th to print off this list and keep count of how many times he says the following phrases, which I lifted from Mark Alexander’s essay, State of Disunion:

  • “let me be clear”
  • “make no mistake”
  • “back from the brink”
  • “signs of recovery”
  • “restored our reputation”
  • “fiscal restraint”
  • “greed on Wall Street”
  • “affordable health care”
  • “relief for working families”
  • “job creation”
  • “inherited” as in “I inherited this mess”

And some I’d be interested hearing him say:

  • “Constitution”
  • “Founding Fathers”
  • “Individual liberty”

I might have to come up with a set of Bingo cards that would follow the same theme, kinda like the Buzzword Bingo made famous by Wally & Dilbert. Would it not be hilarious if in the middle of his speech someone in the gallery (a Senator?) shouted out, “BINGO!”?

Actually, I won’t need to have the speech ‘perked up’; my challenge, if I listen to it, will be keeping my blood pressure down, as Obama will surely say plenty that will get under my skin.

Edit: Just a quick search reveals that I’m definitely not the first one to come up with State Of The Union Bingo. Lots of options are already out there, like this multipage pdf that you can print out and share with your friends, an online version that will allow you to generate a different version with the click of a button, or this interactive online version that you can play in your web browser (no printing required!) And in case anyone sees this as an unfair slam on our illustrious President, let me point out that the Democrats did it first.

Another Speech From The Golden Teleprompter And Its Talking Head

Wednesday, September 9th, 2009

President “Tennis Match” Obama is prepping right now for a speech to a joint session of Congress, which will of course be beamed far & wide for all of us to see. The purpose, according to the President, is to help us all to know…

… exactly what I think will solve our healthcare crisis, they will have a lot of clarity about what I think is the best to move forward. So the intent of the speech is to, A, make sure that the American people know exactly what it is we are proposing, B, to make sure that Democrats and Republicans understand that I am open to new ideas, that not being rigid and ideological, but we do intend to get something done this year.

So, “what I think will solve our healthcare crisis” and “what I think is the best to move forward”… Thus far since taking office, what he thinks is best doesn’t line up very well with what history has proven to be best for the country. I hope he does better than that. And is it just me, or does B contradict A just a little bit? I mean, if he’s gonna let us know exactly what it is that’s being proposed, is it safe to assume that the leaders of the House and Senate are going to get it right and not throw their pet projects in there? I don’t think that’s a safe assumption at all. He seemed to be pretty clueless about what was in HB 3200; will his dulcet tones make all the difference and soothe us into complacency so we’ll just bend over and take it in the rear? Or will those tones convince Congress that they need to just ignore public opinion and pass what he thinks is best for us?

I won’t likely be listening in — I’ll just read the transcript of it later. Listening to that voice for that long will definitely exceed my ewww factor for the day, and besides, what he’s going to say is pretty predictable, judging by what I’ve read from people who’ve been given a preview of what he’s going to say.

The problem is that the guy hasn’t got much credibility left; HB 3200 is the only legislation that has been made public, and there are huge inconsistencies between it and what he says is “in the plan”. I just don’t buy anything he has to say on the subject.

He’s already telegraphed what he ultimately wants to see in healthcare reform legislation, and that’s a state-controlled healthcare industry with a massive bureaucracy overseeing it and huge tax increases to pay for it. I’ll be the first to admit that there are problems with the healthcare system, but it’s not so broken that we need this kind of cure. And he may be telling the truth in saying that he’ll settle for less, but that’s what he and the rest of the statists in Congress will be working toward, if only through small increments. They say there are 40-some million people in the US without healthcare insurance; even if that’s true (and those figures are highly questionable) is it worth screwing up the system that works pretty darned well for the other 260 million of us who do? Even the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says they can’t pull it off the way they’d like to; any healthcare reform they pass now will leave more people uninsured in five years than we have now, and will cost far more than Congress and the President say it will; in the end we’ll have tax increases and healthcare rationing. There’s no way around it. And I for one do NOT want some bureaucrat deciding whether my kid is worth the expenditure of the Government’s precious and limited healthcare resources. And the President has the temerity to tell us the idea of “death panels” is ridiculous… It’s only a logical next step down the path he wants us to go.

I think President Obama suffers from a bit of guilt that he wants to assuage on a grand scale; he says that, “… the cost of our health care has weighed down our economy and the conscience of our nation long enough.” I admire his desire to help those who need help, but this plan of his won’t. And there is plenty of evidence to show this plan to be little more than a pretext for other things he wants to accomplish that will work just as poorly, and leave a terrible legacy for us all to endure.

“Amateur Hour At The White House”

Monday, August 24th, 2009

I love that title. I borrowed it from a RealClearPolitics article on the blunder that is the push to reform the healthcare system, which is an excellent read. Not that it’s hard to find Amateur Hour at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. these days; just about any time of any given day will do.

The article describes how Obama has flubbed this deal; he tasked the Democrat ‘leadership’ — dominated by “coastal liberals” — with writing the bill. They wrote what they would like to see in such a bill, but didn’t think to consult their slightly less liberal fellow Dems while doing it, and now everybody in the White House seems surprised at the current dustup going on over the “Public Option”. The author, Jay Cost, explains it much better than I ever could, so check out the real deal.

He ends the article with…

It’s almost as if the President has absolutely no experience in dealing with the United States Congress whatsoever.

… Gee; do ya think? I’ve been arguing that since Sarah Palin came on the scene.

I Guess Things Are Different Now

Wednesday, July 29th, 2009

Funny how things are different for President Obama when the legislation is something he wants vs. something championed by his political opposition…

Here’s a YouTube clip containing an audio interview with Barack Obama following his election to the US Senate in 2004. Take note of what he has to say following about the 0:50 mark…

BARACK OBAMA: …When you rush these budgets that are a foot high and nobody has any idea what’s in them and nobody has read them.

RANDI RHODES: 14 pounds it was!

BARACK OBAMA: Yeah. And it gets rushed through without any clear deliberation or debate then these kinds of things happen. And I think that this is in some ways what happened to the Patriot Act. I mean you remember that there was no real debate about that. It was so quick after 9/11 that it was introduced that people felt very intimidated by the administration.

… And compare that to his current push to get his health care ‘reform’ legislation passed before the August recess. Thankfully it now appears that the Bluedog Democrats have been able to delay the vote on the bill to after the recess. I’m sure that’s going over big in the White House. Likewise with the drive by Let Freedom Ring to get Senators & Congressmen to pledge to not vote on the legislation unless they read it first, and unless it has been available for the public to read for at least 72 hours. Sounds like something that ought to be required for all legislation.

Obama’s Health Care Snow Job

Thursday, July 23rd, 2009

Our not-so-esteemed President gave a press conference last night about his aspirations for reforming the health care system. He’s apparently encountering more opposition than he expected — well deserved opposition I might add — and felt the need to address all us little people in middle America to tell us why it’s such a high priority. He’s getting some push-back — well deserved push-back I might add — on his insistence that it needs to be passed through both houses of Congress before the August recess.

Well hold on there, bucko.

The case he laid out, very unconvincingly, is that the root cause of the economic crisis is the umpteeen million people who are without health insurance:

… even before this crisis hit, we had an economy that was creating a good deal of wealth for those folks at the very top, but not a lot of good-paying jobs for the rest of America. It’s an economy that simply wasn’t ready to compete in the 21st century, one where we’ve been slow to invest in clean-energy technologies that have created new jobs and industries in other countries; where we’ve watched our graduation rates lag behind too much of the world; and where we spend much more on health care than any other nation but aren’t any healthier for it. And that’s why I’ve said that even as we rescue this economy from a full-blown crisis, we must rebuild it stronger than before.

And health-insurance reform is central to that effort.

Oh, please. The same old leftist rhetoric about the rich getting richer at the expense of the poor, who get poorer every day. “It’s just not fair!” And what a pack of lies; we spend more on health care than any other nation but we aren’t any healthier for it? Baloney. Americans live longer and have more access to better health care than any other society on the face of the planet, but for him and the Democrats in the House and Senate, the whole nation is going to hell in a handbasket without the federal government jumping in and taking control of the entire health care system in America.

What drives me crazy is that he lied through his teeth last night, and nobody in the mainstream press is calling him on it. In the past he’s said on a number of occasions that if you have health insurance and you like your current coverage, you can keep it. Then last week the content of the bill that’s in the House got out, showing that if you change jobs or your employer decides to stop providing group health insurance, or even if the coverage changes, you’ll be mandated by law to buy into the single-payer system he’s trying to ramrod through. But then in last night’s opening comments, he phrased things a little differently, trying to make it sound like what he said before, but not so far from the truth;

If you have health insurance, the reform we’re proposing will provide you with more security and more stability.

It will keep government out of health care decisions, giving you the option to keep your insurance if you’re happy with it. It’ll prevent insurance companies from dropping your coverage if you get too sick. It will give you the security of knowing that if you lose your job, if you move, or if you change your job, you’ll still be able to have coverage.

So now it sounds the same as what he’s said before, using similar terms, but adding others to change the meaning completely. How’s that for ‘honesty’ and ‘transparency’.

Then later, when answering a question from a reporter, he said the following, which totally contradicts what he said earlier about keeping insurance that you’ve already got;

I want to cover everybody. Now, the truth is that unless you have a — what’s called a single-payer system, in which everybody’s automatically covered, then you’re probably not going to reach every single individual, because there’s always going to be somebody out there who thinks they’re indestructible and doesn’t want to get health care, doesn’t bother getting health care, and then, unfortunately, when they get hit by a bus, end up in the emergency room and the rest of us have to pay for it…
… So the plan that has been — that I’ve put forward and that — what we’re seeing in Congress would cover, the estimates are, at least 97 to 98 percent of Americans. There might still be people left out there who, even though there’s an individual mandate, even though they are required to purchase health insurance, might still not get it, or despite a lot of subsidies, are still in such dire straits that it’s still hard for them to afford it…

So the plan is to get everybody on the single-payer system. And not just get them on it, mandate it. Oh and of course, you’d charge them for it.

But the biggest deception in the whole thing is how the thing is going to be funded. He talked about how costs are going up and coverage is going down and thousands of people are losing their health coverage every day and 47 million people have no coverage at all… But a recurring theme was that he’ll be able to pay for it through creating and enforcing new efficiencies in the system and using technology in new ways to eliminate duplicated services… I call BS on that. Since when has anything overseen by the federal government been described (accurately) as efficient? There is just no way that you’re going to keep providing the same level of care to more people and have it cost the same or less than it does now. But that’s what he’s saying he can do. And I say he’s full of it.

The only way he’s going to be able to pull that off is if the ‘efficiencies’ he’s talking about involve rationing care and allowing his proposed “Health Advisory Boards” to dole out treatment only to those the board deems worthy. Let’s say you’re in your late 60’s and you’re diagnosed with cancer. Your doctor runs your paperwork through the Health Advisory Board and they look at your life history and your family history, taking note that you’ve lived a full life, and that people in your family don’t typically live beyond their 70’s. Is it really a wise expenditure of precious health care resources to attack your cancer aggressively if it’s only going to extend your life a few more years, when you’re sure to die from something else? Think of all the children that could be helped with that money!

And what of people like Sarah Palin who find out early in a pregnancy that their child has Down’s Syndrome or a heart condition or some other malady that will likely require extended medical care throughout life. “Wouldn’t it just be easier to abort now? What kind of quality of life would you be giving your child?” Of course, that abortion would only be a proposed option at first, but how long until that Health Advisory Board is granted the power to mandate that abortion? It’d only be a matter of time.

The thing is, I don’t believe most people see the need for the wholesale overhaul of the health care system as it’s being proposed by Obama and the Democrat leadership in the House & Senate. Sure, there are shortfalls in the system, but it’s nowhere near as bad as they say it is. And the cure they propose would surely be worse than the disease; that has been shown to be fact, and not just partisan propaganda. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says that the proposed health care reform will raise costs and increase the deficit by $240 billion in the first ten years.

As I see it, there are two primary problems with the health care system in this country and its rising costs; that people who are insured are insulated from the actual cost of their care, and doctors spend too much time in CYA mode, making sure they don’t get sued. People pay $x for their health insurance plus their deductible and co-payment for office visits, so it matters little to them if they visit the doctor once a year or 30 times a year. If their kid has the sniffles, off they go to the doctor where the doctor runs several tests to rule out one dread disease or another, and before you know it, diagnosing Junior’s sniffles just cost $500 or more. But mom’s insurance covers it, and she’s out her $15 office visit co-payment plus maybe a percentage of the total for her deductible, but it’s far less than the $500. But if mom had to pay for all that herself, she might think twice about going to the office, and see if Junior gets over it on his own. And if there were some meaningful tort reform, the doctors could spend a little more time using the common sense that God gave them instead of ordering superfluous tests and expensive drugs to treat common maladies that the human body is perfectly capable of surviving with no medical intervention.

No, I don’t think that President Obama can pull this off. I don’t think he garners enough of the respect of the House & Senate Democrats and their leadership to get everything he wants in this bill, nor to even get it passed. And the push to get it passed by August is just ridiculous. He hasn’t even read or apparently been briefed on the current bill — he’s admitted as much himself — nor have many of those who are voting on it. Our senior Senator from South Dakota has already said he plans to vote for it; has he read it? I would bet a pile of money he has not, and he really doesn’t care what kind of fallout he gets from signing it either, because he’s got five years left of his term, and chances are he’ll retire after that.

If I’m wrong and this travesty of a bill does pass and become our new way of doing health care in the US, we will have change a-plenty, but not the kind of change any of us want.

It Pays To Read The Fine Print

Thursday, July 16th, 2009

President Obama is on record saying that with his proposed “public option” healthcare that was just discussed (or passed?) in the House of Representatives, if we the people were happy with our current health insurance, we would be able keep it. He must’ve had his fingers crossed behind his back when he said that, because the legislation would outlaw individual private coverage.

The folks at Investor’s Business Daily went through the arduous task of actually reading the monstrous 1,018-page document — something most of our illustrious elected Representatives apparently didn’t have time for — and shared their findings:

… we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states:

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

If you like your current coverage, you’re fine. But if you change jobs, if you lose your job, if your employer decides to discontinue coverage… You’re out of luck.

Can I be the first to say, “Shame on you, Mr. President”? I won’t hold my breath waiting to hear news of this from ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, et al.

Barack Obama & Salvation By Works

Wednesday, July 23rd, 2008

While listening to the radio one day last week I caught some snippets from a stump speech Barack Obama gave over the 4th of July weekend at a church in St. Louis. In that speech, he was talking about his Christian faith, and going into far more detail than I’d heard from him before. But there were a few things I heard that made me a little concerned, so I dug a little deeper to find out exactly what he said. And it’s not just me; Cal Thomas wrote an article for Fox News entitled, Obama Is Not A Christian. Strong words, and I can’t disagree with what he wrote.

I found a video of that speech on YouTube which confirmed my concerns about Barack’s newly ballyhooed Christian faith; it’s just plain old-time salvation by works, nothing more. (more…)