How Low Can You Go..

Woah..this is from left leaning pollster Gallup! The awakening of the silent majority that resides across Flyover and Bible Belt America continues . Obama's approval rating DECLINED IN EVERY STATE in 2010. But you already knew that via ABC, CBS and NBC--right? Right?  More importantly, this poll did not include any 2011 (lack of) performance topics (waffling on Egypt, playing Pres Milk Carton on Libya, reversing course on D.O.M.A,. gas prices cruising past $4, etc).



Yes, Dear Leader now holds an Above Average rating in only 12 states. Two of the states are Hawaii and Illinois, former residences of Mr. Obama which are 'gimmes' (Kenya was not surveyed as part of the Gallup study). For the record, those 12 states possess only 169 electoral states of the 270 needed to repeat this disaster.

To confirm the liberal slant of Gallup-- Texas gets an Average approval rating of Sultan Obama's performance. P U U H L E E Z E. The pollster must have been jetting between S. Austin, Houston, the Rio Grande Valley and the brush country along the Mexican border at night surveying crossing illegals. McCain annihilated Obama in Texas capturing 55% of the vote vs. Obama's 43%. The Lone Star state hasn't voted for a Democratic president since Jimm-mah Carter in 1976 (yes, Texans learn from their mistakes).

Can the GOP still blow it? Of course they can--see McCain 2008. Put up another squish of the sorts of Romney, Huckabee, Trump, Gingrich, and, yes, the divisive Palin , and/or any 3rd party candidate and, poooff-TOAST. Combine those candidates with the COMPLICIT MAIN STREAM MEDIA and we will continue to see the misery of the past 2 years infest America beyond 2012.



The Next Time You Hear---

some liberal ranting..."The rich should pay more!"  "Why are the Bush tax cuts for the rich being extended?" "Let's soak the rich!"...this will be the only chart you will ever need:

The top 5% of income earners already pay almost 60% of the federal income tax received by the IRS while the bottom 50% of earners pay in 2.7%. More astounding, according to the IRS, the share of income taxes paid by the richest 1 percent almost equals the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 95 percent.

And, no, I am not one of the wealthy, I am just someone that chooses to respect their contribution rather than demonize them.

Now, rush down to the little white comment box below and remind us why the wealthy should have their taxes raised when almost 50% of all income earners pay NO TAXES.

Introducing President ---

Yes, I have taken a few days to process the Budget numbers coming out of the White House to see if I could put my response in a simple to understand format. My conclusion is in: B O G U S !

Once again as I outlined in a previous post, garbage in-garbage out. Let's look at the Fantasyland forecast coming from the White House.

1) Starting next year, he forecasts 4% economy growth followed by 4.5% in 2013. To grasp the unreality of that projection, let it be known in only four years of the past 30 has the economy grown four percent or more. In those 4 years, the Republicans controlled economic policies. Obama's budget has 15cnew tax hikes ($60 billion in oil and gas taxes alone--where are you mainsteam media--?), hardly friendly to economic growth.

2) Their inflation projection of 1.3 percent this year, 1.8 percent in 2012 and 1.9 percent in 2013 is baseless. Uhhh, with drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, which accounts for about a third of the country’s natural gas and oil, all but shut-down since the Deepwater Horizon disaster, more foreign oil coming to America means higher inflation. Remember, almost every item you buy has a 'transportation' cost tied to it. Inflation omparison: UK 4%, China 5% and Brazil 6%--and he projects the USA to remain at an average of 1.5%?

3) Obama’s assumption that unemployment will dip from 9.3 percent this year to 8.6 percent next year and 7.5 percent the following year. We have discussed in a prior blog post how 'lowered' numbers are accomplished--simply more people who have stopped looking for work are no longer calculated in unemployment figures. The Obamacare albatross, failed Stimulus, more regulations and taxes on the very businesses that produce the jobs and President Rosy Forecast believes more jobs will be created-really?

If you were not already convinced this President is the the biggest fraud to ever lead this nation, perhaps this will finally wake you up: The interest we are paying on our debt is NOT part of his budget!  That is correct, he balances the budget in 2017 if he does not calculate the trillions (not exaggerating) in interest we are obligated to pay. Go sell that plan to your local creditor, why don't you.

Let me bring this down to your family budget level of understanding: I borrow $1000 at 10% interest. The $100 interest payment comes due and I have to go borrow that $100--Obama DOES NOT include the borrowed interest payment as part of his forecast. Excuse me--I am now $1100 in debt, but I am only going to disclose $1000--yes, that is Mr. Transparency you elected in 2008. (As a point of emphasis, in 2010, we had to borrow $400 billion just to pay the interest)

Obama is either the most economic illiterate person ever to be president or the most maliciously disingenuous. I don’t think there are any other alternatives.

 This administration is robbing Peter to pay Paul, and we are all Peters!





See The Sliver?

In case you cant read the breakout: blue=Obama's 2011 revenue...red=Obama's 2011 budget deficit (shortage) and the green=Obama's budget cuts.

Where's the "green" you ask--here it is--graph is zoomed in 10X.....look real hard....still can't see it?

OK, we will magnify it another 10X for you to see it...yup, that's Scooter's proposed 2011 budget cuts!

It equates to .05 % of the budget, yes, POINT ZERO FIVE PER CENT or $775 million dollars of the total deficit. From the man who recently gave us "we have to make tough choices", "there will be shared sacrifice", "we are going to have to tighten our belts"...WOW..

To compare, Congressman Rand Paul (R) proposed $500 billion in cut. Mr. Paul's number is 645X of that of Pres. Obama! Even if those were to be enacted, it would still only close the deficit by 1/3.

Folks, we simply are in deep trouble.

Let's bring this down to a discussion of comparative numbers the average family could relate to:

• If your household income is $75,000, you would have to trim $12.92 from your annual spending.

Clearly, GW Bush started the spending fire. Obama then requested aerial support, unfortunately the tankers arrived with gasoline. Last November, America requested a hatchet, Barack shows up waving his scalpel. Now you know why yesterday's Galllup poll results shows King Spendthrift with a 27% approval rating on handling the deficit, read here . Take a close look at that poll--he is below 50% approval on every issue impacting America, but all the lamestream media reports is his "personal popularity" rating. America elected a rock star, not a problem solver, and Obama delivered for you.

Once again, watch not what this man says, watch we he does. He wants to cut $775 million while simultaneously sending Conductor Joe Biden on the road to trump a $54 billion dollar railroad boondoggle and he himself heads to Michigan to fund $18 billion for rural broadband. Might as well have said, "Hey honey, what do you mean we are 4 months in arrears on our utility bill--go turn off the night light in the spare bedroom and let's go party"!

(PS..my apologies to the First Lady for using a 'pie' chart. I fully understand every rugrat will now be craving a slice).



Unnecessary Celebration!



ABC headline Friday Celebrates: "Good, But Is It Enough? 36K Jobs Added, Unemployment Drops to 9%".

Dave's headline: "2.2 Million Given Up Looking for Work Since Jan. 2009-- Couch Sales Soar".

IS IT ENOUGH? Here you go ABC, I will do your research for you because clearly you are too busy trying to diagnose Charlie Sheen and prepping for the next royal wedding.

* 13.9 million people remain unemployed
* In order to simply keep up with population growth, the market must add 125, 000 jobs
* U.S added 36,000 jobs. To compare, Canada added 69,000 jobs. After adjusting for population differences, the Canadian number would equate to 600,000 new U.S. jobs!
* The unemployment rate decreased from 9.4% in December to 9.0%.  Is this possible? Yes, simply means more folks gave up on looking for jobs as this rate is calculated by dividing the number of folks employed with those looking for work. When you give up, Obama magic happens! You now transition from job application to food stamp application.
* Karma note: The black unemployed rate (the same folks who give Obama a 95% approval rating) remains the highest unemployed ethnic group at 15.7%. Will their vote change in 2012-- DOUBTFUL.

What is the mainstream media cause for dismal job growth? Snow. Yup, that weather phenomenon clearly the result of global warming that is new to mankind and never existed in prior decades. Spring is 6 weeks away, can't wait for the NBC headline-- "Job Rate at 6% Due To Awesome Clear, Blue Sunny Skies". The only snow impeding job growth is the SNOW JOB coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Taking away the smoke and mirrors of this administration, this is the only chart (click on) you need to look at:



Obama's solutions:

• $800 billion Stimu-less jobs act--view here --failed
• Select a cabinet where only 8.1% of your members have business experience--read here--failed
• Green economy jobs -- (see Spain- 2.2 jobs lost for each green job gained), proceed here . Failure in progress.
• Select G.E. CEO to head your jobs committee-- see his company's 5 year performance here .Failure in progress.

Summary for us simple folk: Focus on job growth in the private sector, not the bloated government payroll and unemployment rate dropping because more citizens have given up looking for jobs. The media celebrating a decrease in the unemployment rate when you have 125,000 new monthly job hunters piling onto the 13.9 million others looking for work is like whooping it up cause you lost 3 pounds for the week and the scale only reads 602.

The only line longer than unemployment in 2012 will be the line to the polling booth. This time America--put down your bongs, see a counselor about your Hopium addiction, mute your Jersey Shores, remove your Ipod earbuds-- and do some research!

Heading to Canada...

........

Happy Birthday to Mr. Ronald Reagan, he would have turned 100 tomorrow....and this is what transparency really looks like....

You Should Have Paid Attention In Law School....

Wow, just wow...that is my only reaction after digesting the response by Team Obama to the Judge's decision in Florida to rule Obamacare unconstitutional...it gave me indigestion....let's march through some of these points in a hopefully simple format...



First, the administration was appalled the judge tossed out the entire Act, rather than just the 'individual mandate' requirement. For us simpletons, the severability clause is taught in "Federal Legislation-101". If you have a severability clause, the legislation can proceed forward, even if one of the components is ruled unconstitutional. You simply have to delete/modify the issue determined by the Courts. If you lack the clause, the entire cookie must crumble and one must start again. Why did Obamacare not have a severability clause---well, in Obama's best off-teleprompter voice-- "uhhhh, wellll, dohhh, duuhhh, mmm--we forgot ". The smartest administration evah forgot? Or, if you don't like that explanation, the simple reality is it may have been omitted knowing if the individual mandate falls, then there simply is no way to fund this albatross.



Next, what is all this talk about the "commerce clause"? Their take--they can impose the Act on all of us as the commerce clause allows them to regulate economic activity. The Court's take--the commerce clause is used to regulate commerce activies that individuals choose of their own free will to engage in. It has never been used to force individuals to participate in commerce. Yes, they are regulating people who are NOT participating in the purchase of health insurance---inactivity! To quote the judge if you can mandate the purchase of health insurance, "then the decisions of whether and when (or not) to buy a house, a car, a television, a dinner, or even a morning cup of coffee, which all have a financial impact" could be regulated.


Third, as this Act marches to the Supreme Court, the Obama attorneys commented "History and the facts are on our side. Similar legal challenges to major new laws — including the Social Security Act, the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act — were all filed and all failed". Well geniuses, history might be on your side, but intelligence is not. Seriously, what product did the Social Security Act, Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act require all citizens to buy? For my simple audience:
 N O T H I N G !



Finally, the absolute best quote (and yes, political poke) from the Judge Vinson's ruling- " “I note that in 2008, then Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that, ‘If a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house". Yes, another You Tube moment turns into a You Boob moment..


Summary:
1) Pay attention in every law class. Remember to include a "severability clause" so the remnants of your legislation can stand when pieces of it fall apart. You would have thought our Harvard constitutional law grad would have known this...
2) You cannot regulate commerce that does not exist...you cannot force the people to buy a product sold by private enterprise...
3) Comparing Obamacare to the previous Soc Security, Voting and Civil Rights legislation is another apple meet orange moment, or as we say around these woods, smoke meet mirror...
4) When you become President, remember what you once claimed as a campaigner...

 
Every day it becomes clearer to me why Pres. Obama will not reveal his college transcripts....