Mayor Bloomberg Places Blame For Financial Crisis On Democrat-Controlled Congress

I am no fan of Bloomberg but he actually gets this one right.  Even a broken clock is correct twice a day. I commend him for placing the blame squarely where it belongs, on Congress and the Democrats.
 

Rick Santorum Says that Maxine Waters is a “Caricature of what’s wrong with Congress, she is vile.”

Republican Presidential candidate Rick Santorum discusses topics such as the military conflict in Libya, regulations, Obama, energy policies, and Obama's bypassing Congress, with Steve Malzberg. He also responds to this outrageous comment which Maxine Waters said "I'm not afraid of anybody. This is a tough game. You can't be intimidated. You can't be frightened. And as far as I'm concerned, the 'tea party' can go straight to hell."  


I guess this type of rhetoric falls right in line with what Democrats call the "new civility".  Geesh... Progressives are so hateful.  




Rick is spot on! 

Sen. Pat Toomey Has a Great Idea on How to Freeze the Debt Ceiling Without Risking Default

Sen. Pat Toomey - Those words sound really good! -  has not bought into the "sky is falling" mentality that Obama, Democrats, and others within the Obama administration have been expressing regarding the debt ceiling.  He even points out that it is NOT a necessity to raise the debt ceiling but in fact emphasizes that if the debt ceiling is raised and congress continues their enormous spending spree, business as usual, then the ramifications would be staggering.  Pat Toomey says there is an alternative.

He is introducing legislation "that would require the Treasury to make interest payments on our debt its first priority in the event that the debt ceiling is not raised. This would not only ensure the continued confidence of investors at home and abroad, but would enable us to have an honest debate about the consequences of our eventual decision about the debt ceiling. If we do not raise it, the government's tax revenue will enable us to fund roughly two-thirds of projected expenditures, including interest payments. Without the ability to borrow the other third, spending cuts would be sudden and severe: Projects would be postponed, some vendor payments would be delayed, certain programs would be suspended, and many government employees might be furloughed. Default would easily be avoided, but these cuts would certainly be disruptive. That's why I hope we can avoid this scenario." 


Pat Toomey points out: 


The recent surge in spending, both in absolute dollars and as a percentage of our GDP, has driven us to record deficits and an explosion of debt. The growth in discretionary spending has been the most dramatic, but in the future mandatory entitlement spending will be the deficit driver. Congress must address both in order to put the government back on a sustainable fiscal path.

The vote on whether to raise the debt ceiling—and, if so, by how much—is our best opportunity to insist that any increase in our nation's debt be coupled with concrete steps toward fiscal sanity. Congress should make increasing our debt contingent on immediate cuts in spending and effective reforms of the spending process that helped get us into this mess.

For too many years, Congress has ignored or exacerbated the looming fiscal crisis created by overspending. Last fall's elections were largely a call to finally deal with this imminent threat, and the vote on the debt ceiling is Congress's opportunity to begin making real progress. We can do so without jeopardizing the full faith and credit of our country—and we should.

I agree with Pat Toomey. This out of control spending must stop!  It also sounds like Afghanistan is on the correct path now.  With the coordinated effort of both our troops and Afghanis hopefully this positive trend will continue. 

Dangers that Executive Powers Pose on Liberty & Freedom

Ever since it has to come to light that the President is sneakily adding end of life counseling under the guise of regulation after that amendment in that piece of legislation was previously rejected by both the American people and Congress I have been thinking and am asking the question, what specifically gives the president the authority to add something without the consent of the governed or Congress?  I have been pondering over how much President Obama has overreached and usurped powers which are reserved elsewhere.  Progressives want to control every aspect of our lives and have advanced their vision rapidly over the past two years. They are trying to decide which ways are easiest to control the masses - the “sheep” - and how those items on their agenda can be implemented  without citizens catching onto their scheme.  Progressives want to use back-door policies to control our lives. The President in coordination with other progressives have issued a great many regulations and laws under the guise of security, safety, education, internet fairness, and health care and this has ultimately led to our liberty and freedom being diminished greatly.  Much of Obama’s usurpations of powers were done under the guise of instituting regulations, without congressional oversight and those so-called regulations were used as a cover to institute new policies.  Obama has viewed his powers as president very broadly and has abused his power as president on a number of occasions.

John Carey over at Sentry Journal has written a thought-provoking article which touched upon the possibility for the need of an Article V Constitutional Convention which would focus on the clarification of the commerce clause, or the need to repeal one out of a few choice amendments, or the possibility of adding an amendment which would grant States the right to repeal any law or regulation of the United States so States can take back their rights which are guaranteed by the constitution.  I am not quite sure whether a Constitutional Convention would work since there are so many liberal activist judges who ignore the Constitution.  I think it is an option worthy of thought and discussion which may work if the details are worked out.  There is no doubt the Federal government needs to be reined in some capacity. The Federal government has metamorphosed into a leviathan which has squeezed and sucked the life out of States’ rights. The Ordinance Power grants the president the authority to issue regulations, proclamations, and executive orders. I believe that the Ordinance Power needs to be clarified so progressive presidents like Obama (I hope not another one like him is ever elected again but we had Carter and look who we got later on) cannot have any wiggle room to act like kings, usurp power, and  institute new policies instead of enforcing existing ones.  In article 2 Section 3 the Constitution states that the president “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” but this does not mean that presidents have been given the authority to add anything extra which wasn’t already passed by congress.  The End of Life Counseling or “Death Panels” in Obamacare were taken out after their was outcry by the public and now Obama is going to be adding the End of Life Counseling via regulations.  This is not merely enforcing the rule of law or making sure that laws are faithfully executed but rather is making an addition which was not in the final version of the health care bill which was passed by Congress and signed into law by the president.

As much as I agree with John that the Federal government needs to be reined in I am not sure I agree with his assessment that the commerce clause is one the biggest threats to the American people. It is a big threat but I believe that the powers of the president -Ordinance Power-  are the powers which have the most capacity to endanger and encroach on our liberty and freedom.  I believe these powers need to be clarified and limited.  I think that Congress should be a check on the president by giving their authorization to any regulations and executive orders that either the President or those in government agencies such as the EPA want to implement.  IMO, recess appointments need to stop also.  If it is impossible for Congress to give a certain appointee their approval then they must not be fit to represent the American people in whatever position they have been nominated for.  Although, there is the problem of the opposite Party blocking appointees approval regardless of how qualified the appointee is. 

President Obama most recently has added (or plans to) end of life counseling under the guise of Medicare and Medicaid regulations, three Democrats on the FCC voted to enact the equivalent of the fairness doctrine but for the internet instead of radio, instituted green gas regulations through the EPA since he couldn’t get Congress to pass Cap & Trade, named recess appointments such as U.S. ambassadors and the head of Medicare and Medicaid, Donald Berwick.  And, these are just the power grabs committed by the president since July of 2010.  In addition you have progressives like John Podesta advising the president to ignore the will of the American people and institute policies via federal agencies. 


Congress needs to do its job and use the Congressional Review Act to engage in oversight to reign in and stop the president’s power grabs. The Republicans in Congress intend to give Obama a fight over the new EPA regulations.


The Federal government, federal agencies and most importantly the president needs to be reined in with both congressional Oversight and either an amendment clarifying and limiting the powers of the president and federal agencies or through a Constitutional Convention such as John suggests.

One of the Best Political Ads Ever! -- A Tale of Two Men

H/T Infidels are Cool

STOP This Tyrannical and Immoral Health Care Bill

The Democrats in Congress are now trying to shove this health care debacle bill down our throats like its the best medicine for the American people since penicillin was invented.  Well, I am allergic to penicillin, so get this freaking danger to my life the hell outta here, and flush it right down the crapper.  The American people have spoken out against this bill continuously for over a year but these ignorant politicians have proven that they either have their heads up their arses or they simply don't give a damn about the American people.  Or both?  This bill is a danger to our life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, privacy, and most of all our freedom.  This is one big step away from being a Republic and a huge leap toward dictatorship and socialism.  Patrick Caddell and Douglas Schoen point out in their coloumn how the Democrats blatant refusal to listen to the American people is going to come back to bite them in the arse in the November elections.  The arrogance of this administration and this Democratic Congress has become quite apparent over this past year or so.  This Congress and administration is refusing to see the writing on the wall- REALITY- and are dredging forward and deeper into their swamp.  As Obama and the Democrats continue to present on the facade that they are for health are reform, Rep. Paul Ryan points out what real meaningful health care reform is instead of the fakery and mockery that Democrats have made out of their whole health care "reform" initiative.  Instead of curbing the cost of health care the CBO points out that Obamacare will raise premiums of health insurance.  And, then Archbishop Chaput points out the immorality of this health care bill and how "Catholic" agencies are doing a disservice to the Catholic community and American people by presenting this bill as being pro-life, when in fact it is not.  This bill must be thrown in the garbage.  We must do meaningful health care reform that accomplshes what health reform was set out to do- lowers health care costs and increases accessibility to people.

Congressman Mike Rogers Speaks Out Against Democrats Government Run Health Care

A big H/T goes to Andrew33 over at K.O.O.K's Manifesto for passing this video along. This video really needs to go viral for all to see. It is excellent. First, here are some thoughts of mine.

I tell you folks, I have recently come across a congressman who has integrity and is of honorable character who is willing to say it like it is to the Democratic establishment in Washington D.C. Congressman Mike Rogers has stood up and spoken for the majority of the American people who just want to flush this piece of crap bill down the toilet. He points out some of the things that are so very wrong with the Democrats health care bill. He says that congress can come up with something much better than this travesty of a bill. It is not the Democrats bill or no bill at all. The Democrats are using fear tactics to make you think that if their bill doesn't pass than no bill is going to pass. If The Democrats would agree to the common sense solutions that the Republicans have come up with and offered to deal with the rising costs of health care and accessibility for 15% of Americans than congress could have had a common sense health care bill passed by now. This bill will hurt 85% of Americans for the sake of 15% of Americans. How ludicrous and nonsensical!! The GOP has offered much better ways to help the 15% of Americans who need health insurance obtain health insurance, without hurting the other 85% of the population with government run health care. The United States has the best success rates for ALL cancer patients around the globe. This is because of innovation, technology, and the ability for cancer patients to see whichever doctor they need to without government dictating which doctor they can see and which they can't see. But, if the Democrats pass their government run health care then this will change America's health care system as we know it today. Our health care will go down the tubes and will not be a place for others to come to for cutting edge medical procedures. Government run health care will halt that technology and innovation that makes the United States the greatest nation on earth. We must continue the good fight to stop government run health care from passing Congress.

A Politician Who Has Got a Clue (Video)

A H/T for this excellent video goes out to No Subject . Please go and check out his blog. Here is a politician who has got a clue. Representative Ted Poe of Texas understands what the American people need and want from their elected officials in congress. I just wish Obama, his comrades, and, the RHINOS would get a clue. Rep. Poe has common sense, which our politicians seem to be lacking nowadays. He understands that he is working for the people, and not vice versa. Enjoy!

A Proposal to Eliminate Waste in Our Government

I just received this in an email from my dad, and I thought everyone would enjoy this poem as well. I absolutely love it!!

A SENSIBLE SUGGESTION
"The Proposal"

When a company falls on

difficult times, one of the

thingsthat seems to happen

is they reduce their staff and

workers. The remaining

workers must find ways to

continue to do a good

job or risk that their job

would be eliminated as

well. Wall street, and

the media normally

congratulate the CEO

for making this type of

"tough decision", and

his board of directors

gives him a big

bonus. Our government

should not be immune

from similar risks.

Therefore:

Reduce the House of

Representatives from the

current 435 members to

218 members.

Reduce

Senate (members

from 100 to 50 one per

State).

Then, reduce their staff

by 25%.

Accomplish this over the

next 8 years (two steps/two elections),

and of course this would

require some redistricting.

Some Yearly Monetary

Gains Include:

$44,108,400 for

elimination of base

pay for congress. (267 members

X $165,200 pay/member/ yr.)

$97,175,000 for

elimination of their staff.

(estimate $1.3 Million

in staff per

each member of the House,

and $3 Million

in staff per each send a

member of the Senate every year)

$240,294 for the

reduction in remaining

staff by 25%.

$7,500,000,000 reduction

in pork barrel ear-marks

each year. (those

members whose jobs are

gone. Current estimates

for total government

pork earmarks are

at $15 Billion/yr).

The remaining

representatives would

need to work smarter

and

improve efficiencies.

It might even be in

their best interests

to work together

for the good of our country!

We may also expect

that smaller committees

might lead to

a more efficient

resolution of issues

as well.

It might even

be easier to

keep track of what

your representative is doing.

Congress has more

tools available to do

their jobs than it had

back in 1911 when the

current number of

representatives was

established. (telephone,

computers, cell phones

to name a few)

Note: Congress did not

hesitate to head home

when it was a holiday,

when the nation needed

a real fix to the

economic problems.

Also, we had 3 senators

that were not doing their

jobs for the 18+

months (on

the campaign trail) and

still they all

have accepted full pay.

These facts alone

support a reduction

in senators & congress.

Summary of opportunity:

$ 44,108,400 reduction

of congress members.

$282,100, 000 for

elimination of the

reduced house member

staff.

$150,000,000 for

elimination of reduced

senate member staff.

$59,675,000 for 25%

reduction of staff for

remaining house

members.

$37,500,000 for 25%

reduction of staff for

remaining senate

members.

$7,500,000,000 reduction

in pork added to bills by

the reduction of

congress members.

$8,073,383,400 per year

estimated total savings.

(That's 8-BILLION

just to start!)

Big business does

these types of cuts

all the time.

If Congresspersons were

required to serve 20, 25

or 30 years (like

everyone else) in order

to collect retirement

benefits, tax payers

could save a

bundle. Now they get

full retirement after

serving only ONE term.

Should The FBI Be Reading Suspected Terrorists Miranda Rights?

While on the ground at the U.S. base detention facilities in Bagram, Afghanistan Congressman Mike Rogers(R-MI) discovered that FBI agents are reading Miranda Rights to terror suspects.
The Department of Justice Dan Boyd has confirmed this.

Boyd stated:
"There has been no policy change and nor blanket instruction issued for FBI agents to Mirandize detainees overseas. While there have been specific cases in which FBI agents have Mirandized suspects overseas, at both Bagram and in other situations, in order to preserve the quality of evidence obtained, there has been no overall policy change with respect to detainees."

This policy was started under the Bush administration.

Rogers, a former FBI special agent and U.S. Army officer, says the Obama administration has not briefed Congress on the new policy. “I was a little surprised to find it taking place when I showed up because we hadn’t been briefed on it, I didn’t know about it. We’re still trying to get to the bottom of it, but it is clearly a part of this new global justice initiative.”

The FBI claim to only Mirandize very specific detainees for very specific reasons.

I don't understand why the FBI is reading Miranda Rights to terror suspects who are not United States citizens. I am against giving terrorists rights that only should be afforded to U.S. citizens regardless of which administration was/is having FBI agents do it. Are we constitutionally bound to do this? Or is the FBI using Miranda Rights as a tool in order to gain information? Is this setting a dangerous precedent? Why is the FBI only mirandizing a select few of the suspected terrorists? President Obama has just recently decided that the detainees at Guantanomo Bay are not going to come to U.S. for military tribunals. Bush never considered this to be an option either. So, then why are we essentially giving suspected terrorists rights that they are not required to have by law since they are not going to be coming to the United States?

Do Not Allow Obama To Serve a 3rd Term-Stop Resolution 5 From Being Passed

Some information has just been brought to my attention regarding a piece of congressional legislation. The House of Representatives has proposed a resolution called House Joint Resolution 5 that would repeal the 22nd Amendment which limits the President to two terms. This would allow President Obama to run for a third term. I don't think any President, neither Good nor Bad should be allowed to serve more than two terms. I believe that if this amendment is passed it would open the door to a wide variety of abuses by both our President and our government. The passing of this bill could open the door to even more government control. This could even open the door for the United States to no longer be a democratic country. The U.S could be ruled by a dictatorship instead of having free and open elections.

Rep. Jose Serrano of NYC is the person who introduced this House Joint Resolution 5. Here is his contact information in order to petition him to stop this resolution from moving forward.

Official website:

http://www.house.gov/serrano/

2227 Rayburn House Office Building

Washington, DC 20515

Phone: 202-225-4361 Fax: 202-225-6001

Contact José Serrano via web

PLEASE HELP STOP HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 5 FROM BEING PASSED!!!!!