Obama/Biden Wrong for America

Shirtless Obama Pics Cause Stir

2008-12-23T16:30:00.001-07:00

So, one of my friends on facebook decided to post a picture of Obama being shirtless in Hawaii. I was kind of disgusted by this photo because the man is our soon to be President and I didn't feel that was very Presidential...just how I don't think Biden being drunk at several fundraising events is very Vice Presidential. Anyway, I let my friend know my feelings and it was no surprise that I was called a racist. But....here's the kicker! When I logged onto Yahoo this morning the first thing I see is, "Shirtless Obama Causes Stir." So, I guess I'm not the only one who is kind of apauled by these photos. I think Obama needs to start looking more Presidential because, after all, we did elect him. He's not the same inexperienced Senator anymore and he needs to grow up and put on the big boy pants now.

Blagojevich + Rham Emmauel = Corruption Made in Heaven

2008-12-14T01:45:00.003-07:00

I'm sure we have all heard the scandal Blagojevich has gotten himself involved with. Blagojevich, the governor of Illinois is the one responsible for appointing the vacant Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama. Blagojevich thought it would be a good idea to secretly auction off the Senate seat as a way to raise money for his campaigns. Donors stated they would give Blagojevich one million dollars towards his campaign if he appointed Jesse Jackson Jr. This kind of behavior is typical for the state of Illinois and the Chicago area. So, this blog is titled how Obama and Biden are wrong for America...Blagojevich doesn't really fit in here, so I dug a little deeper....just a little because this was not hard to find. Obama's newly appointed Chief of Staff and son of a terrorist, Rham Emmaunel, who is also from Chicago had contact with Blagojevich about this scandal and said nothing. I can't comment as to what they spoke about but the fact that Emmanuel, the Chief of Staff, said nothing is big. The conversations between the two were recorded and hit the media a few days after this scandal came to life. So Obama appoints corrupt people to fill his cabinet positions and is from the corruption capital of the United States, but is not corrupt himself....sense my sarcasm.

Obama appoints son of terrorist as Chief of Staff

2008-11-06T14:11:00.003-07:00

Only two days after the historic election and Barack Obama is already palling around with terrorists. That's right! Obama has appointed Rahm Emmanuel as White House Chief of Staff. You may recognize Rahm Emmanuel from the Clinton Administration. Emmanuel served as a political and policy aide to President Clinton before running for Congress. Emmanuel now serves Illinois's' 5th Congressional District....that is, until he resigns his seat in order to become Obama's Chief of Staff.

Rahm only has nine fingers, and there were rumors, once, that he lost the tenth to a Syrian tank while serving in the Israeli Army. That rumor is false—he lost it to a meat slicer—but Rahm's dad did serve the Israeli cause...as a terrorist!

Rahm's dad is Benjamin M. Emanuel, a Chicago pediatrician and, in the 1940s, a member of Irgun, a radical militant Zionist group that attacked Arabs and the British throughout Palestine. They killed 90 men and women in a Hotel bombing in 1946, bombed marketplaces, and were responsible for the infamous Deir Yassin massacre in which hundreds of Arab men, women, and children were slaughtered. Irgun is a Jewish terrorist organization.

Ben, according to the New York Times, "passed secret codes" for Irgun. Benjamin Emanuel is a Jewish terrorist who raised Rahm Emanuel. Appointing the son of a Jewish terrorist does nothing to change America's foreign policy.

A look at what we can expect

2008-11-06T09:25:00.002-07:00

Here's a look at what we can expect with Barack Obama and Joe Biden occupying the Executive Branch of government.

Video 1: Obama thinks there are 57 states in the US.
Fact check: There are 50 states in the United States of America. Someone who is the President-elect should know how many states there are in the country he plans to lead.

Video 2: Biden states that we must create a three letter word: J-O-B-S.
Fact Check: JOBS is a 4 letter word, not three letters.

Video 3: Biden tells Chuck Graham to stand up.
Fact Check: Chuck Graham is paralyzed and can't stand up. Graham is a member of the Democratic Party, the same party Joe Biden belongs to.

Video 4: Joe Biden warns US of terrorist attack if Obama gets elected. Obama was elected, so I guess we'll be victim of another terrorist attack.

---More to come---

Not going away

2008-11-04T22:56:00.003-07:00

Now that America has made a grave mistake in electing socialist Senator Barack Obama and Joe
Biden I feel that it is important for this blog to remain. As a moderate-conservative American I feel it is my duty to fight for America and expose Obama & Biden. I will fight for you America because Lord knows Obama and Biden will not be. They will be raising your taxes, creating national security issues putting our very safety at risk, forcing us to pay for health care even if we don't want it, eliminating free enterprise, and destroying the very capitalist principles we were founded on. I predict that Americans will realize this and separate themselves from Obama and Biden.

The Definition of Socialism is Barack Obama

2008-11-04T15:48:00.002-07:00

Marriam Webster's dictionary defines socialism as:
"Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods."

Obama says he's not a socialist....well, Mr. Obama, your idea of spreading the wealth around is a socialist ideal...taxing the "rich" and giving it to the poor is government control of assets, which, by definition is socialism.

Your healthcare plan...by the government controlling American's choices in healthcare...that is socialism. An American has to either have healthcare provided by their employer or Obama's healthcare...Americans do not have the choice to decline healthcare coverage or choose a different healthcare provider if their employer does not offer it. Small businesses will be mandated by government to provide healthcare coverage to their employees. If any of the above conditions are not met Obama will fine you and I think the fines will be pretty hefty. This is socialism.

So when Senator Barack Obama says he's not a socialist DON'T believe him!!!

Obama's H.O.P.E.

2008-10-12T13:36:00.001-07:00

Throughout this election Obama has been preaching hope....hope this and hope that, What I have learned is the Obama's "hope" is an acronym.

H is for Hype
Obama does offer "just words." When there are no viable plans for change, just the illusion of it, Obama's speeches end up being just words (and often plagiarized words). "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." were not just words, Obama. President Kennedy had a set plan for America to prosper economically, to travel amongst the stars, and to fight global communism. When Dr. King gave his "I Have A Dream" speech, he was culminating a vision he had for all Americans, not just those that are going to vote for Obama.

O is for Omnipotent
Obama seeks presidential election for personal gain. He does not love America, nor America's accomplishments, nor the American people. A man that does not put his hand over his heart as his country's national anthem plays is a traitor! Obama wants to rid America of all patriotism, make us forget all the good we have done for the world, and join a world government, the United Nations, where we give up our rights set forth in the American constitution. As long as Obama is the de-facto leader of the U.N., he will allow measures such as the tax bill he proposed that would send 7 percent of the U.S. Gross national product towards the U.N. Millenium Development Goal. Obama would happily allow a foreign body to tax us upon the new taxes that he is proposing.

P is for Pestilence
The universal healthcare plan and new taxes Obama proposes are just watered-down versions of Hillary Clinton's presidential proposals. Such plans are dangerous because they set us on a path to socialism. Our wages will be garnished against our will in order to pay for unnecessary healthcare costs tbat will not even be our own. The taxes imposed on Americans will cripple the economy because we will not have enough income to set aside for discretionary spending. Forget vacations, flat-screen TV's, and Sunday trips to the ballpark. We will all be thoroughly enslaved by our jobs in order to pay for all of these taxes. Obama says he'll just raise taxes on those earning $250,000 or more but I don't believe it for one second. First, raising ANYONE'S taxes in an economy such as this one is unpatriotic. Second, spreading the wealth around like that IS socialism. Third, in order to pay for and fund all of his new spending and programs he will have to raise everyone's taxes...do the math!

E is for Evil
Barack Obama has stated countless times that we will surrender in Iraq and pull all American troops from the Middle East. Obama will leave the Iraqi people in chaos, will allow them to start a religious civil war, and will allow the remnants of Al Qaeda to regain a foothold in Baghdad and across Iraq. Obama will meet with our enemies, Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, and Kim Jong Il, without precondition, and will give these dictators everything they want as long as they promise peace. Obama is the Neville Chamberlain of our time! Obama will appease our enemies while at the same time weakening America's national security and weakening America's military might. Obama will let our friends and allies fend for themselves against global Islamic terrorism, and Obama will sit idly as the wolves that surround Israel go in for the kill. Obama has stated all of this! You just have to see past the words.

B. Hussein Obama and Fidel Castro

2008-10-12T13:30:00.002-07:00

Throughout this election cycle it's amazing how much Brack Obama has reminded me of Fidel Castro, the former communist dictator of Cuba. As a political scientist, I have studied Fidel quite extensively and I must say that Barack Obama is close to being the contemporary Fidel Castro of our time. Allow me to back this up with some facts and data I have collected.

In the late 1950s most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change, and given the state of Cuba, they were probably right. So...when a young leader came along they were at least receptive. This young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system. Soon, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends and colleagues were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said, 'Praise the Lord!' And when the young leader said, "I will be for change and I'll bring you change," everyone yelled, "Viva Fidel!"

But...nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner's guns went silent the people's guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time the change was finally implemented, Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status. By the time the change was over, more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts and inner tubes. You can call those who made it ashore anywhere else in the world the most fortunate Cubans.

Luckily, we would never in America fall for a young leader who promised change without asking, WHAT change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America? Would we?

So, these reasons among others are why Obama reminds me of Castro...they share many other traits as well.....

Both were abandoned by their fathers at an early age.
Both are charming, eloquent lawyers that say exactly what people want to hear at the right time and place.
One never led the nation to suspect he was a communist at heart, the other doesn't mention the word socialism when in reality this is exactly what his agenda stands for.
Both were virtually unknown until they began to use the word 'change' as their main political motto.
Both have egos as tall as the twin towers once were, yet they manage to present themselves humbly, one in soiled military fatigues and the other sweating and with an undone tie.
Both have the unique ability to distort truth and lies as if they were the same.
Both have the ability to hypnotize the ignorant and fool the wishful thinker and to divide a nation in classes, (divide and you shall win) In Fidel's case he divided the rich against the poor, the illiterate against the educated and the black against the white. In Obama's case even if by omission, he's de-facto dividing the races already.
And lastly I'll use the words of Jorge Santayana to finish my case in point: 'Those who can't remember the past are condemned to repeat it.' And in the words of Sir Winston Churchill: 'The inherent vice of Capitalism is the unequal distribution of blessings, the inherent vice of Socialism is the equal distribution of misery.'

GOD SAVE AMERICA!

Checks and Balances

2008-10-12T13:18:00.003-07:00

I promise this will be a short blog even though I have set the precedent of rambling. I have come to the conclusion that most young voters may not know about the American political system and how it works. Obama seems to realize this and is targeting them for votes.

In the American Political System there are three branches of government: the executive (President), the legislative (Congress), and the Judicial (courts). Each of these branches provides a check on the other. For example, Congress can not just put something into law, it has to go to the President for "review." The President decides whether he will accept it or reject (veto) it. If the President signs it, it becomes a law and if s/he vetoes it, it goes back to Congress. Congress can do a few things: they can override the Presidential veto with a 2/3 majority or they can revise and modify it and send it back to the President. Should the President sign a bill that is unconstitutional in anyway a person can challenge it by bringing it to the Supreme Court, which provides a check on the executive and legislative. The Supreme Court can also step in and reject an overridden Presidential veto. So where am I going with all of this?

In Congress there is a Democratic majority. Democrats control the House of Representatives and the Senate. In the House of Representatives Democrats outweigh Republicans 235-199 with 1 vacant seat (Rep. Jones passed away on Aug. 20). In the Senate there are 49 Democrats and 49 Republicans but since Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut was elected as an Independent, he is free to choose who he meets with in committee (caucus) and he chose the Democrats. There is also one Independent (Sen. Jeffords of VT) who is split between Republican caucus and Democratic Caucus. Because Sen. Lieberman caucuses with the Democrats the balance of power shifts over to them. So, Democrats control all Congressional Committees, including finance, transportation, foreign affairs, Housing and Development, etc. As a side note, I'd like to mention that this Congress...the Congress hat was elected in 2006 has voted on the least amount of bills and has the lowest approval ratings in United States History. Nothing to save the American taxpayer has come out of these Democratic controlled committees...it's like we elected them to twiddle their thumbs. Many of the Democrats ran on the platforms of reducing the price of fuel, however, the price of fuel went up 68% while they did nothing. The President stepped in, with much criticism from Democrats, and started offshore drilling, which provided some much needed relief from $4.00/gallon gas prices. Democrats know that the American people blame President Bush for most if not all of what is going on now so they sit back and let him get all of the blame while they do nothing. I hope Americans will consult this at the polls this November.

Ok, now that my little rant it over....back to the topic. In this upcoming election, Republicans are projected to lose more seats in both the House and Senate. This gives Democrats an even larger majority. So, if we elect Barack Obama as President, that is two branches of government controlled by the Democrats. Who is to provide a check on the legislative branch if Democrats control it all? Barack Obama will be able to push through his very liberal agenda quite quickly and we'll be on track to becoming the Socialist States of America. Democrats have a very long track record of raising taxes. I'm willing to bet that a tax increase will hit the desk of Barack Obama should he be elected. Now, Barack says that there will be no tax increases for people earning over $250,000 per year, but in the US Senate he voted to raise taxes for those earning $42,000 per year. When running for Senate he stated that he would not raise taxes on middle class citizens, yet his Senate record shows that he has voted to raise taxes for the middle class and voted against a tax cut for the middle class. So, when that tax increase hits his desk what do you think he'll do? To me, actions speak louder than words....he says one thing and does another. And the scary part, there is no check on him or on Congress. They will be free to do some damage to this Country. We need balance. I'll even go as far as saying that it wasn't best for America when the Republicans had an 11 seat majority in the Senate and a 31 seat majority in the House. Corruption and abuse of power become tempting when this occurs. Let the Democrats control Congress....but we better have the opposing party at the Executive level to keep them in check. John McCain is the clear choice here. He will keep Congress in check and will do what is right for America. McCain has the ability to reach across the aisle and get things done, he will eliminate political gridlock. The choice is clear America....lets put an end to the corruption and greed and keep Barack Obama back in Illinois.

While on Campaign Trail Obama Bums Cigarettes, Biden gets Drunk

2008-10-09T16:09:00.004-07:00

What great role models for young Americans when they see a candidate bumming cigarettes from civilians and his running mate giving a speech drunk. This is ridiculous and proves that Obama and Biden can't handle the pressure. If they can't handle campaigning what makes you think that they can handle the number 1 and 2 spots? Ummmmm......they can't.

The Associated Press got a preview of Barack Obama's interview with Men's Health magazine to grace next month's issue. In it Obama admits to bumming a smoke along the campaign trail. He stated that as long as he's running for President, he needs to cut himself a little slack. In other words, I can't handle the stress of campaigning so I need to pick up my old habit. Michelle, his wife asked him to kick the habit once he decided to run for President. So not only is he weak, he's deceitful. He also regularly chews Nicorette.
Read the article here: http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/07/obama-admits-bumming-cigarettes-on-the-campaign-trail/

Smoking is the ultimate sign of weakness.....it's performed by people who lack a certain amount of mental, emotional, and physical toughness and the reason these people smoke is to externalize this compensation.

Now, on Biden getting drunk....this isn't the first time we've seen Biden have a little too much. The YouTube video speaks for itself. In the video you can see Biden slurring his words and telling a pointless substanceless story about his life that makes no sense.

My take on the 2nd debate: Obama the LOSER

2008-10-08T18:44:00.004-07:00

Before I start this blog I would like to say that I thought both candidates spoke beautifully at the second debate. I think Obama may connect with the audience better because he likes to tell us how we feel and what we're feeling. It just goes to show that when he's President he is going to be a socialist dictator who tells us what we are and how we feel. There is no more freedom under a Barack Hussein Obama Presidency. I hope America can see that.

I want to touch on things that were said in the debate, primarily by Obama. There are a lot of things he stretched and some things he just outright lied about....and somethings that made him look like he's not ready to lead. As a proven leader, I am able to identify key elements in a person and determine whether or not they are capable of leading. Barack Obama is NOT.

First and foremost, Barack Obama began the second debate the same way he began the first. This does not surprise me because he likes to say the same thing over and over and over. I guess that's all you can do when you lack substance. Obama stated, "President Bush reduced lending regulations and let the industry run wild. We need oversight and someone who thinks about the middle class." Now, I'm paraphrasing but....let's set the record straight for Mr. Obama. It wasn't President Bush who reduced regulations in the mortgage industry....it was President Clinton who did....President Clinton created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and appointed corrupt people to run them, who are, by the way, part of the Obama campaign. Hey that rhymes! Anyway, I will also like to point out that Obama has never thought about the middle class before...the only time he has is when he has raised their taxes or has voted against lowering their taxes. So, don't tell me about the middle class Mr. Obama...I'm not stupid and I won't be fooled. Next, It was McCain who proposed an oversight committee to oversee Freddie and Fannie. It was blocked by Democrats in the Senate and was never allowed to reach the Senate floor. President Clinton instructed the Democrats to block and obstruct anything the Republicans proposed. So, once again, thank you for this mess President Clinton and fellow Democrats.

Next, Obama says his first priority as President is energy prices. Sorry Mr. No health care coverage....Sorry Mr. I can't afford college tuition, you'll have to wait. Obama opposed nuclear energy and offshore drilling. He says that we consume more oil than we have on reserve. That's a legitimate point but McCain doesn't just want to drill and not explore alternative fuels....in fact, he has a track record of supporting alternative fuels....Obama does not. I think it's best that we drill offshore while we explore the idea of other fueling options. This will give Americans temporary relief while we find something else. Obama wants to not only create a supply/demand issue, which will drive fuel prices up even higher....he wants to raise the gas tax! So, when he says, "You're paying $3.80 here in Nashville....we need to reduce that." Don't believe his empty words. Look at his record and make your judgment accordingly.

Next, I can't help but point out how Obama talks in circles...I mean, really, it's ridiculous! I believe it was an e-mail question...but it asked each candidate what sacrifices will you ask Americans to make? Well, I guess Obama is going to ask us to make a lot of sacrifices because he totally talked around the question and talked about 9/11, the peace corp, energy, and never answered the question. I'll tell you what sacrifices he will ask us to make. First and most importantly, he will ask us to surrender some of our civil liberties and freedom. He is a socialist so everything will be government controlled....health care, education, transportation, the economy, etc. There will be no more free enterprise and no more technological advancements in medicine. Since he has no clue on how to deal with this economic crisis Americans will need to sacrifice their homes, their savings, and their retirement. We will also need to sacrifice our safety as Mr. Obama wants to eliminate our missile defense systems and cut our military. Remember when Bill Clinton did that? Al Qaeda planned and executed vicious attacks on us. So, I guess we'll get more of that under Mr. Obama.

Health care......this topic probably made me the most angry and most frustrated. I can't believe the ridiculous policy Obama is proposing. First, as a parent you are REQUIRED to provide health insurance to your child. Now, I realize that as a parent you should be doing this....but it should not be government mandated. Who is the government to tell you how to raise your children. It's just the principle of it. Guess what poorer Americans....if you have 5 kids you're going to go broke providing them health insurance or paying the fines Mr. Obama will charge you. That takes away our freedom to choose. Next, if you're a small business owner....you must provide health care to your workers or pay the government. You'll get a 50% tax credit to do this but again, if you don't, you're fined. McCain's plan is much much better....it allows us to enjoy our freedoms to choose and it takes government out of something unnecessary. Government has a history for screwing things up....look at the mortgage industry. I guess Mr. Obama wants the same for the economy as a whole, for health care, and for education. I guess we can look at Canada's health care system as they have socialist health care....or as Obama calls it, "Universal Health care." Mr. Obama is crafty with his words. Anyway, in Canada you can't even get in to see a doctor...if you want a mamogram....oh...too bad, you have to wait 16 months. By then the cancer has eaten you alive if you have it. I guess it's why Canadians come HERE to use OUR health care. Also, under Obama...there will be no room for technological advancements in medicine. When is the last time anyone has seen anything some out of Canada?

So we all know that Obama opposes the Iraq War even though he wasn't in the US Senate when it was voted on. He had a chance to see if it was popular or not and I guarantee you, America, that if it was popular Obama would be the poster child for it. Remember in 2004, he said, "I don't know how I would have voted on the war" insinuating that he may have voted for it. Now, what really irks me is that he thinks Americans are dumb. He makes it look like it was a decision between Bush and McCain to go into Iraq. THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT HAVE THE POWER TO DECLARE WAR....ONLY CONGRESS DOES!!!!! In fact, Mr. Obama, in the House, there were 86 Democrats who voted for the war and in the Senate 77 Senators supported the war including your running mate, Senator Biden! Also, your Senate Majority leader (Harry Reid) voted for it. So, STOP trying to fool Americans into thinking that the War was a decision between McCain and Bush.

Next, while still discussing the war...Obama states that we are spending $10 billion a month on Iraq and we need to pull out....war is bad. See, America thinks that he will end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home. This IS NOT true. In fact, Mr. Obama is just going to send those same troops to Afghanistan to hunt Osama Bin Laden. So, war won't end. Later on, Obama mentions new wars that he'll start including humanitarian ones such as Darfur. We will also be at war with Pakistan. So, the supposed $10 billion a month that we're spending per month in Iraq that Obama says we need here won't come here...it'll go toward funding new wars Obama wants to start. Now, Obama stated that humanitarian causes are OK to fight over.....genocide, ethnic cleansing, etc. are all inexcusable. I agree with him.....but how quickly he forgets that Saddam Hussein did all of those things to the Iraqi people. He would put civilians in tree grinders....torture his people and force them to do things they did not want to. We all know he gassed the Kurds. So, Obama, you've contradicted yourself once again. You stick up for humanitarian causes but opposed removing the epitome of it from power in 2002. Please stop lieing to the American people!

Now, going to the economy....McCain wants to eliminate earmarks because spending is way out of control in Washington. I agree with this....spending is out of control. Obama's net spending cut is pure BS. Add up the numbers he rattled off in the debate......$15 billion here, $10 billion there....it's not a net spending cut. He proposed billions and new spending and criticizes McCain for earmarks because it only reduces $18 billion in spending. $18 billion is a lot of money Mr. Obama!!!! How could you say that when we're going through a financial crisis?!?!!? Obama just doesn't get it. Let's spend spend spend, drive up more debt and worsen the economy. Let's spend billions on an overhead projector.....that's good use of the taxpayers money. Please! I won't be fooled and neither should you America.

One of the last questions asked by the audience (and I thought this was a good one) was if the US would attack Iran if Iran attacked Israel or would the US seek approval from the UN security council. McCain answered the question beautifully....Obama said we should sit down and discuss it with our enemies. This is not the type of leadership we want to need. I hope you will join me America, in defeating Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the polls this November. Our country deserves better. Our country deserves McCain Palin.

Biden lies and misrepresents McCain record at VP Debate

2008-10-07T17:20:00.001-07:00

So I guess when your policies are weak and you lack substance like Joe Biden does....you have to lie about your runningmate's opponent's record in order to fool Americans into voting for your ticket. I wonder if the people in his "neighborhood" get it. Ok, here we go.....

Feel free to check my sources by the way......

Lie #1: Sen. Biden claimed that Sen. McCain voted the same way that Sen. Obama did on the Democratic budget resolution that calls for a tax increase on those making as little as $42,000 a year. In fact, on March 14, 2008 and again on June 4, 2008, Sen. Obama voted for the Democratic budget resolution, while Sen. McCain did not
Sources: U.S. Senate Legislation & Records – March 14, 2008 Vote, Resolution; U.S. Senate Legislation & Records – June 4, 2008: Vote, Resolution

Lie #2: Sen. Biden claimed that in an Obama Administration the top earners in America would "pay no more than they did under Ronald Reagan." When President Reagan came into office, the top marginal tax rate was 70% (ouch). While in office, he lowered the top marginal tax rate to 28%. In an Obama Administration, the top marginal tax rate would be raised to 39.6%. Now, last time I checked 39.6 was more than 28.
Sources: The Impact of the Presidential Candidates' Tax Proposals on Effective Marginal Tax Rates; Lowering Marginal Tax Rates: The Key to Pro-Growth Tax Relief

Lie #3: Senator Biden claimed that it would take 10 years to get any oil from new offshore drilling. However, the chief economist at the American Petroleum Institute estimates that some offshore installations could be brought online within only 2-3 years.
Source: CNN Money: American's favor offshore drilling

Lie #4: On the Resolution to Authorize the Use of Force Against Iraq, Sen. Biden stated that he "voted for the power because he [President Bush] said he needed it not to go to war but to keep the United States, the UN in line, to keep sanctions on Iraq and not let them be lifted."In fact, on October 2, 2002 before Sen. Biden voted for the resolution, President Bush said that if Saddam Hussein "persists in his defiance, the use of force may become unavoidable."
Source: White House Office of the Press Secretary: President, House Leadership Agree on Iraq Resolution

Lie #5: Senator Biden claimed that "with regard to Barack Obama not funding the troops, John McCain voted the exact same way." That is incorrect, as Sen. McCain voted for the final passage of the bill funding the troops while Sen. Obama voted against the bill
Sources: U.S. Senate Legislation & Records – May 24, 2007 Vote H.R. 2206; Bill

Lie #6: Sen. Biden claimed "we spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country."In reality, according to the Congressional Budget Office and Department of Defense, of the funds appropriated for activities related to the war on terror around Iraq and Afghanistan in 2007, "Operation Iraqi Freedom accounted for approximately 85 percent of all reported obligations; Operation Enduring Freedom (which refers mainly to operations in and around Afghanistan) accounted for another 15 percent." The US spends as much in 51 weeks – not 7 years – in Afghanistan as it spends in every three weeks in Iraq.
Source: Congressional Budget Office, The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2008 to 2018

Lie #7: Sen. Biden said of Vice President Cheney that, "He doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the Vice President of the United States, that's the Executive Branch." However, Article I of the Constitution is actually about the Legislative Branch of government and the Vice President is mentioned in both Article I (Sections 3) and Article II (Sections 1 & 4). I don't know about you America, but I would like my Vice President to at least know the Constitution....I think it's the least we can ask.
Source: Cornell University Law School: The United States Constitution

Lie #8: Sen. Biden said that Gov. Palin "imposed a windfall profits tax up there in Alaska." The Encyclopedia Britannica defines an excess or windfall profits tax as a tax on an amount of profit that exceeds a set standard. An example of a windfall profits tax is President Carter's 1980 tax on oil company profits, where the government took 50 percent of everything above $26 a barrel. However, Gov. Palin's energy policy was an increase in the royalties paid for oil pumped from state lands, not a windfall profits tax.
Sources: Britannica Online Dictionary

Lie #9: Sen. Biden claimed "Barack Obama, first thing he did when he came to the United States Senate, new senator, reached across the aisle to my colleague, Dick Lugar, a Republican, and said, "We've got to do something about keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists.""They put together a piece of legislation that, in fact, was serious and real. Every major – I shouldn't say every – on the two at least that I named, I know that John McCain has been opposed to extending the arms control regime in the world." In fact, this vote was so uncontroversial and unimportant that it passed the Senate by voice vote, where the votes of Senators are not even recorded. This is just another one of Biden's Exaggerations.
Sources: Sen. Obama Press Release: Lugar-Obama Bill to Keep Weapons Out of Terrorists' Hands Passes Congress

Lie #10: Sen. Biden claimed that on US action in Bosnia "initially John McCain opposed it along with a lot of other people." However, Senator McCain actually helped to pass a Senate resolution supporting the American mission in Bosnia. He voted for the resolution on December 13, 1995.
Sources: Q&A/John McCain: Why Senate Skeptic Backed Bosnia Mission, U.S. Senate Legislation & Records – December 13, 1995 Vote

So, America, who do you trust more....the man who gets up there and lies to your face to make his ticket more marketable or the woman who gets up there and talks straight to the American people and is honest and trustworthy? The choice is yours America...choose wisely.

Obama gets millions from Fannie Mae

2008-10-07T15:59:00.001-07:00

So I guess this is why Congress decided not to hold anyone accountable for all of the fraud taking place at Fannie Mae. Lets take a closer look at EXACTLY what is going on, since all of the Democrats like to place 100% of the blame on President Bush.........

First, I realize that not every American might know what Fannie Mae is. In fact, in a brief survey I conducted, most respondents did not know what Fannie Mae was or why it was created. Fannie Mae is a GSE (government sponsored Entity) which is regulated by Congress. It was created in 1997 by President Clinton. What Fannie Mae does is they buy mortgages from other companies and is backed by the American taxpayers for all loses but gets to keep all profits. Once created, President Clinton loosens home loan requirements. This creates subprime lending (lending to those who have less than good credit) and ultimately results in banks, brokers, and mortgage companies making thousands of bad loans ($0 down, low FICO, no documentation, 120%+ financing).

In 1998, executives at Fannie Mae begin receiving HUGE bonues if loan targets are met. Franklin Raines (who now advises Barack Obama on economic policies) and Jamie Garelick are appointed by the Clinton Administration to run Fannie Mae. Between the years of 1999 and 2004 Raines earns $100 million in bonuses and Garelick earns $75 million in bonuses. This goes to show how many bad loans were created if Raines earns $20 million a year in bonuses.

In 2005 President Bush proposes a new oversight committee to clean up Fannie Mae but Democrats in Congress derailed the effort. Rep. Melvyn Watt (D-NC) said, "I don't see much other than weakening the bragaining power of poorer families to get affordable housing." So, when the President proposes a new idea, it has to go through the House or Senate, pass, go to the House if the Senate passed the bill or the Senate if the House proposed the bill, pass again, and then the President has to sign it. In this case a Senator who I'll mention later proposed an oversight committee, which the Democrats derailed. Back to the history lesson.....

Remember the failure of Enron back in 2002? Well, with the collapse of Enron came Congressional investigations and ultimately lead to Skilling and Lay going to jail for fradulent bookkeeping. In response to this Congress formed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which regulated corporations more heavily. Fast forwarding to 2004, an OMB investigation finds massive fradulent bookkeeping at Fannie Mae. False numbers triggered executive bonuses every year. In other words, Raines, Garelick, among other top executives cooked the books so they could earn higher bonuses every year. It's amazing what greed does to people.......sorry, bit of a side note. The shocking part of this....Congress knew about this and held no hearings. No one went to jail and no one was punished. Hmmmmm........why?

From 1999-2005 Fannie Mae paid millions to 354 Congressmen and women from both parties. Fannie Mae also gave millions to Democratic causes.....like ACORN. So....who got the most money? Such a great question....I will tell you.

1) Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT). Remember Chris Dodd and his Countrywide Home Loan scandal? Yeah, it's no surprise he's atop of the leaderboard. "Senator" Dodd, once a Presidential candidate, is Chairman of the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.

2) Senator Barack Obama (D-IL). Now, there's a shocker....well, it's hard to be sarcastic online. Corruption and Barack are not unfamilar to each other....that's a topic for a new blog, I guess. Senator Obama is not only the Democratic Nominee for President but is also a member of the Federal Financial Management Committee. Kind scary and sketch, eh?

3) Senator Chuck Shumer (D-NY). Yeah, no surprise there....NY will keep re-electing him because he's liberal. He's also the Chairman of the House Financial Committee.

4) Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). Hmmmm....isn't that funny?! I guess Bill O'Reilly was right about Mr. Frank. Rep. Frank is Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

In 2005 Franklin Raines and other top executives are forced to resign from Fannie Mae. They don't go to jail and there is no media "perp. walk."

Now, remember I said that there was a Senator who took President Bush's idea of an oversight committee to the US Senate? Well, that Senator you may recognize....his name is John McCain (R-AZ). Senator McCain proposed the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act. He stated, "If Congress does not act, American taxpayres will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole." None of the top 4 recipients of Fannie Mae's money (Dodd, Obama, Schumer, and Frank) supported the legistlation. The reform was blocked by Democrats, never making it out of committee.

Ok, so here we are today....Fannie and Freddie are bankrupt and the government has taken them over completely. Lehman Brothers is bankrupt from investing in bad mortgages. AIG gets $85 million in loan guarantees after insuring bad loans and projects. Taxpayers are forced to pay billions in rescue effort. Franklin Raines is now part of the Obama campaign and will advise Obama on economic policies....since, ya know...he did such a wonderful job with Fannie Mae and all. It's no wonder that Obama supports more government takeover of the economy. I guess he just doesn't know.....I mean, did government involvement in the mortgage industry work out? Rhetorical question..... On the contrary, McCain supports revising regulations and loan standards and selling off Fannie and Freddie.

So who should we trust? To me, the choice is clear. On one side we have a man who got millions from Fannie Mae while millions of Americans lost their homes. A man who now has a corrupt leader advising him on economic policy. A man who wants governmental control of the entire economy. On the other side we have a man who has a proven track record for reform and changing things. A man who stands up for what is right . A man who truly cares about Americans and will do what is right so America can navigate though these difficult times. John McCain offers real change and has the record to back it up.

The Ever Present Obama

2008-10-07T15:47:00.001-07:00

I wrote this blog on myspace account some time ago, but since Biden said, "I'll be in the room with Barack for every major decision" during the VP debate this past Thursday it got me thinking that this blog is still appropriate. Enjoy......

Finally and officially, Barack Obama is running for president. His symbolic announcement, in the Land of Lincoln, called for a new era in politics. Obama downplayed his thin federal experience while championing his record on the state and local level, and he talked about the need to change Washington, set priorities, and "make hard choices."

"What's stopped us is the failure of leadership, the smallness of our politics--the ease with which we're distracted by the petty and trivial, our chronic avoidance of tough decisions," Obama said in his announcement speech. But a closer look at the presidential candidate's record in the Illinois Legislature reveals something seemingly contradictory: a number of occasions when Obama avoided making hard choices.

While some conservatives and Republicans surely will harp on what they call his "liberal record," highlighting applicable votes to support their case, it's Obama's history of voting "present" in Springfield--even on some of the most controversial and politically explosive issues of the day--that raises questions that he will need to answer. Voting "present" is one of three options in the Illinois Legislature (along with "yes" and "no"), but it's never an option for the occupant of the Oval Office.

We aren't talking about a "present" vote on whether to name a state office building after a deceased state official, but rather about votes that reflect an officeholder's core values.
For example, in 1997, Obama voted "present" on two bills (HB 382 and SB 230) that would have prohibited a procedure often referred to as partial birth abortion. He also voted "present" on SB 71, which lowered the first offense of carrying a concealed weapon from a felony to a misdemeanor and raised the penalty of subsequent offenses.

In 1999, Obama voted "present" on SB 759, a bill that required mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds. The bill passed the state Senate 52-1. Also in 1999, Obama voted "present" on HB 854 that protected the privacy of sex-abuse victims by allowing petitions to have the trial records sealed. He was the only member to not support the bill.
In 2001, Obama voted "present" on two parental notification abortion bills (HB 1900 and SB 562), and he voted "present" on a series of bills (SB 1093, 1094, 1095) that sought to protect a child if it survived a failed abortion. In his book, the "Audacity of Hope," on page 132, Obama explained his problems with the "born alive" bills, specifically arguing that they would overturn Roe v. Wade. But he failed to mention that he only felt strongly enough to vote "present" on the bills instead of "no."

And finally in 2001, Obama voted "present" on SB 609, a bill prohibiting strip clubs and other adult establishments from being within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, and daycares.
If Obama had taken a position for or against these bills, he would have pleased some constituents and alienated others. Instead, the Illinois legislator-turned-U.S. senator and, now, Democratic presidential hopeful essentially took a pass.

Some of these bills may have been "bad." They may have included poison pills or been poorly written, making it impossible for Obama to support them. They may have even been unconstitutional. When the Obama campaign was asked about those votes, they explained that in some cases, the Senator was uncomfortable with only certain parts of the bill, while in other cases, the bills were attempts by Republicans simply to score points.
But even if that were the case, it doesn't explain his votes. The state legislator had an easy solution if the bills were unacceptable to him: he could have voted against them and explained his reasoning.

Because it takes affirmative votes to pass legislation in the Illinois Senate, a "present" vote is tantamount to a "no" vote. A "present" vote is generally used to provide political cover for legislators who don't want to be on the record against a bill that they oppose. Of course, Obama isn't the first or only Illinois state senator to vote "present," but he is the only one running for President of the United States.

While these votes occurred while Obama and the Democrats were in the minority in the Illinois Senate, in the "Audacity of Hope" (page 130), Obama explained that even as a legislator in the minority, "You must vote yes or no on whatever bill comes up, with the knowledge that it's unlikely to be a compromise that either you or your supporters consider fair and or just."
Obama's "present" record could hurt him in two very different ways in his bid to win the Democratic presidential nomination and, ultimately, the White House. On one hand, those votes could anger some Democrats, even liberals, because he did not take a strong enough stand on their issues. On the other hand, his votes could simply be portrayed by adversaries as a failure of leadership for not being willing to make a tough decision and stick by it.

Obama is one of the most dynamic and captivating figures in American politics at this time, and he has put together an excellent campaign team. He clearly is a factor in the race for the Democratic nomination in 2008.

But as Democrats--and Americans--are searching for their next leader, the Illinois senator's record, and not just his rhetoric, will be examined under a microscope. As president, Obama will be faced with countless difficult decisions on numerous gray issues, and voting "present" will not be an option. I guess this is where Joe Biden comes in. Since Obama can't make decisions on his own, he will have Joe Biden in the room holding his hand, making the decisions for him. I guess it sounds like Biden will be our President....but didn't he lose miserably in the primaries? America doesn't want you as Commander-In-Chief Senator Biden....that's why we didn't vote for you!!!

So America, how about we elect someone who doesn't need his hand held through difficult times. How about we elect someone who has a proven track record of leadership and for making hard decisions. How about we elect someone who is a real Maverick and will change Washington so that our country will grow and prosper. I'm talking about John McCain.