Friday, October 11, 2013


The Tax Foundation in Washington does some great work on fiscal issues, but I also admire their use of maps when they want to show how various states perform on key indicators.
 
They’re best known for “Tax Freedom Day,” which measures how long people have to work each year before they’ve earned enough to satisfy the tax demands of federal, state, and local government. Andthey have a map so you can easily see how your state ranks.

But my favorite map from the Tax Foundation is the one showing that the geese with the golden eggs are moving from high-tax states to low-tax states. That’s tax competition in action!

I also like their map showing which states have done the best and worst jobs of controlling the burden of government spending, as well as their map showingwhich states steal the biggest share of economic output from taxpayers.

So it should go without saying that I’m going to share their new State Business Tax Climate Index. And the accompanying map.

Tax Foundation State Tax Ranking

What are some important takeaways from this ranking? Five things caught my eye.

1. It’s a very good idea for a state to not impose an income tax. The top six states all avoid this punitive levy and every no-income tax state is in the top 15. And you won’t be surprised to learn that these states grow faster and create more jobs.

2. It’s just a matter of time before states such as New York and Californiaare beset by fiscal crisis. When a jurisdiction has something special – like California’s climate or the appeal (to some) of New York City – it can get away with imposing higher tax burdens. But there’s a limit, and migration patterns show that productive people are voting with their feet.

3. Scott Walker and Chris Christie often are mentioned as serious 2016 presidential candidates, and both have become well known for trying to deal with the problem of over-compensated state bureaucrats. But they both preside over states in the bottom 10 of this ranking, and presumably should address this problem if they want to demonstrate that they’re on the side of taxpayers.

4. It’s possible for a state to make a dramatic jump. North Carolina currently is one of the bottom 10, but that will soon change because of reforms – including a flat tax – that were enacted this year. As the Tax Foundation noted: “While the state remains ranked 44th for this edition, it will move to as high as 17th as these reforms take effect in coming years.”

5. States also can move dramatically in the wrong direction. Connecticut is now one of America’s least-competitive states, in large part becausepoliticians managed to push through a state income tax in the early 1990s.

P.S. If you like maps, here are some interesting ones, starting with some international comparisons.
Here are some good state maps with useful information.
There’s even a local map.

Behold the Hollywood bubble. This week, actress Olivia Wilde starred in an Obamacare propaganda video targeting young people. 

"You can sign up for health care online in 10 minutes," her co-propagandist chirped as she cheered. Cue the laugh track. Back on planet Earth, Americans nationwide are still struggling with the $634 million online health care exchange nightmare.

One reader asked me to share his story. Like me and 22 million other citizens in the private individual market for health insurance, he recently received his You Can't Keep It cancellation notice. Here's what happened when he went online to find alternatives.

"I live in New Jersey, but work for a small company based out of Massachusetts. For years, we were all insured through the company from a plan that originated in Massachusetts. However, as soon as Obamacare was passed, we were "audited" by the insurance company, and it turns out only 50 percent of our company is based in Massachusetts, and therefore we did not qualify as a company under the law. Apparently, you need 51 percent based in the state. About five days prior to our insurance policy renewal, we were told we could not (renew), and I had to scramble to purchase a much more expensive individual policy with much higher costs.

"Fast-forward two years. I now receive a new letter from my insurance company, Horizon Blue Cross, (informing me) that the plan that I have now is being discontinued and I need to pick a new plan.

"On Oct. 1, I tried to get into the exchange for New Jersey that is run by the federal government. I earn too much for a subsidy, but I wanted to see what my options were and how much more this was going to cost.

"I created an account and tried for four days to get in. Each time it said my password was invalid. I tried to use the "forgot password" option so they could send me a link to reset. When I got the link, the system kept saying that it didn't recognize my user account. When I tried to re-create the user account, it told me that one already existed. I called the number several times, and they all told me the same thing: Try back later. The glitches are being worked out.

"I (then) created a new account under (my wife's) name. After several attempts, I was able to get in. Over the weekend, I spent at least four hours trying to fill out the application. Each time, the website crashed. When I got back to work on Monday, I tried one more time. Lo and behold, the application was submitted. At this point, President Obama must be thinking 'great, a success story.'

"Well, my options came back, and voila: According to the government, I'm not eligible for any private plans. I received a notice that my entire family is only eligible for Medicaid! I make a decent salary. I'm not eligible for a subsidy, let alone Medicaid.

"This morning my wife received a call. Apparently, it was the exchange. She explained to them that we are not eligible for Medicare or Medicaid. The person on the phone told her, "That is what the system says you are eligible for. If you want, you can file an appeal."

"So now back to a change in plans. I currently have a Point of Service that covers benefits 70 percent after a large deductible, with somewhat large co-pays for doctors. Horizon Blue Cross does offer a similar plan (to the one being canceled) for about the same, but the problem is that my children's pediatricians are not in it (so much for keeping your doctors).

"The only plans that the doctors take involve a 40 percent deductible with higher co-pays. So now I have fewer options and not more. There is another new company offering coverage where I am, but it has zero out-of-network benefits and a smaller network. Either way, everything is changing for me with higher costs.

"I hope you can somehow relate this story to the public at large to let them see that the whole process is a joke. The automatons who know nothing are just collecting a government check and getting health care paid for by me with my tax dollars, when I cannot even get my own."

In sum: Obama lied. His health plan died. He can't keep his doctors. He couldn't sign up in 10 minutes for health care. He's being steered toward a government plan he doesn't qualify for or want.

And he can't get his personal information back from the online Obamawreck black hole.

1-800-T-O-T-A-L-F-A-I-L. 


  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
NEW YORK – Are centrist Republican senators supporting passage of comprehensive immigration-reform legislation playing the role of unwitting dupes in a Democratic Party plan to control the White House with a tidal wave of Hispanic immigration?
The question is being asked increasingly by conservative Republicans as S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, backed by Republican Sens. John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio, gets ready to follow the debt-ceiling debate to the floor of Congress.
Democratic strategists believe the bill will add more than enough Hispanic immigrants to U.S. voters rolls to give the Democratic Party the electoral majority needed to win the White House the next two decades, starting with 2016 and continuing for the next five scheduled presidential elections.
The Washington-based Center for Immigration, CIS, released Thursday a study that should trouble knowledgeable Republican Party presidential hopefuls.
Based on projections published by the Congressional Budget Office, the CIS study estimates that should S. 744 become law, more than 17 million new potential voting-age citizens would be added to U.S. voting rolls by 2036, in addition to the nearly 15 million that current levels of legal immigration will add by 2036.
Get Jerome Corsi’s “What Went Wrong: The Inside Story of the GOP Debacle of 2012 … And How It Can Be Avoided Next Time,” autographed, at WND’s Superstore?
“Current immigration policy is adding millions of new voters each decade,” pointed out Steven Camarota, the CIS director of research. “The Gang of Eight bill will add millions more. This is one of the most important consequences of immigration. Will it result in voters who need or want more government services? Or, will it reshape American foreign policy? There has been almost no discussion of the impact on the electorate.”
But the trend has not escaped John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira, the authors of the 2002 book “The Emerging Democratic Majority.” They join a growing group of demographers and political scientists who continue to advise Democratic Party politicians that a growing Hispanic population marks the dawning of a new progressive era, assuring the Democratic Party control over presidential elections for the foreseeable future. It would replicate if not surpass the hold the Democratic Party had on the White House in the last century, beginning with FDR’s victory in the 1932 presidential election.
Obama’s hold on Hispanic voters
Hispanics voted for Obama over Romney by 71 percent to 27 percent, according to the Pew Research Hispanic Center.
It represented a gain in Hispanic supporters for Obama since 2008, when Hispanics voted 67 percent for him, compared to 31 percent for McCain.
George W. Bush registered the strongest Republican share of the Hispanic vote since 1980 when in 2004, he drew 40 percent of the Hispanic vote, versus 58 percent for John Kerry.
Clearly, the support George W. Bush showed for U.S. relations with Mexico and the support he and McCain gave to passing comprehensive immigration reform legislation during Bush’s second term cut into the historic affinity Hispanics have had for the Democratic Party.
The Pew Research data also supported the contention that Obama’s national vote share among Hispanic voters was the highest seen by a Democratic candidate since 1996, when President Bill Clinton won 72 percent of the Hispanic vote.
Moreover, the Hispanic vote represented 10 percent of the electorate in 2012, up from 9 percent in 2008 and 8 percent in 2004.
The data also showed Hispanic support for Obama was key to victory in several swing states:
  • In Florida, Obama carried the Hispanic vote 60 percent to 39 percent, an improvement over 2008, when Obama won 57 percent of the Hispanic vote, compared to 42 percent for McCain;
  • In Colorado, Obama carried the Hispanic vote by a wide margin, 75 percent to 23 percent, again bettering his performance in 2008, when Obama won the Hispanic vote in Colorado by 61 percent to 38 percent;
  • In Nevada, Obama won the Hispanic vote 70 percent to 25 percent, doing less well than in 2008, when Obama won the Hispanic vote by a 76 percent share.
In 2012, Hispanics made up 17 percent of the vote in Florida, 14 percent in Colorado and 18 percent in Nevada. Obama also won 68 percent of the Hispanic vote in North Carolina, 65 percent in Wisconsin, 64 percent in Virginia and 53 percent in Ohio.
Combining African-Americans at approximately 13 percent of the electorate in 2012 and Hispanics at 10 percent of the electorate, Obama had a solid advantage on 23 percent of the electorate, virtually 1 of every 4 voters.
So, in the 2012 presidential election, with roughly 110 million votes likely to be cast, Obama ended up gaining from African-American voters 95 percent of the 14.3 million votes they cast, for a total of 13,585,000 votes.
From Hispanics, Obama ended up gaining 71 percent of the 11 million votes cast, for a total of 7,810,000. In 2012, Obama gained approximately 62 million votes, meaning that approximately 40 percent of the votes he needed for victory came from a combination of African-American and Hispanic voters alone.
Put another way, Mitt Romney could well have begun the presidential election campaign against Obama calculating he would get very little support from one quarter of the electorate, almost regardless of his campaign message.
The emerging Democratic majority
In their 2002 book “The Emerging Democratic Majority,” journalist Judis and sociologist Teixeira predicted a fundamental realignment of the voters to produce a new emerging Democratic majority that they say based on progressive values and a post-industrial view of America.
The Democratic majority would bring together the following demographic groups: white working class and middle class Democrats; minorities, including blacks, Hispanics and Asian-American voters; women voters, especially single, working and highly educated women; and professionals, including highly educated tech specialists.
“These are products of a new postindustrial capitalism, rooted in diversity and social equality, and emphasizing the production of ideas and services rather than goods,” Judis and Teixeira wrote. “And while some of these voters are drawn to the Democratic Party by its New Deal past, many others resonate strongly to the new causes the Democrats adopted during the sixties.”
The new causes included lifestyle issues such as support for abortion, acceptance of same sex marriage and “a new postindustrial metropolitan order in which men and women play equal roles and in which white America is supplanted by multiracial, multiethnic America.”
On page 70 of their book, the authors produced an electoral map of the United States in which the configuration of the states looks remarkably like the battleground between Obama and McCain in 2008 and between Obama and Romney in 2012.
Supporting the contention that a new Democratic majority is emerging, Obama won both elections by margins sufficiently large that the GOP did not contest the elections on issues of voter fraud.
The disappearing white voter
The demographic reality is that the white population of America will be a minority population within the next 30 years.
  • The white portion of the population is expected to peak in 2024, at 199.6 million, with the non-Hispanic white population projected to fall by nearly 20.6 million from 2024 to 2060.
  • Meanwhile, the Hispanic population is expected to more than double, from 53.3 million in 2012 to 128.8 million in 2060.
  • The black population is expected to increase from 41.2 million in 2012 to 61.8 million by 2060, growing from 13.1 percent of the population in 2012, to 14.7 percent in 2060.
  • The Asian population is expected to double from 15.9 million in 2012 to 34.4 million in 2060, moving from 5.1 percent of the population to 8.2 percent of the population in that period.
  • The total minority population, comprising approximately 37 percent today, is projected to increase to 57 percent in 2060.
White Americans are expected to be a minority for the first time in 2042. While the non-Hispanic white population will remain the nation’s largest group, no group will make up a majority.
In the immediate future, increased Hispanic immigration into the Southwest is likely to make the Western states of Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico increasingly Democrat-voting blue states.
Demographers with progressive political opinions have viewed the demographic changes enthusiastically, believing “the potential for true progressive government is greater than at any point in decades,” with the electorate making a commitment to a progressive vision of government, international values, and economic and political policies “that could transform the country in a way that has not been seen since FDR and the New Deal.”
Writing of Obama’s reelection in 2012, Teixeira, one of the first to identify a new emerging Democratic majority, and his colleague John Halpin, both currently senior fellows at the Center for American Progress, wroteimmediately after the election, on Nov. 8, 2012: “Obama’s strong progressive majority – built on a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, cross-class coalition in support of an activist government that promotes freedom, opportunity, and security for all – is real and growing and it reflects the face and beliefs of the United States in the early part of the 21st Century.”
In glowing terms, Teixeira and Halpin credited Obama’s win to a message that “everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules.” Teixeira and Halpin praised Obama for the stimulus bill, for the bailout of the auto and financial sectors, for passing Obamacare and for expanded rights for women, Latinos, and gay and lesbian families.
Making their message clear, Teixeira and Halpin added a warning for the Republican Party: “The GOP must face the stark reality that its voter base is declining and its ideology is too rigid to represent the changing face of today’s country.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/dems-eye-permanent-grip-on-power-through-immigration-bill/#g6AE0SG5PGucY3V5.99


  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
NEW YORK – Are centrist Republican senators supporting passage of comprehensive immigration-reform legislation playing the role of unwitting dupes in a Democratic Party plan to control the White House with a tidal wave of Hispanic immigration?
The question is being asked increasingly by conservative Republicans as S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, backed by Republican Sens. John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio, gets ready to follow the debt-ceiling debate to the floor of Congress.
Democratic strategists believe the bill will add more than enough Hispanic immigrants to U.S. voters rolls to give the Democratic Party the electoral majority needed to win the White House the next two decades, starting with 2016 and continuing for the next five scheduled presidential elections.
The Washington-based Center for Immigration, CIS, released Thursday a study that should trouble knowledgeable Republican Party presidential hopefuls.
Based on projections published by the Congressional Budget Office, the CIS study estimates that should S. 744 become law, more than 17 million new potential voting-age citizens would be added to U.S. voting rolls by 2036, in addition to the nearly 15 million that current levels of legal immigration will add by 2036.
Get Jerome Corsi’s “What Went Wrong: The Inside Story of the GOP Debacle of 2012 … And How It Can Be Avoided Next Time,” autographed, at WND’s Superstore?
“Current immigration policy is adding millions of new voters each decade,” pointed out Steven Camarota, the CIS director of research. “The Gang of Eight bill will add millions more. This is one of the most important consequences of immigration. Will it result in voters who need or want more government services? Or, will it reshape American foreign policy? There has been almost no discussion of the impact on the electorate.”
But the trend has not escaped John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira, the authors of the 2002 book “The Emerging Democratic Majority.” They join a growing group of demographers and political scientists who continue to advise Democratic Party politicians that a growing Hispanic population marks the dawning of a new progressive era, assuring the Democratic Party control over presidential elections for the foreseeable future. It would replicate if not surpass the hold the Democratic Party had on the White House in the last century, beginning with FDR’s victory in the 1932 presidential election.
Obama’s hold on Hispanic voters
Hispanics voted for Obama over Romney by 71 percent to 27 percent, according to the Pew Research Hispanic Center.
It represented a gain in Hispanic supporters for Obama since 2008, when Hispanics voted 67 percent for him, compared to 31 percent for McCain.
George W. Bush registered the strongest Republican share of the Hispanic vote since 1980 when in 2004, he drew 40 percent of the Hispanic vote, versus 58 percent for John Kerry.
Clearly, the support George W. Bush showed for U.S. relations with Mexico and the support he and McCain gave to passing comprehensive immigration reform legislation during Bush’s second term cut into the historic affinity Hispanics have had for the Democratic Party.
The Pew Research data also supported the contention that Obama’s national vote share among Hispanic voters was the highest seen by a Democratic candidate since 1996, when President Bill Clinton won 72 percent of the Hispanic vote.
Moreover, the Hispanic vote represented 10 percent of the electorate in 2012, up from 9 percent in 2008 and 8 percent in 2004.
The data also showed Hispanic support for Obama was key to victory in several swing states:
  • In Florida, Obama carried the Hispanic vote 60 percent to 39 percent, an improvement over 2008, when Obama won 57 percent of the Hispanic vote, compared to 42 percent for McCain;
  • In Colorado, Obama carried the Hispanic vote by a wide margin, 75 percent to 23 percent, again bettering his performance in 2008, when Obama won the Hispanic vote in Colorado by 61 percent to 38 percent;
  • In Nevada, Obama won the Hispanic vote 70 percent to 25 percent, doing less well than in 2008, when Obama won the Hispanic vote by a 76 percent share.
In 2012, Hispanics made up 17 percent of the vote in Florida, 14 percent in Colorado and 18 percent in Nevada. Obama also won 68 percent of the Hispanic vote in North Carolina, 65 percent in Wisconsin, 64 percent in Virginia and 53 percent in Ohio.
Combining African-Americans at approximately 13 percent of the electorate in 2012 and Hispanics at 10 percent of the electorate, Obama had a solid advantage on 23 percent of the electorate, virtually 1 of every 4 voters.
So, in the 2012 presidential election, with roughly 110 million votes likely to be cast, Obama ended up gaining from African-American voters 95 percent of the 14.3 million votes they cast, for a total of 13,585,000 votes.
From Hispanics, Obama ended up gaining 71 percent of the 11 million votes cast, for a total of 7,810,000. In 2012, Obama gained approximately 62 million votes, meaning that approximately 40 percent of the votes he needed for victory came from a combination of African-American and Hispanic voters alone.
Put another way, Mitt Romney could well have begun the presidential election campaign against Obama calculating he would get very little support from one quarter of the electorate, almost regardless of his campaign message.
The emerging Democratic majority
In their 2002 book “The Emerging Democratic Majority,” journalist Judis and sociologist Teixeira predicted a fundamental realignment of the voters to produce a new emerging Democratic majority that they say based on progressive values and a post-industrial view of America.
The Democratic majority would bring together the following demographic groups: white working class and middle class Democrats; minorities, including blacks, Hispanics and Asian-American voters; women voters, especially single, working and highly educated women; and professionals, including highly educated tech specialists.
“These are products of a new postindustrial capitalism, rooted in diversity and social equality, and emphasizing the production of ideas and services rather than goods,” Judis and Teixeira wrote. “And while some of these voters are drawn to the Democratic Party by its New Deal past, many others resonate strongly to the new causes the Democrats adopted during the sixties.”
The new causes included lifestyle issues such as support for abortion, acceptance of same sex marriage and “a new postindustrial metropolitan order in which men and women play equal roles and in which white America is supplanted by multiracial, multiethnic America.”
On page 70 of their book, the authors produced an electoral map of the United States in which the configuration of the states looks remarkably like the battleground between Obama and McCain in 2008 and between Obama and Romney in 2012.
Supporting the contention that a new Democratic majority is emerging, Obama won both elections by margins sufficiently large that the GOP did not contest the elections on issues of voter fraud.
The disappearing white voter
The demographic reality is that the white population of America will be a minority population within the next 30 years.
  • The white portion of the population is expected to peak in 2024, at 199.6 million, with the non-Hispanic white population projected to fall by nearly 20.6 million from 2024 to 2060.
  • Meanwhile, the Hispanic population is expected to more than double, from 53.3 million in 2012 to 128.8 million in 2060.
  • The black population is expected to increase from 41.2 million in 2012 to 61.8 million by 2060, growing from 13.1 percent of the population in 2012, to 14.7 percent in 2060.
  • The Asian population is expected to double from 15.9 million in 2012 to 34.4 million in 2060, moving from 5.1 percent of the population to 8.2 percent of the population in that period.
  • The total minority population, comprising approximately 37 percent today, is projected to increase to 57 percent in 2060.
White Americans are expected to be a minority for the first time in 2042. While the non-Hispanic white population will remain the nation’s largest group, no group will make up a majority.
In the immediate future, increased Hispanic immigration into the Southwest is likely to make the Western states of Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico increasingly Democrat-voting blue states.
Demographers with progressive political opinions have viewed the demographic changes enthusiastically, believing “the potential for true progressive government is greater than at any point in decades,” with the electorate making a commitment to a progressive vision of government, international values, and economic and political policies “that could transform the country in a way that has not been seen since FDR and the New Deal.”
Writing of Obama’s reelection in 2012, Teixeira, one of the first to identify a new emerging Democratic majority, and his colleague John Halpin, both currently senior fellows at the Center for American Progress, wroteimmediately after the election, on Nov. 8, 2012: “Obama’s strong progressive majority – built on a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, cross-class coalition in support of an activist government that promotes freedom, opportunity, and security for all – is real and growing and it reflects the face and beliefs of the United States in the early part of the 21st Century.”
In glowing terms, Teixeira and Halpin credited Obama’s win to a message that “everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules.” Teixeira and Halpin praised Obama for the stimulus bill, for the bailout of the auto and financial sectors, for passing Obamacare and for expanded rights for women, Latinos, and gay and lesbian families.
Making their message clear, Teixeira and Halpin added a warning for the Republican Party: “The GOP must face the stark reality that its voter base is declining and its ideology is too rigid to represent the changing face of today’s country.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/dems-eye-permanent-grip-on-power-through-immigration-bill/#g6AE0SG5PGucY3V5.99
Michelle Malkin
Recommend this article
Behold the Hollywood bubble. This week, actress Olivia Wilde starred in an Obamacare propaganda video targeting young people. "You can sign up for health care online in 10 minutes," her co-propagandist chirped as she cheered. Cue the laugh track. Back on planet Earth, Americans nationwide are still struggling with the $634 million online health care exchange nightmare.
One reader asked me to share his story. Like me and 22 million other citizens in the private individual market for health insurance, he recently received his You Can't Keep It cancellation notice. Here's what happened when he went online to find alternatives.
"I live in New Jersey, but work for a small company based out of Massachusetts. For years, we were all insured through the company from a plan that originated in Massachusetts. However, as soon as Obamacare was passed, we were "audited" by the insurance company, and it turns out only 50 percent of our company is based in Massachusetts, and therefore we did not qualify as a company under the law. Apparently, you need 51 percent based in the state. About five days prior to our insurance policy renewal, we were told we could not (renew), and I had to scramble to purchase a much more expensive individual policy with much higher costs.
"Fast-forward two years. I now receive a new letter from my insurance company, Horizon Blue Cross, (informing me) that the plan that I have now is being discontinued and I need to pick a new plan.
"On Oct. 1, I tried to get into the exchange for New Jersey that is run by the federal government. I earn too much for a subsidy, but I wanted to see what my options were and how much more this was going to cost.
"I created an account and tried for four days to get in. Each time it said my password was invalid. I tried to use the "forgot password" option so they could send me a link to reset. When I got the link, the system kept saying that it didn't recognize my user account. When I tried to re-create the user account, it told me that one already existed. I called the number several times, and they all told me the same thing: Try back later. The glitches are being worked out.
"I (then) created a new account under (my wife's) name. After several attempts, I was able to get in. Over the weekend, I spent at least four hours trying to fill out the application. Each time, the website crashed. When I got back to work on Monday, I tried one more time. Lo and behold, the application was submitted. At this point, President Obama must be thinking 'great, a success story.'
"Well, my options came back, and voila: According to the government, I'm not eligible for any private plans. I received a notice that my entire family is only eligible for Medicaid! I make a decent salary. I'm not eligible for a subsidy, let alone Medicaid.
"This morning my wife received a call. Apparently, it was the exchange. She explained to them that we are not eligible for Medicare or Medicaid. The person on the phone told her, "That is what the system says you are eligible for. If you want, you can file an appeal."
"So now back to a change in plans. I currently have a Point of Service that covers benefits 70 percent after a large deductible, with somewhat large co-pays for doctors. Horizon Blue Cross does offer a similar plan (to the one being canceled) for about the same, but the problem is that my children's pediatricians are not in it (so much for keeping your doctors).
"The only plans that the doctors take involve a 40 percent deductible with higher co-pays. So now I have fewer options and not more. There is another new company offering coverage where I am, but it has zero out-of-network benefits and a smaller network. Either way, everything is changing for me with higher costs.
"I hope you can somehow relate this story to the public at large to let them see that the whole process is a joke. The automatons who know nothing are just collecting a government check and getting health care paid for by me with my tax dollars, when I cannot even get my own."
In sum: Obama lied. His health plan died. He can't keep his doctors. He couldn't sign up in 10 minutes for health care. He's being steered toward a government plan he doesn't qualify for or want. And he can't get his personal information back from the online Obamawreck black hole.
1-800-T-O-T-A-L-F-A-I-L.


  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
NEW YORK – Are centrist Republican senators supporting passage of comprehensive immigration-reform legislation playing the role of unwitting dupes in a Democratic Party plan to control the White House with a tidal wave of Hispanic immigration?
The question is being asked increasingly by conservative Republicans as S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, backed by Republican Sens. John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio, gets ready to follow the debt-ceiling debate to the floor of Congress.
Democratic strategists believe the bill will add more than enough Hispanic immigrants to U.S. voters rolls to give the Democratic Party the electoral majority needed to win the White House the next two decades, starting with 2016 and continuing for the next five scheduled presidential elections.
The Washington-based Center for Immigration, CIS, released Thursday a study that should trouble knowledgeable Republican Party presidential hopefuls.
Based on projections published by the Congressional Budget Office, the CIS study estimates that should S. 744 become law, more than 17 million new potential voting-age citizens would be added to U.S. voting rolls by 2036, in addition to the nearly 15 million that current levels of legal immigration will add by 2036.
Get Jerome Corsi’s “What Went Wrong: The Inside Story of the GOP Debacle of 2012 … And How It Can Be Avoided Next Time,” autographed, at WND’s Superstore?
“Current immigration policy is adding millions of new voters each decade,” pointed out Steven Camarota, the CIS director of research. “The Gang of Eight bill will add millions more. This is one of the most important consequences of immigration. Will it result in voters who need or want more government services? Or, will it reshape American foreign policy? There has been almost no discussion of the impact on the electorate.”
But the trend has not escaped John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira, the authors of the 2002 book “The Emerging Democratic Majority.” They join a growing group of demographers and political scientists who continue to advise Democratic Party politicians that a growing Hispanic population marks the dawning of a new progressive era, assuring the Democratic Party control over presidential elections for the foreseeable future. It would replicate if not surpass the hold the Democratic Party had on the White House in the last century, beginning with FDR’s victory in the 1932 presidential election.
Obama’s hold on Hispanic voters
Hispanics voted for Obama over Romney by 71 percent to 27 percent, according to the Pew Research Hispanic Center.
It represented a gain in Hispanic supporters for Obama since 2008, when Hispanics voted 67 percent for him, compared to 31 percent for McCain.
George W. Bush registered the strongest Republican share of the Hispanic vote since 1980 when in 2004, he drew 40 percent of the Hispanic vote, versus 58 percent for John Kerry.
Clearly, the support George W. Bush showed for U.S. relations with Mexico and the support he and McCain gave to passing comprehensive immigration reform legislation during Bush’s second term cut into the historic affinity Hispanics have had for the Democratic Party.
The Pew Research data also supported the contention that Obama’s national vote share among Hispanic voters was the highest seen by a Democratic candidate since 1996, when President Bill Clinton won 72 percent of the Hispanic vote.
Moreover, the Hispanic vote represented 10 percent of the electorate in 2012, up from 9 percent in 2008 and 8 percent in 2004.
The data also showed Hispanic support for Obama was key to victory in several swing states:
  • In Florida, Obama carried the Hispanic vote 60 percent to 39 percent, an improvement over 2008, when Obama won 57 percent of the Hispanic vote, compared to 42 percent for McCain;
  • In Colorado, Obama carried the Hispanic vote by a wide margin, 75 percent to 23 percent, again bettering his performance in 2008, when Obama won the Hispanic vote in Colorado by 61 percent to 38 percent;
  • In Nevada, Obama won the Hispanic vote 70 percent to 25 percent, doing less well than in 2008, when Obama won the Hispanic vote by a 76 percent share.
In 2012, Hispanics made up 17 percent of the vote in Florida, 14 percent in Colorado and 18 percent in Nevada. Obama also won 68 percent of the Hispanic vote in North Carolina, 65 percent in Wisconsin, 64 percent in Virginia and 53 percent in Ohio.
Combining African-Americans at approximately 13 percent of the electorate in 2012 and Hispanics at 10 percent of the electorate, Obama had a solid advantage on 23 percent of the electorate, virtually 1 of every 4 voters.
So, in the 2012 presidential election, with roughly 110 million votes likely to be cast, Obama ended up gaining from African-American voters 95 percent of the 14.3 million votes they cast, for a total of 13,585,000 votes.
From Hispanics, Obama ended up gaining 71 percent of the 11 million votes cast, for a total of 7,810,000. In 2012, Obama gained approximately 62 million votes, meaning that approximately 40 percent of the votes he needed for victory came from a combination of African-American and Hispanic voters alone.
Put another way, Mitt Romney could well have begun the presidential election campaign against Obama calculating he would get very little support from one quarter of the electorate, almost regardless of his campaign message.
The emerging Democratic majority
In their 2002 book “The Emerging Democratic Majority,” journalist Judis and sociologist Teixeira predicted a fundamental realignment of the voters to produce a new emerging Democratic majority that they say based on progressive values and a post-industrial view of America.
The Democratic majority would bring together the following demographic groups: white working class and middle class Democrats; minorities, including blacks, Hispanics and Asian-American voters; women voters, especially single, working and highly educated women; and professionals, including highly educated tech specialists.
“These are products of a new postindustrial capitalism, rooted in diversity and social equality, and emphasizing the production of ideas and services rather than goods,” Judis and Teixeira wrote. “And while some of these voters are drawn to the Democratic Party by its New Deal past, many others resonate strongly to the new causes the Democrats adopted during the sixties.”
The new causes included lifestyle issues such as support for abortion, acceptance of same sex marriage and “a new postindustrial metropolitan order in which men and women play equal roles and in which white America is supplanted by multiracial, multiethnic America.”
On page 70 of their book, the authors produced an electoral map of the United States in which the configuration of the states looks remarkably like the battleground between Obama and McCain in 2008 and between Obama and Romney in 2012.
Supporting the contention that a new Democratic majority is emerging, Obama won both elections by margins sufficiently large that the GOP did not contest the elections on issues of voter fraud.
The disappearing white voter
The demographic reality is that the white population of America will be a minority population within the next 30 years.
  • The white portion of the population is expected to peak in 2024, at 199.6 million, with the non-Hispanic white population projected to fall by nearly 20.6 million from 2024 to 2060.
  • Meanwhile, the Hispanic population is expected to more than double, from 53.3 million in 2012 to 128.8 million in 2060.
  • The black population is expected to increase from 41.2 million in 2012 to 61.8 million by 2060, growing from 13.1 percent of the population in 2012, to 14.7 percent in 2060.
  • The Asian population is expected to double from 15.9 million in 2012 to 34.4 million in 2060, moving from 5.1 percent of the population to 8.2 percent of the population in that period.
  • The total minority population, comprising approximately 37 percent today, is projected to increase to 57 percent in 2060.
White Americans are expected to be a minority for the first time in 2042. While the non-Hispanic white population will remain the nation’s largest group, no group will make up a majority.
In the immediate future, increased Hispanic immigration into the Southwest is likely to make the Western states of Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico increasingly Democrat-voting blue states.
Demographers with progressive political opinions have viewed the demographic changes enthusiastically, believing “the potential for true progressive government is greater than at any point in decades,” with the electorate making a commitment to a progressive vision of government, international values, and economic and political policies “that could transform the country in a way that has not been seen since FDR and the New Deal.”
Writing of Obama’s reelection in 2012, Teixeira, one of the first to identify a new emerging Democratic majority, and his colleague John Halpin, both currently senior fellows at the Center for American Progress, wroteimmediately after the election, on Nov. 8, 2012: “Obama’s strong progressive majority – built on a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, cross-class coalition in support of an activist government that promotes freedom, opportunity, and security for all – is real and growing and it reflects the face and beliefs of the United States in the early part of the 21st Century.”
In glowing terms, Teixeira and Halpin credited Obama’s win to a message that “everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules.” Teixeira and Halpin praised Obama for the stimulus bill, for the bailout of the auto and financial sectors, for passing Obamacare and for expanded rights for women, Latinos, and gay and lesbian families.
Making their message clear, Teixeira and Halpin added a warning for the Republican Party: “The GOP must face the stark reality that its voter base is declining and its ideology is too rigid to represent the changing face of today’s country.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/dems-eye-permanent-grip-on-power-through-immigration-bill/#g6AE0SG5PGucY3V5.99


  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
NEW YORK – Are centrist Republican senators supporting passage of comprehensive immigration-reform legislation playing the role of unwitting dupes in a Democratic Party plan to control the White House with a tidal wave of Hispanic immigration?
The question is being asked increasingly by conservative Republicans as S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, backed by Republican Sens. John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio, gets ready to follow the debt-ceiling debate to the floor of Congress.
Democratic strategists believe the bill will add more than enough Hispanic immigrants to U.S. voters rolls to give the Democratic Party the electoral majority needed to win the White House the next two decades, starting with 2016 and continuing for the next five scheduled presidential elections.
The Washington-based Center for Immigration, CIS, released Thursday a study that should trouble knowledgeable Republican Party presidential hopefuls.
Based on projections published by the Congressional Budget Office, the CIS study estimates that should S. 744 become law, more than 17 million new potential voting-age citizens would be added to U.S. voting rolls by 2036, in addition to the nearly 15 million that current levels of legal immigration will add by 2036.
Get Jerome Corsi’s “What Went Wrong: The Inside Story of the GOP Debacle of 2012 … And How It Can Be Avoided Next Time,” autographed, at WND’s Superstore?
“Current immigration policy is adding millions of new voters each decade,” pointed out Steven Camarota, the CIS director of research. “The Gang of Eight bill will add millions more. This is one of the most important consequences of immigration. Will it result in voters who need or want more government services? Or, will it reshape American foreign policy? There has been almost no discussion of the impact on the electorate.”
But the trend has not escaped John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira, the authors of the 2002 book “The Emerging Democratic Majority.” They join a growing group of demographers and political scientists who continue to advise Democratic Party politicians that a growing Hispanic population marks the dawning of a new progressive era, assuring the Democratic Party control over presidential elections for the foreseeable future. It would replicate if not surpass the hold the Democratic Party had on the White House in the last century, beginning with FDR’s victory in the 1932 presidential election.
Obama’s hold on Hispanic voters
Hispanics voted for Obama over Romney by 71 percent to 27 percent, according to the Pew Research Hispanic Center.
It represented a gain in Hispanic supporters for Obama since 2008, when Hispanics voted 67 percent for him, compared to 31 percent for McCain.
George W. Bush registered the strongest Republican share of the Hispanic vote since 1980 when in 2004, he drew 40 percent of the Hispanic vote, versus 58 percent for John Kerry.
Clearly, the support George W. Bush showed for U.S. relations with Mexico and the support he and McCain gave to passing comprehensive immigration reform legislation during Bush’s second term cut into the historic affinity Hispanics have had for the Democratic Party.
The Pew Research data also supported the contention that Obama’s national vote share among Hispanic voters was the highest seen by a Democratic candidate since 1996, when President Bill Clinton won 72 percent of the Hispanic vote.
Moreover, the Hispanic vote represented 10 percent of the electorate in 2012, up from 9 percent in 2008 and 8 percent in 2004.
The data also showed Hispanic support for Obama was key to victory in several swing states:
  • In Florida, Obama carried the Hispanic vote 60 percent to 39 percent, an improvement over 2008, when Obama won 57 percent of the Hispanic vote, compared to 42 percent for McCain;
  • In Colorado, Obama carried the Hispanic vote by a wide margin, 75 percent to 23 percent, again bettering his performance in 2008, when Obama won the Hispanic vote in Colorado by 61 percent to 38 percent;
  • In Nevada, Obama won the Hispanic vote 70 percent to 25 percent, doing less well than in 2008, when Obama won the Hispanic vote by a 76 percent share.
In 2012, Hispanics made up 17 percent of the vote in Florida, 14 percent in Colorado and 18 percent in Nevada. Obama also won 68 percent of the Hispanic vote in North Carolina, 65 percent in Wisconsin, 64 percent in Virginia and 53 percent in Ohio.
Combining African-Americans at approximately 13 percent of the electorate in 2012 and Hispanics at 10 percent of the electorate, Obama had a solid advantage on 23 percent of the electorate, virtually 1 of every 4 voters.
So, in the 2012 presidential election, with roughly 110 million votes likely to be cast, Obama ended up gaining from African-American voters 95 percent of the 14.3 million votes they cast, for a total of 13,585,000 votes.
From Hispanics, Obama ended up gaining 71 percent of the 11 million votes cast, for a total of 7,810,000. In 2012, Obama gained approximately 62 million votes, meaning that approximately 40 percent of the votes he needed for victory came from a combination of African-American and Hispanic voters alone.
Put another way, Mitt Romney could well have begun the presidential election campaign against Obama calculating he would get very little support from one quarter of the electorate, almost regardless of his campaign message.
The emerging Democratic majority
In their 2002 book “The Emerging Democratic Majority,” journalist Judis and sociologist Teixeira predicted a fundamental realignment of the voters to produce a new emerging Democratic majority that they say based on progressive values and a post-industrial view of America.
The Democratic majority would bring together the following demographic groups: white working class and middle class Democrats; minorities, including blacks, Hispanics and Asian-American voters; women voters, especially single, working and highly educated women; and professionals, including highly educated tech specialists.
“These are products of a new postindustrial capitalism, rooted in diversity and social equality, and emphasizing the production of ideas and services rather than goods,” Judis and Teixeira wrote. “And while some of these voters are drawn to the Democratic Party by its New Deal past, many others resonate strongly to the new causes the Democrats adopted during the sixties.”
The new causes included lifestyle issues such as support for abortion, acceptance of same sex marriage and “a new postindustrial metropolitan order in which men and women play equal roles and in which white America is supplanted by multiracial, multiethnic America.”
On page 70 of their book, the authors produced an electoral map of the United States in which the configuration of the states looks remarkably like the battleground between Obama and McCain in 2008 and between Obama and Romney in 2012.
Supporting the contention that a new Democratic majority is emerging, Obama won both elections by margins sufficiently large that the GOP did not contest the elections on issues of voter fraud.
The disappearing white voter
The demographic reality is that the white population of America will be a minority population within the next 30 years.
  • The white portion of the population is expected to peak in 2024, at 199.6 million, with the non-Hispanic white population projected to fall by nearly 20.6 million from 2024 to 2060.
  • Meanwhile, the Hispanic population is expected to more than double, from 53.3 million in 2012 to 128.8 million in 2060.
  • The black population is expected to increase from 41.2 million in 2012 to 61.8 million by 2060, growing from 13.1 percent of the population in 2012, to 14.7 percent in 2060.
  • The Asian population is expected to double from 15.9 million in 2012 to 34.4 million in 2060, moving from 5.1 percent of the population to 8.2 percent of the population in that period.
  • The total minority population, comprising approximately 37 percent today, is projected to increase to 57 percent in 2060.
White Americans are expected to be a minority for the first time in 2042. While the non-Hispanic white population will remain the nation’s largest group, no group will make up a majority.
In the immediate future, increased Hispanic immigration into the Southwest is likely to make the Western states of Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico increasingly Democrat-voting blue states.
Demographers with progressive political opinions have viewed the demographic changes enthusiastically, believing “the potential for true progressive government is greater than at any point in decades,” with the electorate making a commitment to a progressive vision of government, international values, and economic and political policies “that could transform the country in a way that has not been seen since FDR and the New Deal.”
Writing of Obama’s reelection in 2012, Teixeira, one of the first to identify a new emerging Democratic majority, and his colleague John Halpin, both currently senior fellows at the Center for American Progress, wroteimmediately after the election, on Nov. 8, 2012: “Obama’s strong progressive majority – built on a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, cross-class coalition in support of an activist government that promotes freedom, opportunity, and security for all – is real and growing and it reflects the face and beliefs of the United States in the early part of the 21st Century.”
In glowing terms, Teixeira and Halpin credited Obama’s win to a message that “everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules.” Teixeira and Halpin praised Obama for the stimulus bill, for the bailout of the auto and financial sectors, for passing Obamacare and for expanded rights for women, Latinos, and gay and lesbian families.
Making their message clear, Teixeira and Halpin added a warning for the Republican Party: “The GOP must face the stark reality that its voter base is declining and its ideology is too rigid to represent the changing face of today’s country.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/dems-eye-permanent-grip-on-power-through-immigration-bill/#g6AE0SG5PGucY3V5.99

Egypt's new government trying to separate Islam from politics

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

As Islam has always had a political component, this will be extremely difficult. The only model is Turkey, which is in the process of rapidly re-Islamizing. "In Egypt, a campaign to promote an ‘Egyptian Islam,’" by Stephanie McCrummen for the Washington Post, October 9 (thanks to Trevor):
CAIRO — One recent Friday, Egyptian officials dispatched an Islamic preacher named Mustafa Nawareg to a mosque full of angry people — distraught relatives and friends of demonstrators killed by security forces. 
It was a crowd used to hearing fiery sermons that called the dead “martyrs” and exhorted followers to take to the streets. But now the crowd would hear from Nawareg, who was sent there by the government to “correct the fallacies of extremist thought.”
It took about five minutes for the shoes to start flying.
“Who paid you to say this?” yelled one man, according to Nawareg and others at El-Rahman El-Rahim mosque that day.
Come down from your stage, you infidel!” yelled another as the crowd surged toward Nawareg. He felt hands clasp his neck before he managed to escape.
Nawareg’s sermon was part of a campaign by Egypt’s military-backed government to “standardize religious discourse” and promote what authorities describe as the true “Egyptian Islam.”
But critics say the effort could add fuel to a violent backlash that has included a suicide bombing in the heart of Cairo and regular attacks on security forces in the Sinai Peninsula.
Although the government’s initiative promotes a separation between Islam and politics, opponents say that the new push serves the decidedly political purpose of casting a divine glow on the brutal crackdown against supporters of ousted president Mohamed Morsi. Hundreds of Morsi’s backers in the Muslim Brotherhood have been killed and thousands arrested by authorities, who describe them as “terrorists.”
“This is the new regime trying to create an official Islam, a state Islam, which doesn’t exist within the Islamic tradition,” said Emad Shahin, a professor of public policy at the American University in Cairo. “It’s providing a religious justification to tolerate the killing of possibly thousands of people, and it is sending alarming signals into many segments of society. This is exactly what you call fascism.”
Shahin's words are not clear. Does he mean that a state Islam doesn't exist within the Islamic tradition? Has he never heard of the caliphate? Of the Umayyads and Abbasids and Ottomans and the rest? Or does he mean that the new de-politicized Islam that the Egyptian authorities are trying to implement doesn't exist within the Islamic tradition? That is true -- every mainstream sect of Islam and every school of Islamic law teaches that Islam has a political and societal component. Secular Turkey was established in the context of an explicit rejection of political Islam, so it can't precisely be considered to be a manifestation of Islamic tradition, although it did create a de-politicized state Islam that lasted for decades and is only dying now -- and seems to be the model for what Egyptian authorities are currently trying to do.
Pop culture is taking the cue, Shahin noted, pointing to a new song being played around Cairo. It is called “We Are a People, and You Are a Different People,” a thinly veiled reference to Morsi’s followers. 
“We have a God, and you have a different God,” the lyrics go. “Because Egypt is in our blood, we will never be like you, and you will never be like us. . . . Take your yelling and your screaming and your fatwas and go far away from our land.”
So far, the Ministry of Endowments, which regulates mosques, has effectively disqualified tens of thousands of preachers in the country, imams known for urging a more Islamist political order and, lately, for rallying followers to protest the July 3 coup that ousted the democratically elected Morsi.
In their place, the ministry has mandated that all preachers be government-­certified graduates of Cairo’s al-Azhar University, the world’s preeminent institution of moderate Sunni learning. Al-Azhar has also been closely associated with a string of Egyptian autocrats.

Support our Truckers...


Op-ed:
Cutting deals with Obama is NOT an option
By: Diane Sori


They turned him down…

And so it seems that ‘Prince’ Harry Reid is now pulling Obama’s strings for late yesterday afternoon Reid announced that he and Obama will NOT accept Boehner’s proposal regarding the short term raising of debt ceiling unless a ‘clean’ continuing resolution goes along with it…as in do what we originally demanded or you get NOTHING!

And so Speaker of the House John Boehner has been blowing smoke into the air with his proposal for a 6-week raise in the debt ceiling in exchange for the Democrats to be willing to sit down with the Republicans and negotiate on other matters…matters such as ObamaCare and spending cuts.

But why did Boehner even offer a negotiation proposal in the first place when Obama’s approval ratings have fallen to 37% in the polls, and with the fact that the sky will NOT fall if the debt ceiling is NOT raised…and all Obama’s bloviations to the contrary are just threatening game-playing words of NO substance at all.

So what was Boehner thinking when he announced that he was willing to negotiate with Obama on an extension to raise the debt ceiling…why doesn’t Boehner and his fellow Republicans get that we patriots want him and the House Republicans to stand strong and united against this most miserable excuse of a president and most assuredly NOT to negotiate with him.

I guess Boehner missed school the day the lesson was taught that you do NOT negotiate with the enemy…neither foreign nor domestic…ever.

And now it pains me to have to say that for the most part the Republican Party has let us down yet again. So to the few Republicans who publicly stood strong against Obama…especially to our hero Ted Cruz and also to Mike Lee, Marco Rubio and even Rand Paul…I apologize to you for Speaker of the House John Boehner choosing to betray you and your dedication to doing what’s right for ‘We the People’ as he caved and sold us out once again.

So it does NOT matter that Obama and Reid turned him down for Boehner did the deed and we patriots are NOT happy that he did so.

And I cannot say this enough, and I wish Boehner would let it sink into his brain…we will NOT default if we do NOT raise the debt ceiling as we have 5 times the monies needed to pay the interest on the notes due…and interest is all that has to be paid out…and Boehner should have thrown this fact in Obama’s face and used ObamaCare as his ace-in-the-hole bargaining chip if he was going to meet Obama half-way or anyway on anything.

So here the House Republicans had a chance to stand united…to stand their ground…to stand strong…as our side had the upper hand over NOT only Obama, but Harry Reid and the Senate as well. But Boehner blew it for now it sadly seems that NO matter what Obama dishes out he and the likes of McCain, Graham, and a host of other ‘so-called’ Republican party leaders will cower and cave before the man who NOT only stole an election through voter fraud, but a man whose ultimate goal is to destroy all we Americans honor and hold dear…all we honor and hold dear as he deliberately and with malice gets joy in inflicting pain...as much pain as possible on ‘We the People’…and laughs as he holds the race card over everyone’s head while doing so.

Caving to a man whose satisfaction…a satisfaction that only the most vile of human beings would revel in…is inflicting pain on those who deserve it the least…and Boehner’s offer adds an added slap to the face of true American heroes.

And as we all know Obama’s recent round of vileness was calculatingly directed at our veterans and troops starting with the closing of the World War II Memorial to our aging and frail heroes…and moved on to closing the Viet Nam Memorial to those finally getting the respect so long overdue…then continued on to closing the D-Day Memorial at Normandy...and most reprehensible of all to NOT restoring immediately the military death benefits that the government shutdown took away to family members of recently fallen troops …and Obama’s doing so out of NOTHING but sheer meanness makes what Boehner did even more reprehensible.

To say shame on him puts it oh so mildly for if Boehner had truly wanted to send something over to Obama that had true substance and teeth it should have been that the only way he would agree to raise the debt ceiling…and to raise it only temporarily at best…then removing ObamaCare from the general budget and making it a ‘stand alone bill’ would be the only way he would agree to it.

And now it’s over as Boehner was turned down and while some might think Boehner looks the hero for making the offer of compromise, if truth be told he looks like the sell-out that he is. Boehner betrayed those in his own party...brave men like Ted Cruz…and most of all he betrayed the hope that we Republicans and Tea Party members had in him to stand strong against this most vile of presidents.

And that my friends is the saddest thing of all.