Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Time To Declare A War On Liberal Stupidity

By / The Western Center for Journalism 

America is not the “social issue fixer-upper in disrepair” Progressives make her out to be. Instead, America is the “world’s last great hope” and will continue to be, just as soon as we are able to get our head above the water economically.

 Time to Declare a War on Liberal Stupidity
The wave upon wave of “wars” on race, women, class, and now gay marriage  were devised to sink this magnificent “city on a shining hill” into the depths of the sea and replace her with a European-style socialistic utopian theme park I affectionately call “Progressive World.”

Progressives, there is a much simpler way to get to that happy place filled with e-ticket rides and no work: Hop on a plane to Greece and send us a postcard to let us know how it’s working out for you.

God bless them; it seems Progressives honestly thought the sun, moon, and planets had lined up just for them that magical Greek column-themed Inauguration night in 2009 when Democrats owned Washington.

President Obama and Democrats had two years to do something about gay marriage if they wanted to.

Instead, the president waited to make his “public service announcement” until now. Obama made no promises; he simply stated his opinion. The shrewd politician he is, Obama understood the power of words and threw out a few to rally his base and raise Hollywood big-dollar campaign donations — which goes to show you that intelligence is not a prerequisite for fame.

Rally, he did; within days, Newsweek canonized Obama as America’s “First Gay President” and plastered his face on their front page, rainbow flag colored halo and all. I shall bite my tongue here for further comment and leave the editorializing to readers.

Especially during these days of pending economic ruin, the “war” on gay marriage is a waste of time. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand that as long as gays stay within the same legal boundaries we are all bound to, they can do whatever they want behind closed doors. It’s their business. I’m sure the GOP would be happy to accommodate them with reasonable things like hospital visitation rights. Sexual activity is between an individual, God, and the fly on the wall and has nothing to do with civil rights.

Conservatives must sit this one out and let nature take its course. If liberal men marry men and liberal women marry women and those who want to abort their babies do so, it won’t be long before liberals will “social right” themselves out of existence. In this case, patience is a virtue conservatives should wholeheartedly embrace.

Meanwhile, our ship is sinking, and Democrats are dressing themselves for dinner.

Focusing on non-issues intended to pit Americans against each other rather than acknowledging the iceberg we’re about to crash into was an exercise in futility. How far this one, who once promised to bind us together, has fallen.

It truly is “still about the economy, stupid.” Maybe someone needs to declare a war on “stupid.”

All about me: Obama 'stealing Reagan's glory'

Barack inserts himself into other presidents' biographies

Barack Obama has been accused of “vandalizing” the presidential biographies posted on the official White House website by injecting his own personal agenda into the details of what past leaders accomplished.

On the page with Ronald Reagan’s biography, for example, it states: “In a June 28, 1985 speech Reagan called for a fairer tax code, one where a multi-millionaire did not have a lower tax rate than his secretary.”

Then Obama has added, “Today, President Obama is calling for the same with the Buffett Rule.”

“This is a truly disgraceful behavior,” wrote Examiner Senior Editorial Writer Philip Klein.

“Put aside the fact that what Reagan was proposing in 1985 had nothing to do with the Buffett Rule. Obama should not vandalize his predecessors’ biographies to promote his own agenda,” he wrote.

“Obviously, as president, Obama can use the tools of the White House to advance his goals. But at the same time, all presidents are to some extent guardians of the institution,” he continued. “Sure, a lot of the White House website is naturally going to be used to promote Obama, but there are some areas that should be considered neutral ground – one of them being the history sections.

“I’m sure that during the Social Security debate in 2005, if President Bush had updated the biographical page to say that he was trying to preserve FDR’s original vision for Social Security, liberals would have been up in arms.”

Seth Mandel at Commentary Magazine has assembled a list of other instances of the White House injecting Obama into presidential biographies.
  • On Feb. 22, 1924 Calvin Coolidge became the first president to make a public radio address to the American people. President Coolidge later helped create the Federal Radio Commission, which has now evolved to become the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). President Obama became the first president to hold virtual gatherings and town halls using Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.
  • In a 1946 letter to the National Urban League, President Truman wrote that the government has “an obligation to see that the civil rights of every citizen are fully and equally protected.” He ended racial segregation in civil service and the armed forces in 1948. Today the Obama administration continues to strive toward upholding the civil rights of its citizens, repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, allowing people of all sexual orientations to serve openly in our armed forces.
  • President Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare signed (sic) into law in 1965 – providing millions of elderly health care stability. President Obama’s historic health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, strengthens Medicare, offers eligible seniors a range of preventive services with no cost-sharing, and provides discounts on drugs when in the coverage gap known as the “donut hole.”
Wrote Mandel, “The Heritage Foundation’s Rory Cooper tweeted the Obama had casually dropped his own name into Ronald Reagan’s biography on www.whitehouse.gov, claiming credit for taking up the mantle of Regan’s tax reform advocacy with his ‘Buffett Rule’ gimmick. My first thought was, he must be joking.

“But he wasn’t.”

He continued: “As you can see, the bullet points make clear that while each president has done something historic or notable, Obama is carrying forward every one of those accomplishments since Coolidge. No wonder he always seems to proud of himself.”

Obama even arranged credit for his wife, explaining in the Dwight D. Eisenhower biography: “President Dwight Eisenhower established the President’s Council on Youth Fitness on July 16, 1956 (now known as The President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports) after learning from a study that American youth were less fit than European youth. Today the Council is still going strong – with Olympians and professional athletes on board – working in conjunction with the First Lady Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move initiative.”

And surpassing the presidency of Jimmy Carter also is a goal, apparently. The White House site says: “In 1977, President Jimmy Carter created the Department of Energy; today the DOE works with the Obama administration to drive toward innovation in energy and reducing reliance on foreign oil with an ‘all of the above’ approach.”

On the Commentary Magazine website, reader MK Daspit added one to those listed on the White House site:

God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning – the sixth day. Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested. … President Obama saw this and said “I was totally going to do it in 5 days and get in two days of golf, but whatever.”

At the online Indecision Forever, writer Ilya Gerner also noted a few statements that Obama seems to have missed.

Gerner suggested the following:
  • When Jefferson assumed the presidency on March 4, 1801, the crisis in France had passed. Today, President Obama communicates with the president of France entirely through apologies.
  • On July 2, 1862, Abraham Lincoln signed a bill establishing the United States’ first land grant colleges. Today, President Obama fills out NCAA brackets.
  • On July 17, 1898, William McKinley signed a bill that annexed the Hawaiian Islands, making them part of the United States. Today President Obama claims he was born in Hawaii.
  • In August 1941, Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the construction of what would become Andrews Air Force Base. Today, President Obama plays golf there.
Romney vs Obama...let the economic games begin
By: Diane Sori

As the playing field has now been set for a ROMNEY vs. OBAMA November showdown, let’s review one major fact: Barack Hussein Obama has just about destroyed the American economy while Mitt Romney saved Massachusetts’ economy.

No matter what ridiculous diversions Obama and crew try to throw in our path the bottom line remains that this election IS all about the economy...the economy...the economy...we must focus on the economy!  Our economy is flailing with twenty-three million Americans out of work, with millions having lost their homes, and with the national debt now exceeding $15 TRILLION, and ALL on Obama’s watch. 
Fact: The National Debt has increased more during Obama's three plus years in office than it did during George W. Bush two terms in office.  The National Debt was $4.899 trillion during the entirety of Bush’s eight years but has gone up more than $4.939 trillion just since Obama took office, and his first term isn’t even over yet!  The National Debt was $10.626 trillion on President Bush's last day in office, now thanks to Obama it’s over $15 trillion.

Fact: the National Debt now exceeds 100% of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services and that is extremely serious.  Obama must have been sleeping that day in class when Economics 101 was taught...you NEVER spend more than you take in or are worth!

There really is a very simple approach to spending that leads to debt...can we afford it, and if not, is it worth borrowing money to pay for it and most times the answer will be NO!  Mitt Romney understands this, Barack Hussein Obama does NOT.

Fact: when Bush left office the unemployment rate was 7.8%.  Today the While House claims its ‘ONLY’ up to 8.3% but those numbers do NOT tell the real truth.  Remember, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports ‘assumptive numbers’ which are based on raw data NOT on factual numbers.  With government employees possibly manipulating this data, the 8.3% could be nothing more than creative accounting.

With 23 million Americans unemployed or working in the category known as ‘underemployed,’ with ever-increasing labor pool numbers (over 56% of recent college graduates can’t find work), with over 968,000 discouraged workers dropping out of the labor pool this past April alone, and with the rate of jobs creation dropping, leading economists say the actual unemployment rate is 10% and probably much higher! 

And here is a very sobering fact...the government borrows almost forty cents of every dollar it spends! 

‘Thanks Obama, you screwed ‘We the People’ again! 

Mitt Romney, a very astute businessman first and foremost, knows how an economy should work.  As governor of Massachusetts he cut taxes 19 times and balanced the budget all four years he was in office.  He cast over 800 vetoes and cut entire wasteful spending programs using the monies saved to create jobs, putting people back to work.  Also while governor, Romney erased a $3 billion budget shortfall, and when he left office there was a $2 billion rainy day fund in place.  And he did all this in Massachusetts, one of the most liberal of states, and with a legislature that was 85% Democratic to boot!

I, for one, want a president whose jobs plan WILL create jobs and put Americans back to work; a president who knows how to balance a budget and eliminate wasteful spending; and a president who knows the meaning of fiscal conservatism.

So the economics game is over...Obama loses and Romney and 'We the People' win!

'Existential threat' to Western U.S. states

New Obama water policy position overturns decades of practice

Water32The Obama administration has launched a new battle over water rights that threatens not only the the economies of arid Western states, which largely voted against him in the 2008 election, but their very existence.

WND reported last month that the federal government was creating obstacles for Tombstone, Ariz., to restore its water supplies following last year’s forest fire and monsoon-triggered floods in the nearby mountains. The federal government said crews could not use machinery to rebuild pipelines and spring-water collection systems.

Now, a letter contradicting longstanding federal practice asserts a claim to water in arid Western states, such as Utah, Montana, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and others, that supersedes all other authorities, including decisions by state water courts.

“Federal water rights are entitled to a form of protection that is broader than what may be provided to similarly situated state law rights holders,” states a letter from Julie Decker, the deputy state director in the U.S. Department of the Interior to the Arizona Department of Water Resources.

The letter was objecting to state plans to do a routine “Designation of Adequate Water Supply,” which reviews water resources, rights and uses when changes are proposed.

Decker’s letter said water is not “legally” available for some users who may want to develop property in the area, because “the expressed federal reserved water right created by Congress is senior to all junior water users who initiate uses after the date of the establishment of the reservation.”

Nick Dranias, who holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute, called it an “existential threat to the Western states.”

The institute is fighting on behalf of Tombstone for its right to repair its water supply system and use the water.

A statement from the institute said the city of Tombstone “is no longer the only one fighting the federal government for water rights.”

“The latest move by the federal Bureau of Land Management appears to herald a bigger and much more comprehensive effort to seize water and access rights on federal lands throughout the Western states,” the statement said.

The newest dispute is the federal government’s letter concerning water rights in Arizona’s San Pedro Riparian watershed. The letter came in response to a request by Sierra Vista’s Pueblo del Sol Water Co., which claims water rights in the area but is being told it cannot use the water without the federal government’s permission.

“This new federal policy not only defies decades of deference to and accommodation of state sovereignty over water law, but it throws a noose around Arizona’s neck, for which water is life,” the institute said.

“The growing federal stranglehold over water rights in Arizona is a direct assault on state autonomy. There is perhaps no better way for the federal government to quell restive Western states, like Arizona, that dare to resist federal immigration, health care, and unionization policies.”

Dranias explained the situation to people in regions of the country where water is more plentiful.

“Water is the lifeblood of the arid Western states. Development would not exist without pretty intensive development of scarce water. That is only possible with the incentives created by ownership,” he said.

Without assurances that water is available, there is no possibility that economic development can occur, he said. In fact, some states have provisions, such as in Colorado, saying a homeowner cannot occupying a building unless a water right is documented for the structure.

He said it was only a few decades back that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a New Mexico case that the federal government deferred to states on water rights.

Now, however, the policy is being repudiated, threatening virtually every water user west of the Mississippi River.

Dranias cited the Tombstone dispute, in which federal officials won’t give the city permission to take equipment into a protected region to repair damage from a forest fire and monsoon-induced flooding. The city has obtained its water from the area since Wyatt Earp helped build a pipeline.

“The federal government doesn’t care about a direct threat to human life, a direct threat to property, a direct threat to the economy. It is will to risk all of that in pursuit of whatever they’re trying to claim as a superior position of water rights,” he said.

Tombstone, which can document through federal letters its ownership of the rights back 130 years, is in a far superior position to most water users in the West. Dranias told of Arizona ranchers who own specific spring-fed water rights but only leased rights-of-way for pipelines.

The federal government is demanding as a condition for renewing the pipeline permits that ranchers cede to the federal government all water ownership and rights, he said.

The radical “green,” or ecological, element appears to be playing a role, Dranias noted.

As part of the litigation over Tombstone’s water, he said, emails to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from various activists cheered the fires and floods that destroyed Tombstone’s water supply system.

“Hooray, the water’s running free again,” he said the emails expressed.

“Any state like Arizona … is facing the same situation,” he said.

Dranias said the fight over Tombstone’s water simply cannot be lost, because of the implications that could ripple across the nation, even beyond the West.

The state has declared the Tombstone situation an emergency, but, even so, federal officials refuse to allow repairs. Losing the case could set a precedent that emergency measures needed to mitigate oil spills and other environmental problems might not be allowed because of restrictions by the federal government, he said.

Federal officials have declined to answer questions about the court case.