Obama: No Spending Problem

In the South, we have an old saying.  "There are two kinds of stupid in this world.  One is when you start barking at the moon and make a fool of yourself.  The second is when you do that in my living room.  I can look over the first, but the second I have to take personal."  Or something to that effect.  I'm not sure which of the above describes President Obama.  For him to state, categorically, that federal spending is not the cause of the massive $16 trillion debt is beyond any logic, by any definition.  He obviously doesn't read warnings sent to him from his own agencies or advisers.   Obama's own debt commission has warned him that spending is the force that is causing the debt.  His own debt commission!!!  They are warning him to cut spending and he is ignoring them!  But, this is the man that says there is no spending problem?  President Obama is the problem.   He is like a kid in a candy shop, but only has $1.00 to spend.  He has these grandiose plans for the ultimate utopian society where everything is free and everyone is equal.  That means no rich, no poor and, yes, no middle class.  That is the Socialist dream.  Unfortunately, like so many things in the Socialist thought process, it is not feasible or possible.

This just goes on to show how delusional a President we have now.  He is reckless and out of touch with reality.  We are broke.  BROKE.  But, we have a President who simply does not realize it or does not care.  I'm not sure which it is or maybe it's both.  Anyone with common sense could recognize our revenues are not matching our spending.  Every household in the USA has to have some kind of budget.  If I spend more than I take in each month, I will be out in the street.  Why doesn't the federal government feel it is under the same restraints? President Obama ignores his own advisers, his own debt reporting agencies.  The only person Obama listens to is, of course, that HUGE Obama ego.  President Obama thinks he is the smartest person on earth, no doubt fueled by the idiots that voted for him twice to be the Vacationer in Chief.  No spending problem, Mr President?  We have a lack of leadership problem, Mr. President.  The buck stops with YOU!

Gun Control - Waterloo for Democrats?

Much has been said and debated since the senseless tragedy of the killing of 26 innocent lives, including 20 children, at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT.  Most of it borders on hysterics, some of it downright frightening.  Both sides, Left and Right, need to calm down.  You have the Left saying the President of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and all its members should be shot.  Think of the irony of that statement for a moment.  A segment of the population that wants gun control (or just outright abolition thereof) is wanting to use guns to kill people who disagree with them.  The intolerant, bigoted, violent Left never, ever ceases to amaze or entertain.  I doubt they even recognize the irony in their statements of violence.  To make matters worse, you have people like Senator Dianne Feinstein who is once again trying to get passage on a bill that makes gun owners get background checks, finger prints and just basically makes them criminals.  What her bill is all about is to frustrate people into giving up their guns to the federal government.  Democrats are taking an enormous political risk by pushing for gun control.  I'm certain Democrats remember what happened the last time they pushed for gun control.

The last time Democrats went all out on gun control was in the middle of Bill Clinton's first term as President.  Their losses were monumental in the mid-term 1994 elections.  It was the first time that a Speaker of the House, Tom Foley, had lost reelection since the Civil War.  It was the first time since 1954 that Democrats did not control the House.  In other words, the Democrats of today are expending major political capital in their attempt to appeal or invalidate the Second Amendment.  Now, some will, once again, hysterically point out this has nothing to do with politics.  "This is all about protecting our children".  Bullshit.  I hate to say this, but Liberals don't give a damn about those children that were murdered.  This is ALL about politics to them.  Anything goes in pushing their political agenda.  As soon as the 2011 Tucson Shootings took place, Liberals immediately tried to put the blame on Conservative Tea Party members.  The bodies were still warm when they took to the airwaves and blogs to cast blame.  There was little sympathy for the six people that died and the other twelve that were wounded, including Congresswoman Gabby Giffords.  So, color me skeptical of Liberal outrage over these children.  It's all about politics to them and always will be.

Regardless of what happens to gun control in Congress, Democrats are taking a big gamble and they know it.  Democrats have been on the upswing since 2008, with the exception of 2010, and were very successful in 2012.  As stated, I'm not buying their excuse that they want to protect people from guns.  A crazy person is going to get a gun, someway, somehow.  This is about power, absolute power for the federal government.  It is not about gun control.  Democrats see this as an opportunity to press their dream of unlimited power and putting even more government into the lives of every American.

Politicizing Sandy Hook

Like everyone else, I was simply devastated and greatly saddened by the insanity of one deranged individual who killed 20 children and 6 adults.  There is no way to explain how someone could kill another human being.  But, added to that, how can you kill the most innocent of human beings; 5 and 6 year old children?  How can you hurt kindergarteners?  They were so innocent and were just looking forward to recess. Instead, a scumbag came to school and snuffed out their little lives for no reason, no reason at all.  My heart goes out to the families of the victims.  Nothing can be said to sooth their grief.  There are no words in the English language to comfort someone who loses a child.  Jodi Picoult once said,
"In the English language there are orphans and widows. But, there is no word for the parents who loses a child." That's true.  There are simply no words to convey the loss and sadness of a parent losing a child.  What is almost as sad is that there are people in this country who will politicize a tragedy, such as occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newton, CT, to further their own agenda.  

The little bodies of the school children at Sandy Hook were probably still in the elementary school while Mayor Michael Bloomberg, of New York City, came out calling for "immediate action"  against the proliferation of guns in America (but, the good mayor declines "immediate action" against his armed guards).  Before the first funerals took place, Senator Dianne Feinstein said she will again introduce a bill to ban assault weapons in this country.  I very much want to say President Obama was not politicizing this unimaginable tragedy.  I'm trying to believe he is not.  But, based on his past rhetoric of similar tragedies, I tend to think he is pushing his agenda at the expense of the murders of 26 innocent people, including 20 innocent children.  To begin with, Obama's statement of  "We can’t tolerate this anymore" was a warning shot across the bow to gun advocate groups such as the NRA.  It was a cheap shot in order to blame gun advocates for the insanity of one deranged individual.  President Obama went on to say, "whatever power this office holds" in a quest to prevent future mass shootings."  He is going to try to twist Congressmen in both parties to come around to gun control and strict gun control this time.  Gun control or the absolute abolition of guns is the a Leftist wet dream that has been tried for decades.  They are absolutely jumping with joy at "never letting a good crisis go to waste."  They are disgusting.

What I ask the Leftists, how do you stop a crazy from getting guns?  You can outlaw guns tomorrow and the  Adam Lanzas, Dylan Klebolds, and Eric Harrises of the world will STILL find a way to get a gun.  You can melt down every gun tomorrow, and the above type individuals will STILL find a way to carry out their insanity by way of a bomb or some other weapon.  You can't unring a bell, ladies and gentlemen.  You can't go back to a time when there were no guns in the USA.  Oh, but they did that in Great Britain, you say?  Really?  You think the criminal element in Great Britain do not have guns?  If they don't, they have knives.   In China, a man stabbed 22 school children.  You say, but they didn't die.  That is truly the case.  But, they could have died.  This man had a weapon, if used correctly, could have killed at least half those school children in China.  One last point to the orgasmic Lefties who are politicizing this tragedy;  you say the 2nd Amendment was written during a time of militias and muskets.  You say the 2nd Amendment is outdated now.  Ok, using this same analogy, should we also appeal or amend the 1st Amendment since it was written with feather pens and parchment paper?  Of course not, that is ridiculous.  But, your argument to repeal or abrogate the 2nd Amendment is equally ridiculous. Basically, unarming citizens makes them sitting ducks for the crazies of the world such as Adam Lanza.  If one teacher, just ONE, had a gun last Friday, the carnage may not have been so bad.  One dead child is too many.  But twenty?  One gun could have stopped Lanza in his tracks.  Pity that Liberals are too stupid to understand that.

Boehner: Give the Democrats What They Want

As many are aware, the so-called "Fiscal Cliff" is coming at us quite fast.  President Obama wants to tax the "rich who make above $250K."  Some Republicans are coming around to this, but with a stipulation; cuts in spending across the board.  Republicans get only vague responses to this idea when the subject is broached to Democrats.  Say "cut spending" to Democrats is similar to saying "stop drinking" to an alcoholic.  It's an addiction in both cases.  So, right now, House Speaker John Boehner and President Obama are meeting privately to avoid the fiscal cliff in which the Bush Tax Cuts end and taxes increase across the board.  That would be disastrous for a still recovering economy.  President Obama wants a huge tax increase on the "rich."  What our beloved President fails to understand, the so-called "rich" in that $250K bracket that he wants a tax increase, consists of small businessmen.  Quick question to the Liberals;  who does most of the hiring in this nation, those evil corporations that you demonize or the small businessman (who you also despise)?  I think you know small businesses do most of the hiring.  It will devastate the small businessman.  Why can't you understand this?  Even if you increase taxes to 50% on the rich, how much will that go toward cutting the national debt?  There will be little change in the debt. 

My advice to John Boehner; give the Democrats what they want.  They want to increase tax rates, let them do it.  There will be a handful of Republicans who will vote with the Democrats in the House.  The rest of the Republicans should simply vote "present."  That is something President Obama is very familiar with as a state and U.S. Senator.  Let the Democrats own this.  They feel increasing taxes is the way to prosperity. It is an age old concept of the Progressive.  It has never worked in any country.  But, again, let the Democrats have what they want.  Let them also own the repercussions this will have on the economy and employment.  Sure, they will still blame the Republicans.  Democrats do not believe in accountability.  That's fine.  But, even the Obama Zombies who voted for Obama in November will start to realize they have been sold a bill of goods.  Even the Obama Zombies will see who pushed this exorbitant tax rate on them.  Then again, according to the Russian newspaper Pravda, the Obama Zombies are "illiterate."  So, maybe they won't understand who is responsible.  Sadly, I must admit that is a possibility also.