Fire! Nah, Just Kidding

Do not speak untruths.

The Boy Who Cried Wolf suffered a form of punitive peer judgement from the village to whom he repeatedly asked for help when none was actually needed. We all know how that turned out. Today, the punishment is on the books. One cannot yell "fire" in a crowded theater, e.g., just to see people flee in a panic and possibly trample one another. Of course, if there is a fire, by all means please yell.

There are also penalties for telling untruths by even the President of the United States, particularly if those lies are designed to cause a similar panic, such as the frequent warnings that House Republicans will cause the United States of America to "go into default on our obligations for the first time in history". Not only does this make the financial markets jumpy, but it's also simply not so.

The United States is not going to default, period.

The debt limit restricts government expenditures to the amount of its incoming revenues -- which is still quite substantial -- and does not prohibit the government from servicing its debt. To compare to a household budget; if your bank says it will not lend you any more money, that does not mean that you can't spend your paycheck.

Obama has also lied about...well,  everything, to be honest, but for now let's just stick to some specifics. Obama recently said that it was "unprecedented" for the raising of the debt ceiling to be linked to unrelated budget issues, calling the Republicans' demands "extortion", and accusing the Republicans of "strapping bombs on their chests". The only thing unprecedented is the president's rhetoric in dealing with members of the opposition party.

Obama also said recently that raising the debt ceiling has no effect on the deficit. Despite being a whopper of unprecedented proportions, the products of the State-sponsored school system believe it because the president said it. Now, it could be argued that the statement itself is technically true, since the immediate effect would be nil unless the government begins spending. Have we ever seen the government stop spending? Slow spending? Spend wisely?

Not that it would ever happen, but there is an argument to be made that Obama's constant harping on the possibility that America could default on its debts is an impeachable offense. See Dan Calabrese's article here  from www.Caintv.com.

Personally, I think Obama could be impeached on a variety of charges, but with a Democrat controlled Senate, we're stuck with him for another 1,124 days.

Sphere: Related Content

Spending is a Democrat's Addiction

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure." --Senator Barack Hussein Obama, March, 2006

Political Spendaholics

As The White House and Congress battle the clock to avert what the mainstream media refers to as "a catastrophic default", the lies and the demagoguery fly with wild abandon, never once second-guessed by the media. No, that media takes as gospel the words of Obama and gleefully regurgitates them over "news" broadcasts. The State-run Media is firing on all cylinders, to be sure. (I still wonder why the likes of Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward have as yet become sufficiently enraged at the sullying of their profession.)

 For starters, the President of the United States stating on national television that he can't guarantee that Social Security checks would go out was one of the most outrageous things he could have said. It was a blatant attempt to frighten seniors into accepting his furthering of our destruction through economic collapse. Each month the federal government receipts of tax revenues far outpaces outlays for Social Security, so if those checks don't go out, it's because Obama decided to punish the elderly for not getting his way.

There will be plenty of revenues to "meet our obligations", both in entitlement programs and the interest on our debt. What may be strained is our ability to continue funding for research into the mating habits of Alaskan halibut or construction of turtle tunnels under highways, to name a few examples. We will, however, not default on our obligations, unless the guys conducting the aforementioned activities decide that their grant money was promised and file suit. Good luck with that, boys and girls, but there is no reasonable excuse for Grandma not getting her Social Security check.

Obama continues to portray himself as above the political bickering, claiming to have the interests of the country in mind rather than brinkmanship or personal interest. He also says that he is willing to negotiate with Republicans, and that Speaker Boehner was inflexible in walking away from talks on Friday night.

But as Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck revealed on Saturday in an emailed statement before the meetings that day, the President is clearly interested in the 2012 elections. Buck wrote:

“Last night the president said, ‘the only bottom line that I have is that we have to extend this debt ceiling through the next election'. Now, we do not know what size or shape a final package will take, but it would be terribly unfortunate if the president was willing to veto a debt limit increase simply because the timetable prescribed would not be the ideal one for his reelection campaign.”

Playing for Keeps

Obama has said this on more than one occasion, and not one media pundit has grasped it. One can only imagine the howls of outrage from the media and the Left -- pardon the redundancy -- if a Republican had made any such statement in regard to such a grave issue.

Aside from the political posturing, however, is the fact that Obama and his Democrat cohorts in Congress exhibit an innate inability to curb spending of our money. Not only are they incapable of restraint, they are now demanding more from us, insisting that taxes be raised. Obama said the other night that he's "done well", and can afford higher taxes. That's great for him, but I still don't see him volunteering to pay more. The IRS would certainly not refuse a large check from Barack and Michelle, nor from any other rich Liberal who complains about "low taxes" on the wealthy.

Democrats simply cannot be trusted with our money, and their incessant desire to seize more of it should be alarming to every American -- at least those of us who actually pay them. In his first term as President, Ronald Reagan agreed to raise taxes based on the Democrats' promise to cut spending. Those cuts never came, and Reagan didn't fall for the ruse a second time. Then George H. W. Bush suffered defeat in his second term election because of his famous "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge that he reneged on with the same false promise from Democrats.

Today, the Democrats have been battling to eliminate the "Bush tax cuts", claiming that "they weren't paid for", a phrase all too familiar in Congressional-speak. But Democrats -- who traditionally portray themselves as the fiscally responsible party -- continually attempt to fix that which isn't broken.

In 2003, the headlines were about Bush's "massive" deficit and the harm it would wreak on our grandchildren. But with the passage of the second tax cut that year, the economy began to improve. From the AP in 2007 (notably the second-to-last year that Bush enjoyed a Republican-controlled House):

The federal deficit is running sharply lower through the first eight months of this budget year as growth in revenues continues to outpace the growth in spending. 

The Treasury Department said that the deficit through May totaled $148.5 billion, down 34.6 percent from the same period a year ago. 

For the 2007 budget year, which ends on Sept. 30, the Congressional Budget Office is projecting a federal deficit of $177 billion. That would be down 28.7 percent from last year's imbalance of $248.2 billion, which had been the lowest deficit in four years.

2003 was the worst of the Bush years, with a $455 billion deficit, which both the Democrats and media claimed was catastrophic. Each year of Obama, though, has seen deficits of a trillion dollars more than Bush's, and now they want to raise the debt ceiling by $2.5 trillion more.

And Obama wants it to last until after the 2012 elections so the problem doesn't impede his possible reelection. Since the math indicates that four more years of Obama would equate to at least $60 trillion in more deficits. That, my friends, would be catastrophic.

Sphere: Related Content

The False Mothers of the Debt Debate



Tough Choices

Americans have not been as divided as they are today since perhaps the early 1860's. Then, the Civil War was ramping up into the bloodiest period of turmoil in our nation's history, and the war brought the worst imaginable scenario to fruition through much of the decade.



It was all brought about by deep divisions in the ideologies of the denizens of the North and the South. Today, those tactical lines are drawn -- for all intents and purposes -- around our major urban centers, pitting the encircled cities against the rest of the nation which gradually is receding from them.

Geographically, the battle maps drawn give little prospect of victory to the tiny enclaves that seem vastly outnumbered and surrounded by the sea of red on an electoral version. That being said, this is a ballot-box war, and so while the weaponry is equal, the forces are also balanced in numbers, and territory means nothing. In terms of classical warfare, circa early 20th century, it is tantamount to one side occupying an entire country while trying in vain to defeat a few well placed sniper nests with thousands of marksmen in each.

Barack Obama is currently trying to get the debt ceiling raised so that he can continue to borrow more money from China and build his base for 2012. The talks taking place now are a perfect example of the bitter fight Americans are having over the state of the U.S. economy, which is sinking like the Titanic. Colloquially  speaking, Obama's position -- as well as many on the Democrats' side -- is to rearrange the deck furniture on that grand ship as it sinks into the sea.

Just as a few stewards may have tried calm passengers who might have witnessed the insanity, so today are members of the media and congressional perpetrators trying to either blame the patrons for the tragedy or similarly sully the builder, keeping the captain guiltless.

Americans spoke loudly and clearly in the 2010 elections, stating in no uncertain terms that they were fed up with reckless spending, wanton borrowing and repressive taxation, yet the message seems lost on all Democrats and astonishingly, even some Republicans. Would that these Republicans had the courage and the wisdom of King Solomon.

King Solomon had before him an infant and two women claiming to be the mother. So bitter was their argument that King Solomon offered this solution: he had his guard draw his sword, and told the women that in order to be fair (a favorite word of today's progressives), his guard would cut the baby in half so that they may each have part of the child. The false mother agreed, but the real mother was horrified and, not wishing harm to come to her son, pleaded for Solomon to give the child to the false mother. Solomon knew at once who the real mother was and awarded her the child.

McConnell Ready to Fold?

King Solomon not only made a wise decision, but a courageous one. It took a leap of faith in the real mother to be willing to make the tough choice for the good of the child for whom she had come to fight. Republicans in the debt ceiling battle ostensibly want to do what is right for the country and the economic health thereof, but apparently lack the political courage to risk losing their seats.

Just as the life of the baby was on the line, so is the life of America, yet of paramount concern to these politicians is whether or not they can get re-elected in 2012. You may refer to all of them from here on as "the false mothers".

Sphere: Related Content

Children Rarely Walk

Always in a Hurry

In case no one has ever observed this simple truth -- a notion I find nearly impossible -- children run everywhere. They run to the bathroom, they run up or down the stairs, they run to their friends' houses to play. Everything to a child is a hurry despite that they have their whole lives ahead of them. Impatient and impetuous lot are children.

It is eerily reminiscent of the child currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, President Barack Hussein Obama. To President Obama, everything must be done "swiftly". (Children seldom use that word save for the precocious ones).  Like everything he has done, speed is of the essence, including the manner in which he arrived at his current station in life. His current use of the word is in regards to Congressional passage of the raising of the debt ceiling which, he says, must be done swiftly.

Obama's reasoning is due to the anemic jobs report for June. The president claims that the business community is not hiring because of uncertainty over whether the debt ceiling will be raised to prevent the U.S. government from defaulting on its obligations. He simply can't imagine that it might have something to do with the fears of businesses that talk of increased taxes and the impending burden of universal health care might be somewhat of a deterrent to expansion.

It is part of a delusional mindset that seems to permeate his circle of friends and advisers. Consider David Plouffe's recent comment that "the average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers." Press secretary Jay Carney punctuated that silly sentiment and added: 

"I don’t know where, you know, the voters that some other folks might be talking to — but — or — but most people do not sit around their kitchen table and analyze GDP and unemployment numbers.  They talk about how they feel their own economic situation is.  And they measure it by whether they have a job, whether they have job security; whether their house – whether they’re meeting their house payment, whether their mortgage is underwater; whether they have the money to pay for their children’s education or they don’t; whether they’re dealing with a sick parent and can afford that, or whether they can’t.They do not sit around analyzing The Wall Street Journal or other — or Bloomberg to look at the — you know, analyze the numbers.  Now, maybe some folks do, but not most Americans.  I think that’s the point David Plouffe was making; that’s the point the president was making just moments ago in his statement in the Rose Garden."

That type of rhetoric seems awfully similar to gloating over a decidedly stupid electorate, doesn't it? In other words, in order for Obama to get re-elected, the team is counting on the notion that most Americans "only care about themselves", all the while preaching about the virtues of "shared sacrifice". They also wager that those they refer to as uneducated will remain so long enough to vote for Obama one more time, and hope that they remain sufficiently selfish as well.

President Teleprompter

Perhaps that is a symptom of Obama's need for speed. After all, the magician relies on slight of hand and dexterous deftness to achieve moans of delight from the audience. So does Obama depend on lofty rhetoric -- supplied on clear Plexiglas -- to lure the attention of the suspicious away from proper investigation while pushing Congress to move quickly swiftly on every suggestion he makes.

It is noteworthy that many members of his early team have long departed. Rahm Emanuel; gone. David Axelrod; gone. Maybe they did their jobs so well and so, ahem, swiftly that they felt it prudent to move on in life. It might also be said that they saw the handwriting on the wall after being in such close quarters with Barack Obama for as long as they were.

As for me, I'm too old to run very fast and am ill-suited to run far at all, but on November 6th of next year, I plan on sprinting to the voting booth.

Sphere: Related Content