Democrats Could Lose Even Old Safe Seats

As the New York Times story at the link below demonstrates, even the liberal media have to admit that the Democrats' creation of massive new Big Business subsidies and shoving of fascist health care down our throats have created such a backlash against the Democrats that they might lose even some of their traditionally safe seats in Congress. It's the very likelihood that Democrats will suffer major losses in November that leads them to their current scorched earth policy, trying to impose as much fascist control as possible over our lives now, knowing that when they're back in the minority they can use the filibuster to stop Americans from repealing the fascism that Democrats are imposing on us now. I don’t expect Democrats to lose the 40 House seats required to lose their majority entirely this November alone, nor to lose the Senate (which would require Democrats to lose every competitive contest). I do expect, however, that they will suffer substantially more than the traditional midterm congressional losses, losing their ability to overcoming virtually any filibuster in the Senate while losing a practical, working House majority in support of most of their fascist policies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/25/us/politics/25campaign.html?th&emc=th

Obama Tacking to the Right After Taxachusetts Defeat?

Last week's special election in Taxachusetts to replace the late Ted Kennedy in the US Senate served as a referendum on Obama's fascist health care plan, with its mandates, taxes, fines and prison sentences. A majority of voters in what's arguably the most liberal state in the republic came out and soundly defeated Democrat Martha Coakley and gave the seat to a Republican for the first time in decades. Scott Brown, the Republican victor, promised during the election to oppose Obama's fascist health care program.

A week later, according to liberal media outlet The New York Times, Obama plans to tack sharply to the right, pretending fiscal conservatism by proposing to freeze some discretionary domestic spending, while leaving defense spending and entitlements untouched. Since entitlement spending makes up the majority of (non-interest) spending in the budget, even Obama's wildly optimistic (some might say, "delusional" or "deceitful") show his alleged freeze reducing the projected $9 trillion in federal budget deficits by only $250 billion, or less than 3%. In the meantime, his budget for the coming fiscal year would actually increase spending even more with another $150 trillion of "stimulus" pork spending. Even the liberal New York Times admits in the story below that all of Obama's talk of freezing the budget would serve mostly as a symbol of fiscal conservatism--while leaving trillions of dollars of new pork on top of the trillions of dollars of continuing pork.

Keep in mind, too, that the federal government uses something called "baseline budgeting." Under baseline budgeting the Congressional Budget Office estimates next year's "need" for spending and then calls that the baseline. Somehow the "need" increases every single year, even after adjusting for inflation and population growth. So baseline federal spending increases every single year in real dollars per person. Obama's proposed "cuts," even if they did materialize, would simply represent reductions in the baseline projected rate of increase, not actual cuts in spending from one year to the next.

Worse still, Congress has shown repeatedly, particularly Democrat Congresses in the 1980s and early 1990s, that "spend more now, cut later" actually means "spend more now, spend even more later." Each time Democrats and mushy moderates like Bob Dole promised Reagan and the first Bush that they would "cut the budget" they actually authorized far more than even the baseline. I would expect Obama, who's first-year spending binge dwarfs anything under FDR or LBJ (or indeed the two combined) to accept let Congress get away with far more in spending increases than Reagan or even Bush did.

Still, while Obama's calls for a budget freeze probably consist of roughly have delusion and half deceit, it's good to see that despite some liberal media claims to the contrary, Scott Brown's victory does indeed signal that Americans are fed up with Obama's liberal policies of tax, spend, regulate and imprison.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/us/politics/26budget.html?th&emc=th

Petition to Seat Scott Brown Immediately

Now that Republican Scott Brown has won the US Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy for decades, Democrats in the Senate have lost their 60-seat filibuster-proof majority and so can no longer pass Obama's fascist health care plan with its mandates, taxes, fines and criminal prison sentences. Or have they?

Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid might try to delay the seating of Scott Brown until after the House-Senate Conference Committee sends back a fascist health care bill that reconciles the Senate version with the even worse House version. Reid doesn't care much that a majority of American people oppose the fascist health care bills and that even in Massachusetts, arguably the most liberal state in the republic, thousands of liberal Democrats who voted for Obama came out to vote against Obama's fascist health care bills. Reid himself now runs a serious risk of getting tossed out by the voters of Nevada in his 2010 reelection bid, so he's likely to conduct a scorched-earth policy and impose as much fascist government control on us as possible before Nevadans put an end to his legislative reign of terror and lop off his political head.

To help oppose fascist health care you can sign a petition to demand the immediate seating of Scott Brown at http://www.countryfirstpac.com/seathimnow/?initiativekey=3JTODVIZSRFF. Reid might not be listening, but some other Democrat Senators are: already last night, Virginia's US Senator, Jim Webb, a Democrat with a liberal voting record but a moderate reputation, stated that no vote should on health care reform should take place before the Senate seats Brown. Webb won his Senate seat in 2006 by only three-tenths of a percent against conservative Republican George Allen, and only because 1. The liberal media managed to turn Allen's non-racial "macaca" comment into a racial slur; 2. Voters sick of losing Bush's then-losing policies in Iraq wanted to win; 3. Enough voters were foolish enough to believe that Democrats would win rather than try to cut and run; and 4. The liberal media managed to paint Webb as a "moderate" or even "conservative" Democrat because he'd once served as an Assistant Secretary of the Navy under Reagan (but also called Reagan a fool, a fact that the liberal media loved but hid from you). Webb knows then that he's skating on thin ice. He routinely votes a liberal line, but without much media attention routinely gets away with it. On fascist health care (on which he voted to kill the Republican filibuster) though there's far too much media attention, and he knows that he's in serious danger of not getting reelected in 2012.

So while the petition probably won't affect Reid directly, it can certainly affect Democrat Senators like Webb and others from so-called "purple states" where voters could easily toss out the Democrat Senators with moderate reputations revealed to be liberal and not the moderates they pretended to be. So let's do everything possible to drive the wooden stake through the heart of Obama's fascist health care plan and sign the petition to seat Scott Brown immediately at http://www.countryfirstpac.com/seathimnow/?initiativekey=3JTODVIZSRFF. I've already signed it, and I hope you will too.

Unemployment Rose in September

This report came out a while ago and I've been meaning to share it. Despite the claims by the Federal Reserve Board that the recession has ended, the official unemployment rate rose in September, and not because the number of people who reentered the workforce exceeded the number of new jobs the economy created. The economy actually lost 263,000 jobs in September, worse than the 201,000 loss of August.

I've been saying for more than a year now that the Fed's inflationary policies, a vain Keynesian attempt to trick the economy into real growth by inflating the money supply, were only making things worse, as are the trillion-dollar Bush-Obama big business corporate bailouts, which crowd out real investment in efficient businesses. I've predicted for months now that things would get worse before they get better, and the prediction certainly proved true in September. Notice that the real unemployment rate reached 17%, the highest ever since the BLS started measuring the rate.

If the government stops trying to "help" the economy with more bailouts, borrowing and inflation, it will eventually recover on its own, but government could speed the recovery by spending less and cutting marginal tax rates. Presidents Kennedy and Reagan both got impressive rates of growth after making large cuts in marginal income tax rates. I don't see the current president and Congress cutting marginal tax rates or reducing the growth rate of federal spending (much less actually cutting spending, which hasn't happened since the 1930s) so I think we're still in for a long, bitter recession.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/02/jobless-rate-climbs-percent-september/

By 40% to 35% Americans Oppose "Climate Change" Bill

From the late 19th century through the mid-20th, the Earth warmed a bit, coming completely out of the Little Ice Age of the Late Middle Ages. From about 1940 through the 1960s, the Earth cooled again ever so slightly, causing environmentalists to start screaming "global cooling!" and demand that the government control us more. Three warm summers in the 1980s, however, led the same environmentalists to start screaming "global warming!" and demand that the government control us more. With 3 cold years in a row now, environmentalists have started to talk about "global climate change" instead of "global warming"--but still demand that government control us more. As the liberal Democrats in Congress try to impose their control on us, Americans have grown skeptical of environmentalist demands for more government control. Note that those who strongly oppose the latest bill outnumber those who strongly favor it nearly 3 to 1.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/climate_change_bill_gets_mixed_reviews

Obama Nominee Koh Wants to Impose Foreign Law; Shariah?!

If you've been reading my blog at all in the past few weeks, you know that Obama has already tried to appoint 7 anti-Israel, pro-terrorist politicians to his administration. We managed to defeat one so obviously vile that even elected Jewish liberal Democrats who supported Obama last November opposed him, but that still leaves Obama with 6 anti-Israel, pro-terrorist miscreants in his administration. You might also recall that in his $410 billion socialist pork "stimulus" act, Obama got the Democrat majority in Congress to send hundreds of millions of dollars to Obama's terrorist buddies in Hamas, who contributed illegally to his campaign last fall.

Not content to help mass-murdering Muslim monsters exterminate the Jews in Israel, now Obama wants to appoint Harold Koh as the chief legal advisor for the US State Department. Koh, a leftist in charge of the notoriously left-wing Yale Law School since 2004, advocated subordinating the US Constitution to "international law." Koh has written and spoken widely against US sovereignty, likening the US to terror states like North Korea and Iraq under Saddam Hussein. According to New York attorney Steven J. Stein, Koh, during a speech in 2007 where Koh advocated imposing the laws of various foreign countries on US courts, Koh mentioned Islamic law, or Shariah, as one type of law that he advocated imposing on American courts.

Shariah, as you might know, is the Muslim law that allow a husbands to beat his wives for being disobedient, forces all women to cover themselves from head to toe in order to subjugate them into virtual nonexistence as individuals, and authorizes a husband to kill any wife who sleeps with another man. Liberals, who often get hysterical over even a law preventing third-trimester abortions, claiming that such a law somehow dehumanizes them, should have exploded in outrage over Obama's nomination of a pro-Shariah lawyer to the State Department. Other than Stein, however, not a single liberal has uttered a peep, and the liberal media refuse to even report the story. You can read more at http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/31/obamas-appointment-koh-state-department-legal-adviser-stirs-controversy/.

Working together we managed to defeat one pro-terrorist nominee, as you can read at http://david-lifelibertyandproperty.blogspot.com/2009/03/recently-ive-documented-how-obama-has.html. Now's your chance to oppose the nomination by sending a free email to your US Senators (who have to consent to the nominee) at http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=3604 (toward the bottom of the page). If you're one of my liberal Jewish high school friends, or indeed any liberal, and you've read this far, I give you kudos! Now please use any connections you might have to Democrats in Congress, the Obama, administration, or the liberal media to oppose the nomination of Koh and to publicize the issue further.

If we can pressure the liberal media into actually reporting the story, as we did to defeat the nomination of Charles Freeman, if we can just get word of his pro-Shariah comments to Democrats on Capitol Hill, we might just defeat Harold Koh too. Even if your connections consist of just a $50 contribution to Obama, Hillary, or some Democrat in Congress, please write to them opposing Koh. Let them know that you supported them. They're more likely to respond to favorably when their own supporters oppose what they're poised to do. So please don't delay, but contact them in opposition to Koh now. Thank you.

David

Help Stop Obama Sham Budget!

The shockingly-high level of spending Obama proposes falls nothing short of simply insane! He's talking about a deficit of $2 TRILLION for fiscal 2010 alone. The deficit, you'll recall, is the amount by which federal spending exceeds federal tax receipts. So just this fiscal year, Obama wants to spend $2 trillion more than the government collects in taxes. As part of those taxes, by the way, Obama proposes increasing tax rates to collect an extra $700 billion. So expect your tax bills to rise even as the recession is lowering your income. Remember too that, because people respond to incentives, when tax rates go up, people shift away from taxable income, and so the government never collects as much in taxes as it projects from a tax increase. You can reasonably expect the Obama deficit to exceed $2 trillion--for 2010 alone!

The Obama budget plan for the next decade projects total budget deficits approaching $10 TRILLION, nearly doubling the unpaid federal accumulated since World War II of $11 trillion. Remember too that Congress hasn't once, since it passed the Budget Impoundment Act of 1973 (which took away the president's power to refuse to spend money appropriated by Congress), actually spent only as much as the president budgeted. Let me repeat that: not once since 1973 has Congress ever spent only as much as the president budgeted. Let me say it another way: every year since 1973, Congress has spent more than the federal budget it passed. The budget is a sham that Congress passes and then freely ignores. So Obama's projected $10 trillion in new federal deficits over 10 years will easily exceed the $10 trillion. Don't be surprised if Obama and the Democrat Congress spend more on deficits alone in the next decade than all the deficit-spending Congress has done since World War II combined!

With Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress, it will be hard to stop the simply insane Obama sham budget. Republicans in the Senate, however, have enough votes, if they all stick together, to filibuster to death (permanently table) Obama's sham budget. With enough pressure from constituents, furthermore, some Democrats might bail out on the sham budget too. I've already used the link below to send my free fax to my US Representative and two US Senators (all Democrats in a swing state) and I hope you will too. Together we can stop, or at least drastically reduce, the Obama sham budget.

https://secure2.convio.net/cagw/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=573

Small Victory Against Obama's Anti-Israel Appointments

Recently I've documented how Obama has tried to appoint seven different anti-Israel and pro-terrorist nominees to his administration. You can read more details at http://david-lifelibertyandproperty.blogspot.com/2009/03/obama-intel-appointment-angers-israel.html.

Thanks to quick action by pro-Israel Republicans and Democrats alike, the most recent anti-Israel nominee, Charles Freeman, has withdrawn his name from nomination after the conservative media revealed that Freeman serves on the payroll of Saudi Arabia, and after the liberal media picked up the story from the conservative media. While the withdraw of Saudi agent Freeman provides us with a small victory against Obama's pro-terrorist, anti-Israel policy, remember that Obama's already appointed 6 other anti-Israel thugs to his administration and gotten Congress to send millions of dollars to the mass-murdering Muslim terrorists in Hamas. Obama wants to make friends with Iran's Terrorist-in-Chief, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has promised to destroy Israel and America, and now has more than a ton of uranium, enough to make his own nuke. Even as I write, Obama is in the process of surrendering Afghanistan to the mass-murdering Muslim terrorists in the Taliban--against whom Hollywood's liberals railed in the 1990s--and handing Afghanistan over to the Taliban so they can return to murdering innocent Muslims there. So we have a long way to go to defeat Obama's anti-Israel and pro-terrorist evil, but at least we've made a start. You--especially my liberal Jewish friends and family who voted for Obama and have contacts inside his administration or with Democrats in Congress--need to keep up the pressure on the Obama administration.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4975999/Intelligence-candidate-Charles-Freeman-pulls-out-after-objections.html

AIG Execs Get Millions in Bonuses From Taxpayer Bailout

Late in 2008, Ben Bernanke, chair of the Federal Reserve Board, without any legal authority, bailed out ailing insurance giant, AIG. Bush and Congress approved of the extralegal bailout so much they started bailing out other failing financial giants, and wrote into the law a provision authorizing Bernanke to do what he'd already done. A majority of Republicans in both houses of Congress, however, opposed the bailouts, urging the government to let financial giants suffer from their own foolish policies.

In some sense you can't blame Bernanke, as it was the Keynesian inflationary polices of his predecessor, Alan Greenspan, that encouraged these financial giants, along with a little help from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which "guaranteed" the loans) to make hundreds of billions of dollars in foolish loans to people who couldn't afford to borrow in the first place. Bernanke, Bush and congressional Democrats bailing out the financial giants that government policies encouraged to lend foolishly demonstrates how one government intervention leads inevitably to another. As Yoda said, once you turn to the Dark Side, forever will it dominate your destiny. Keeping in mind Yoda's advice--and the entire history of federal government regulation, starting with the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, which Congress passed allegedly to lower railroad rates but which actually raised the rates, just like the Cable Reregulation Act of 1992 raised rather than lowered cable rates--it comes as no surprise that Fed inflation and Freddie Mae and Fannie Mae "loan guarantees" would lead to multi-trillion dollar federal bailouts.

Obama and the new, more-Democrat Congress have done a great job of continuing the failed policies of Bush, Bernanke, and the slightly-less-Democrat Congress of 2008. So it should come as no big surprise either that the executives at AIG are taking some of the $170 billion that the Fed and Congress spent to bail out AIG and paying $121 million in bonuses to corporate executives (themselves) and other employees. I mean, what's $121 million anyway, when Obama and Congress plan to spend about $8 TRILLION of your money this year? I mean, heck, that $121 million isn't even 10% of the $170 billion bailout. Why not skim 7% right off the top of the bailout to pay themselves for their good job in securing the $170 billion in the first place? I mean, if they hadn't gotten Bernanke, Bush and Democrats to bail them out, why, they would have had to have declared bankruptcy, and gone into receivership. The bankruptcy judge would have appointed a trustee to run the company, and the trustee surely would have fired all of the executives as part of cutting out the deadwood at the company and slimming it down for continued operations as an actual for-profit business. Those executives worked hard to save their jobs at the taxpayers' expense. They actually had to call Bernanke on the phone and ask for a bailout! That's tough work, no doubt, and worth every penny of the $121 million of your money that they stole from the taxpayer bailout of AIG to bail themselves out.

It's funny--or at least ironic, albeit sad--that liberals routinely rail against "the rich" and "Big Business" and then use taxpayer money to bail out both the rich and Big Business. Obama has already said that he thinks Congress should spend another $1 trillion or so on additional bailouts of the financial institutions wrecked by disastrous government policies, so don't be surprised if on Wall Street, the year 2009, while a horrible year for the stock market (which has, since Obama took office, fallen some 25%, from above its 2003 level all the way down to its 1997 level), shapes up to be the Year of the Big Bonus for executives of failed financial institutions. Ain't socialism grand?


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/business/15AIG.html?th&emc=th

Oppose the Obama OmniPork Spending Bill

Last week opponents of the Obama OmniPork bill flooded Congress with 25 THOUSAND emails. The public outrage at yet another multi-hundred-billion pork bill so soon after the last caused Senate Majority Leader and taxpayer-funded private jet flier Harry Reid to postpone the vote on the Obama OmniPork bill until next Tuesday in hopes that over the weekend people would forgot their opposition. So it's more important than ever that you use the link below to send another free email to your senators in opposition!

https://secure2.convio.net/cagw/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=571

ACORN Destroying American Elections

During the election I sent out frequent updates on ACORN's efforts to steal the election for Obama. McCain turned into such a weak candidate, parroting Obama in support of environmental extremism, that Obama didn't even need the cheating. Cheating is still evil, even if you don't need the fraudulent votes to win, and ACORN ran around registering thousands of illegal aliens, convicted felons, and even fictional characters. It's no big surprise that in the trillion-dollar Barrack Boondoggle Bonanza that Congress just passed, ACORN got $5.2 billion. ACORN has turned voter fraud into a science, and with its new federal billions will ramp up its efforts to steal the next election unless we stop it.


http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/acord_destroys_US_vote/2009/02/27/186512.html