Obama is in trouble

Here is another one of my predictions.  President Barack Hussein Obama is TOAST in DC, and here is why.  Too many things are happening way too fast for a town that likes to move at a snails pace.  For starters, ObamaCare is causing consternation with Democrats like Max Baucus, the out-going senator from Montana who sold his vote to Obama for some earmarks.  Next year will bring the full weight of ObamaCare tax increase on the public, and it is also an election year in which many Democrats, especially those in the senate,  feel the noose tightening around their necks.

Then there's the Benghazi fiasco where the smell of cover-up is gaining noxious speed.  Then the Justice Department's wiretapping of AP outlets around the nation has brought a sudden chill between the mainstream media (which adores Obama) and the White House.  And the IRS audits of conservatives, conservative non-profits and anything TEA Partyish has even brought the ire of a number of Democrats as well as the ACLU.  

And that is on top of Fast & Furious, Solyndra and Fisker which were pre-election scandals the liberal mainstream press ignored and squashed.

Lastly, the fact that Obama put all his political capital on his gun control legislation which was roundly defeated in the senate last month suggests that Obama's luster has worn.  Obama has crashed and he's now thrashing the political sea to stay afloat.  

It's over, Obama.  Your second term is a thud.  And there's still three more years of this embarrassment we have to deal with, unfortunately.

Obama to play Texas

So President Obama is planning to visit the Lone Star state today to play up the economic growth of that state as if he's responsible for creating such conditions.  Heck, why not, he's president and if he wants to take credit for it, so be it.  But, in the real world, we know Obama has had nothing to do with anything that's happened to Texas economically.

Texas confounds many liberal progressives who see its rich diversity and electoral map as something they can take to the blue column, if only they could convince a group of people to believe in the Democrat party again.  Namely, convince enough minorities and women to vote their way.....and often in one election.

Turning the Lone Star state blue is certainly in the works.  Has been for a couple of years without gaining sufficient grounds.  Why not work at it?  Why not work harder to turn the state from its present growth into another welfare basket case like California?  

Texas has no state income taxes, the people support the Constitution and especially the 2nd Amendment.  Basically, Texans cherish liberty, personal freedom and individual entrepreneurship.  Texans love to work and keep their keep.  How on earth will Democrat operatives be able to convince Texans otherwise?

Obama will be touring a high school and a chip machine manufacturer in Austin.  Seems like whenever Obama tours a company, the company folds a year later.  

That said, here's a question I have for Obama and the Democrats:  Why work to screw up Texas by making it a blue state knowing full well that blue states are struggling with job losses and population flight to the south and southwest due to ever-increasing higher taxes and cost of living?

Dems forget about Obama, focusing on Hillary 2016

It didn't take long for the Democrat party honchos to abandon Barack Obama for someone "fresher", as in Hillary Rodham Clinton who is expected to launch her 2016 bid for the presidency in 2014, or maybe earlier.  

With Obama now recognized as a lame duck president, the very fact that he could not muster enough votes in the Democrat senate to pass gun control legislation showed the nation how politically weak he has truly become since his re-election last November.

Not only is Obama's stardom imploding right before us, but as we get nearer to the full implementation of ObamaCare in 2014 (a midterm election year) with the added costs, cuts to medicare and tax increases, many in Obama's party are now considering abandoning the entire program, altogether, out of fear that it will become the reason why they lose their seats in the house and especially in the senate, where they hold a slim majority.  

The Democrats are now realizing that rather than having bedded with Obama in his first term to get ObamaCare passed (without GOP support), they should have done their homework.  Instead, those Democrats sided with then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi who famously quipped:  "We have to pass the [healthcare] bill so you can find out what's in it."

Well, we know what's in it, for the most part, and it seems like every week we are hearing more and more about regulations that all the more makes us angry that the Democrats and Obama supported this boondoggle monstrosity.

So what are Democrats doing to have us forget all this?

Right, they are now promoting Hillary 2016 for us.  Trying to get us into that lovey dovey fawning mood that got the nation in trouble in 2008 in the first place with Obama.  So we have the first mulatto president, and now we have to have the first woman president, and then eight years down the road, a GLBT president.  All Democrats.  Oh, goody!!!

Now if Hillary wants to run again, I can see it now.  The mainstream uber-sensitive liberal press throwing softballs, avoiding asking hard hitting questions like Benghazi.  Slick Willie standing next to her smiling and laughing ala Yeltsin to throw off anybody who dares criticize his wife's performance at State.  All in an effort to swoon the public again.  Who knows if it will work again, but rest assured, liberal women groups will be out in full force trying to get one of their own, a liberal woman, mind you, to the top post in DC.

Should this nation risk another four years of a Democrat in the White House serving the special interest groups like NOW, NARAL and the Kermit Gosnell Infanticide Institute?

The Unites States of America needs a president who knows how to lead, and who knows about economics, jobs creation, investments, and above all, the Constitution, and who respects that sacred document which binds us all as one people.

We don't need cheap suits with empty heads and forked tongues who double speak to throw us off our guard.  We simply can't afford another wasted four years, period.

Why armed citizens are good for society

Just fished this bit of news out of the internet involving an armed civilian stopping a knife-wielding thug at a Salt Lake City supermarket last night who had stabbed two people.

Now, we often hear about stories like this on the local news, but hardly ever on the national news, and I wonder why?

Another thing that irks me is that we often hear congressional testimony from victims who call for stricter gun control, but very seldom do we hear about gun-owners, specifically conceal carry permit holders, testifying before congress about how they stopped a crime.

We all know that on average roughly 2.5M crimes are stopped annually by gun owners, but we only hear about those violent crimes and the need for gun control.  It's time the voices of the 2nd Amendment supporters are heard in congressional testimony.

Why the flu should cripple Congress

Here's a good one to shake your head.  A bipartisan group of congressional hacks have decided to add a .75-cent flu vaccine tax to help fund the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, which they admit is no where near financial collapse as are Medicare and social security with $3.5B in the bank.  And given the fund has paid out $2.5B since its inception in 1988, that means that conceivably the amount it has banked can last another 25 years without a problem.

Oh no, the savants in Washington figure that with 135M Americans expected to receive flu injections this year (me included), that it could pilfer an additional $100M even though the trust fund is not on the verge of insolvency.  

So why add a tax that will take from the working middle class?  Because it's an easy and simple tax they can get away with without incurring the wrath of the American people.  It's a service tax or much like a sales tax. You buy, you pay. 

But since the VICTF is not bankrupt, are we to believe the entire $100M will flow into its coffers?  Or will  the additional funds be diverted to some other government project or favored earmarks never to be seen again?

That is the $100M question.

But wait, since this is all about funding a government trust fund, I thought there wasn't such a thing as a government trust fun?  You know, like social security, etc.

So writes Jeryl Bier, "As is the case with all government 'trust funds,' there is no cash set aside to pay out claims. According to the November 2012 report on the vaccine trust, the $3.5 billion balance is invested in 'US Treasury Securities.'  In other words, financing a portion of the $16.5 trillion national debt."

And so, folks, there you have it.  Congressional brilliance at work to siphon off more money.....ever more money from you and me. 

And these are the same folks who voted for and against ObamaCare, and are now working to exempt Congress and their aides from the dreaded and costly effects of ObamaCare.  

Help us, Lord!!!

Reliving the left's Bush Derangement Syndrome

Eugene Robinson, writing in the Washington Post, helps Americans divert their attention on the ineffectiveness and failures of the Obama administration by focusing on former President George W. Bush's presidential library opening.

In his latest screed, Robinson reminds Americans why we are still supposed to hate Bush after four years.  He writes, "Hiding behind the euphemism 'enhanced interrogation techniques,' Bush made torture official US policy."  And he goes on to use the recent 576-page report from the Constitution Project to make his point that no matter what, Bush was the worst of all American presidents.

Look, I've had my issues with the former president.  I didn't like the prescription drug law and TARP among a few others.  But when it came to handling the war against Islamic terrorism Bush was spot on.  I remain apprehensive about Iraq still even after reading Decision Points, however I was never privy to top secret intel reports as he was.

That said, I do see and respect that Bush helped free 25 million Afghans and another 25 million Iraqis from oppressive regimes, and set about a course for democracy in that part of the world.  Whether democracy's roots take hold of that soil remains to be seen, and it is both of those goals (freedom and democracy) that liberals like Robinson refuse to accept for they will never ever forgive Bush for the 2000 election.

However, Robinson does end his anti-Bush rant by lauding the number one cause of liberals.  That of AIDS and of Bush's effort to bring anti-viral AIDS drugs to Africa to save the lives of millions.  Therefore, it's okay to fight AIDS but not okay to fight terrorism using military force which then helps to free 50 million people from oppressive governments.

Look, President Bush did what he thought was right for this nation and so we must live with his war decisions and all the consequences.  But remember this, 19 radicalized Muslim men brought us to where we are today.  And we live still in a very dangerous world, and thus we cannot let our guards down one bit, or we may face an even greater peril ahead.  Far greater than what happened on 9/11 and in Boston last week.

Improving federal background gun checks? Sure!!!

The Obama administration and congressional liberals want to pass legislation that would "improved" federal background checks conducted by the FBI on all gun purchases, but when it comes to background checks on foreign nationals and potential domestic terror suspects like Tamerlan Tsarnaev, they just can't get it right.

And we're supposed to believe that a new and improved federal firearms check will stop criminals and the mentally ill from purchasing guns at stores, gun shows or private transfers?