Bourgeois Catholics

From the Associated Press:
"WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama ventures to America's foremost Roman Catholic university, where the country's deep divisions over abortion and stem-cell research have moved to the forefront in a time of war and recession."

Aside from the controversy which he has stirred, Rev. John Jenkins, the President of Notre Dame University, is thrilled to be receiving the first black president to the Notre Dame campus today. And, why not? According to the honorary degree that will bestowed upon President Obama today, he has done wonders to heal the rifts of racism, open dialogue with opposing camps and heal the nation...

The term 'social justice' that permeates the Catholic elite today is actually the source of all of this controversy. It could not have been contrived any better by Madison Avenue joining forces with Mario Cuomo and Ted Kennedy to come up with a single term that gives Catholics good conscience to vote for politicians that legislate and appoint judges that undermine our most treasured doctrines.

Firstly, Social justice presupposes, and without debate, that the ideas and the programs of the left do a better job of serving the underclass than, say, capitalism, freedom and responsibility. Never mind that since the beginning of 'social justice' movement of the left we have destroyed the very values that made this country an honor to God (family, decency, patriotism, hard-work, responsibility). But, we can debate economic policy later...

Social justice allows Catholics to vote for the candidate who supports abortion, supports testing on aborted human embryo's, supports human cloning, euthanasia, supports gay marriage and carries the water for hollywood and the entire pornography industry. That's social justice!! Put all those cherished issues on one side of the scale and put social justice on the other...and somehow social justice weighs out favorably.

On the night of the inevitable election of Barack Obama, many of us could not sleep. We knew from his rhetoric and his party's platform what his plans were for America. The pro-lifers, the hard-nosed Catholics knew that this would not be a good four years to be Catholic. Apparently, according to Fr. Jenkins, we are Bourgeois and narrowly focused. We can't see the big picture.

Thank you Fr. Jenkins for giving President Obama a prominent Catholic platform to help make his case that social justice is more important than LIFE. We can show the world that progressive tax policies are more important than MARRIAGE.

In the words of an ND friend of mine..."my idea of war (with Obama's policies) is apparently different than the Catholic Church's idea of war!"

I pray that something good comes of out this. We can rest in comfort that the Patron Saint of the United States is Our Lady herself. We cannot ask for better than that.

Submitted by D. B. Jackson

JACK KEMP "TRUE BELIEVER"

As I was turning off the television last weekend, having just watched the Boston Celtics defeat the Chicago Bulls, I heard that Jack Kemp had died. I was surprised by the news, I had not heard about his cancer. But I was mostly surprised because I had always remembered Jack Kemp as a picture of health and a source of energy. His energy helped to invigorate the Republican Party in the 1980's and 90's.

I wondered how this football player - and a very good football player - had come to believe what he did. He was one of the few that, just prior to Reagan emerging as the leader of the conservative movement, that went against the forces of liberalism and enthusiastically supported an agenda of low taxes and growth. (And we know, in the time of Pelosi and Obama, how hard it is to go against the tide). He could have easily jumped on the bandwagon and won a house seat as a Democrat in the strongly Democratic New York district where he won and served as a conservative Republican.

My question for Mr. Kemp..."how did you know?" He knew what conservatives take for granted today. How did he arrive at his beliefs? Did he read the great authors; Ayn Rand, Adam Smith, Milton Friedman? Did he listen to the speeches of Goldwater and Reagan? Did he study economics or the policies of the great depression? I didn't learn the answer during the brief bio's on the networks this week.

I did learn that he was an important person in the modern conservative movement, perhaps second only to Reagan. He believed that low taxes, entrepreneurship and smaller government were the keys to prosperity. He was a capitalist. He was pro-life. He was a man of integrity. Jack Kemp was cool.

His words from 1993, as Clinton was trying to do what Obama 'is' doing today, are more relevant than ever.

April 27, 1993
JACK KEMP
All Republicans, indeed all Americans, should commend Sen. Bob Dole and Senate Republicans for blocking President Clinton's so-called stimulus package, a pork-barrel spending plan that deserved defeat regardless of the economy's health or the size of the deficit.

Republicans now have an opportunity to defeat the Clinton tax increases and to go to the American people with a superior agenda for real jobs, real economic growth and renewed American leadership in the global economy.

The first order of business must be debunking the Democrats' notion that higher taxes will lead to a more prosperous America.

These words should be shouted from the tallest housetop, even as Pelosi, Reid and Obama take the country one hundred and eighty degrees in the other direction.

Peggy Noonan identified the source of his strength. His happiness. Leave it to Peggy to nail it !! The link is below.

Jack Kemp - Rest in Peace !!


http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html


Submitted by D.B. Jackson

Orson Wells eat your heart out !!

Seventeen skyscrapers were evacuated after this blunder yesterday including the ten-story where a co-worker of mine’s wife is employed. Terror must have led to relief which later led to anger which then led to the realization that maybe this Obama’s test scores in school are more indicative of his intelligence than his silver tongue. Oh well. If our great country weren’t in play…it might be hilarious.

Here is how the Kansas City Star reported on it:
“Besides costing businesses millions of dollars in lost productivity, the flyover exposed President Obama's staff to deserved ridicule for approving the mission.
For example, callers flooded the lines of conservative talk-shows in Kansas City on Monday. Some claimed this incident showed how disconnected from reality President Obama already has become about Americans' concerns over terrorism.
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg was among the top local officials angered because he was not told about the training exercise and photo-op. (Ut was a chance to take new pictures of the president's plane as it flew by the Statue of Liberty.)
The White House later Monday issued an apology. Obama reportedly was angered by the incident.”

The first 100 days extravaganza is in panting mode for the media…as they prepare to celebrate their new president and their accomplishments in getting him elected. Matt Drudge calls it the ‘Best President Ever Campaign.’

Those not celebrating are those concerned about the economic vitality and security of our nation.

In the meantime, at least let’s criticize the guy for burning a thousand gallons of fossil fuel – after his criticism of the automakers flying to Washington. Oh Al Gore, where are you when we need you?

Submitted by D.B. Jackson

Being a Republican is HARD WORK !!

No one ever said it would be easy.

What is easy, is to get discouraged.

We know academically that we have faced obstacles before and we know that we got through them because our predecessors did not give up and did not get discouraged. Many risked and sacrificed and many gave the ultimate sacrifice.

It is hard to be a Republican and hard to be a conservative. And the opposite is true…it is easy to take the path of least resistance. The late great Fulton Sheen used to say, “even a dead body can float downstream.” Rick Warren gave up the fight. His predecessor Billy Graham (both great men) chose to not engage in the fight. The Pope is one of the few in the international stage that is taking the blows (for abortion, gay marriage, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning).

We have been handed the challenge of our generation. It is fighting back a popular president and his popular uprising. It is sticking up for LIFE, when the world seems to have thrown in the towel. It is fighting to maintain the laws, structure and the tenets that have made America the country that it is. It is defending the family.

We know we will be successful, although we can’t see that direct path just yet. But God doesn’t reward us for being successful, as a nun friend always reminds me, He rewards us for being faithful. God will take care of the success.

I spent last night at a tea party rally. It was much as I expected, a working class, polite, patriotic crowd. About 4000+ people of all ages. Republicans, Independents, Libertarians. I sensed some discouragement, but I sensed considerable energy. We are not focused yet. Our message is all over the board…from stimulus, to affirming our Christian heritage, to health care, to socialism, to fighting terror, to tax and spend liberalism and to immigration…it is hard to nail down exactly what we need to do.

In the end, it is politics that triumphs in a Republic. As long as Nancy Pelosi is writing legislation that will affect the next two generations, grass roots will end up solving nothing. We need to elect moral leaders that share our founding fathers vision of America (and the vision shared by every president since before LBJ and including Ronald Reagan, George(s) Bush).

I find it hard to believe that any of the 4000 in that stadium last night did not vote this past November, but statistically a good number - 10-20% - did not. We need to do better.

We need to motivate and recruit. We need to register new voters that share our principles and we need to 'GET OUT THE VOTE IN 2010.' All the letters, the talk, the tea parties will be of no use if we cannot win back the Congress.

It is also important that we nail down our arguments. We need to know EXACTLY why we are opposed to abortion or stem cell research or immigration amnesty or high taxes. We need to win over the next generation to an understanding of the risks to America that the current course and speed is imposing.

In the end, we know we will be successful. And we will soon see how that path evolves. It may not be easy or pleasant or fun…but it is hard work and it must be done. Keep the FAITH !!!

Submitted by D. B. Jackson

Give Nuance a Chance !!

In a saner world – a world where the good guys are the good guys and the bad guys are the enemies – Europe and the United States would be eradicating these third world pirates from the world’s oceans. These are the days when even the most ardent supporter of Obama is wishing that Ronald Reagan or George Bush could be president for, say, forty-eight hours. Don’t expect anything more than lip service and harsh words for the pirates. The only thing that would merit a response from Mr. Obama is if he was absolutely sure that soft action (a la Jimmy Carter) would kill him in the opinion polls. Bill Clinton was famous for putting on a tough show when the numbers were against his principles (the aspirin factory in Iraq). He was also famous for cutting and running as he did in Mogadishu (hmmm, that’s in Somalia too).

John Kerry, in his failed attempt to win the presidency, used to actually criticize President Bush’s foreign policy as lacking in nuance. That’s correct. I still wonder precisely what he meant. I guess it means, a little diplomacy, a little bluffing and very little gunpowder. The problem is that nuance with terrorists and pirates is like nuance with children – it doesn’t work. Say what you mean and do what you say is the only thing that works. Ask Ronald Reagan. Ask John Kennedy. Ask Harry Truman.

We live with Americans – hopefully just a loud minority- that truly believe that we can cajole the world into peace by talking softly, handing out iPods and apologizing for America. We can even say we are no longer a Christian nation anymore…c’mon, “PLEASE LIKE US, WE”LL SELL OUT ON ANYTHING.”

In actuality, Muslims do not hate us because we are Christian. They never attack the Vatican. They never blow up Baptist churches. They blow up France and Spain all of the time. They hate us because they believe us to have no values. Whether it is our movies, our greed or our dress code – this is what they oppose. Too bad for them! But, don’t apologize for founding a country on Christ and Judeo-Christian values, especially during Holy Week.

Nothing causes a president to lose popularity faster than ‘nuance’ in foreign policy. Let’s hope that this is the beginning of the end for the soft-spined Obama. Let’s just hope that no one else gets hurt.

Submitted by D. B. Jackson

Dividing the Country while Destroying the Economy

Not many years ago in America, when a son asked his father the reason why a classmate or a neighbor had a bigger house or a nicer car, the answer was along the lines of, “he went to college, he worked hard to get where he is and he works hard every day to earn the money.” Today, in President Obama’s America , the answer is more about the wealthy being immoral and greedy; and Mr. Obama uses those words every day to describe the wealthy or the companies where they work.



The president of the United States should not fan the flames of class envy and class warfare, while showing no basic understanding of capitalism and economics. The actions of our current government leaders have been disturbing to those of us that understand what turned America from a collection of agrarian colonies to the economic superpower that we are today.



Over the past fifty years, we have come a long way from the founding fathers' vision of America . Even among the founders, the early advocates of a strong central government would be deeply disturbed by the level of invasiveness and control exhibited by the federal government today and dismayed by the level of federal taxation and debt. None of this, however, would disturb them as much as the rhetoric of class warfare and the shameless promotion of class envy by this president and the other democratic leaders.



The majority of the millionaires in America today did not inherit their fortunes, they earned them. They earned them legally and through education, personal risk and hard work. We need to encourage the next generation of Americans to follow in their footsteps and resist the temptation to use the tax code to punish their success or to garnish additional revenues to temporarily boost the standard of living for the rest of us.



Every dollar taken from the investment class diminishes our ability to create new companies and grow jobs. In the long term, this dollar will produce far more for America in the hands of those that know how to invest it, than it will by the temporary redistribution that is underway. While the new administration learns about basic economics through on-the-job training, I would hope that they can refrain from dividing this country with their rhetoric and personal attacks.

Submitted by D.B.Jackson

The Transformation of Arnold

It seems so long ago but few can forget Arnold Schwarzenegger's introduction into American politics. He was campaigning for George H. W. Bush in the 1988 Presidential race and uttered this memorable line:

"They call me the terminator, but when it comes to America's future, Michael Dukakis is the real Terminator...of the American dream."

Well, it seems, things change. The one-time chum of Presidents Bush is now, in 2009, singing the praises of one President Barack Obama.

In a recent article in Politico, Carol E. Lee writes of the Obama-Schwarzenegger hugfest:

“When have you ever seen a president be that out there?”

That was a mesmerized Arnold Schwarzenegger after Obama’s town hall meeting.

“I’ve never seen that,” Schwarzenegger said to a couple reporters as he and his wife, Maria Shriver, tried to make an exit. “Usually people are so guarded. The aides are always so guarded. They’re so afraid that you will blow it or that you will make news that’s unintended and all those things.”

Schwarzenegger continued to gush about Obama.

“But I think he’s so smart,” he said. “He’s so clear with his thinking and he’s so well informed and has been dealing with policy in all this and is also very philosophic it’s almost like. I think he’s just like – I think it’s beautiful.”

Asked how he feels about supporting a stimulus package most members of his party did not, he said. “You know me. I don’t look at things as a Republican. If it’s good for California, it’s good for me.”

There has been a transformation in Arnold Schwarzenegger from Republican hopeful to Democrat fellow-traveler. This was not an overnight change. As governor of California, Schwarzenegger has seemingly determined that political survival depends upon personal transformation into a left-leaning "governator." The final stroke is his embracing of Barack Obama, a man even more radical than the Michael Dukakis that Arnold once saw as the Terminator.

If you do not think that California's 40-plus billion dollar deficit has something to do with it, you are not paying attention. Arnold sees federal largess as the short-term solution to California's problems that should be solved by common sense governing. Obama comes to California with cash in his pocket and Schwarzenegger wants some of it.

Even has Barack Obama's policies continue to drive the U.S. economy further into the tank with his excessive spending and taxation, some things never change. Money can still buy political friendship.

--Submitted by B. Bryant

No Room for Life

The practice lives in infamy in Scripture and other ancient texts. It is child sacrifice, the killing of children to appease a deity for the purpose of obtaining some temporary benefit.

In Scripture, God called it an "abomination" (Jer. 32:35) and assigned the death penalty for anyone who practiced it (Lev. 20:1-5). Greek and Roman writers attested to the practice, describing its utter cruelty. To destroy one's own children is considered by most thinking people to be the lowest form of depravity.

It is alive and well in twenty-first century America.

This past week, President Barack Obama did what liberals have been wanting all along. He countermanded a Bush-era executive order that barred federal money for stem cell research using frozen embryos.

He did it with great fanfare, reminiscent of Bill Clinton's celebration of partial-birth abortion. He did it to great acclaim. Ted Kennedy said, "Today, an extraordinary medical breakthrough was achieved with the stroke of a pen."

Candidate Barack Obama, like all liberals, castigated the Bush administration for placing "ideology over science" primarily because of this issue and that of global warming. George W. Bush, after agonizing deliberation, could not bring himself to sanction the destruction of human embryos for the sake of medical research just as he would not sacrifice American economic prosperity for the pseudo-science of climate change. To most conscientious people, Bush's actions demonstrated political courage in the face of tremendous pressure, from both the media and politics.

For those responsible decisions that placed human life and human welfare above unthinking science, Bush was pilloried by the media, academia, the left, and some who call themselves Republicans. In his inaugural address, Barack Obama promised to "restore science to its rigthful place." By that, he seems to mean that science goes from servant to master.

In no place is this more clear than with this issue of embryonic stem cell research where human life is sacrificed in the hope of medical breakthroughs. The only difference between using embryos for medical research and the Nazi experiments upon people is stage of gestation. The morality is the same.

Chuck Colson said it well:

"If we deny the things that make us truly human, by definition we create a culture that is inhuman - a culture that, for example, embraces moral horrors like the killing of humans at the earliest stage of life on the spurious grounds that doing so might cure other people's diseases. Or cloning. Or medical experiments on humans, as the Nazis conducted."

The culture of death that this administration promotes does not end with stem cells. In one of his first acts as President, Barack Obama rescinded Bush Administration restrictions on using American money to pay for abortions in other countries, thus putting the United States on the side of the international death merchants. Also, in stressing his objection to human cloning, Obama words were "for reproductive purposes," seemingly leaving the door open for therapeutic cloning, cloning for the harvesting of body parts or the creation of stem cells.

We are truly entering a brave new world...one in which science not only trumps ideology but also morality.

It is both a testimony to modern smugness as well as an ignorance of history that we can condemn the ancients for sacrificing children to a god while we sacrifice them for our own convenience and monetary gain.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Welcome to the Obama administration where we smile and affirm our love for children even as we kill them for our own selfish benefit.

May God have mercy on such a wicked nation.

--Submitted by B. Bryant

Bernie Madoff, Democrat (LINK)

One of the great misconceptions about the current political landscape is that it is the political landscape from ancient history. The media helps to keep the legend alive, but much has changed between the parties.

Some gross misconceptions:

Republicans are the party of the rich.
Republicans don't care about the poor.
Republicans are not charitable.
Republicans exploit the poor.
Republicans pollute more.
Republicans are against science.
Republicans are the establishment.
Republicans are corrupt.

A co-worker once told me assuredly that he always voted Democrat because the Republicans are the party of the rich and the Democrats are the party of the poor and middle class. (Despite the combined income of he and his wife topping $175,000, he still considered himself middle class).

He was surprised to learn that the top 13 richest U.S. Senators were Democrats. The Democrat that he intended to vote for for president in a few weeks, John Kerry, was #1. He was also surprised to learn that the Republicans raised most of their money on donations of less than $50 per person. The Democrats cannot nearly make that claim. The majority of their campaign contributions come from people giving the legal maximum. Over 50%. (I had fortunately just been provided the data from a column on townhall.com).

Ann Coulter's latest column contrasts the four most famous representatives of their party for salary and charitable donations: George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Barack Obama, Joe Biden. It is enlightening (link above). I wish she had reminded her readers about the charitable donations that Al Gore made the year that he ran for president...$147 (sic).

anncoulter.org

Without the time or space to prove that the exact opposite of all of the above misconceptions are true - I will leave you with the thought that 'whatever the democrats or the media tell you is true, the truth is more likely the exact opposite.'

Submitted by D. B. Jackson

No More Talk of Obama's Centrism

Election day had hardly come and gone with Barack Obama winning the Presidency than when we began to be assured by seemingly everyone that he would now "govern from the middle." It is understandable that Democrats would do this, knowing that they would need moderate support for Obama to effectively govern and establish their agenda. What was surprising was how many, supposedly, conservative voices said the same thing. The verdict was overwhelming. Obama, having won while espousing virtually every position of the radical Left and who now had a commanding majority in both houses of Congress, would now throw it all away in a grand move toward the center.

We are now less than two months into Obama's presidency and no one is talking about centrism any more. Barack Obama, true to his far-left roots, in accordance with his campaign rhetoric, and in cahoots with the Democrats' radical Congressional majority, has uncorked a liberal agenda that is unprecedented in American history. None of us who had really paid attention to Obama's speeches over the past two years was surprised at this. He is doing what he said he would do and what his party has been wanting to do for years. That some talking heads believed he would throw that aside in a mad rush to the middle casts great doubt on their abilities as analysts.

Let's have a quick review of President Obama's emerging vision for a "new" America.

• Abortion: Obama's first official act as President was to reverse an executive order by George W. Bush so that international abortion providers would now receive federal funding thus putting the U. S. government into the international abortion business.
• Higher Taxes: Not only will Obama let the Bush tax cuts expire, he will impose new higher taxes upon those making more than $250,000. The marginal rate will return to 39% for these people but new changes in what they can deduct will raise their taxes even more. For example, his proposal only allows those "rich" people to claim 28% of their charitable contributions as deductions on their taxes. This will have a terrible effect upon charitable institutions.
  
• Radically increased spending: Following Hillary Clinton's dictum to "never waste a good crisis," Obama has proposed a trillion-dollar economic "stimulus" package that has a lot of social engineering but little stimulus. Thus, we incur tremendous debt to no effect. Obama's first pork-filled budget proposes a $1750 billion deficit with more red ink to follow.
  
• A Remade Medical System: The American medical system is the envy of the world. Why else do foreigners come here to be treated. Obama wants to transform this system into European-styled socialized medicine. Without going into the long lines for treatment and the reduced coverage, the cost is prohibitive. Obama's 2010 budget contains a $634 billion "down payment" on universal health coverage. The Administration claims that this is two-thirds of their estimated $1 trillion cost of this program over 10 years. Does anyone really believe that this program will only cost $1 trillion to cover "all" Americans, both legal and illegal?
  
• Socialism, More Socialism: The Obama Administration seemingly wants to get the government into "everybody's" business. There are bailouts for banks, bailouts for states, bailouts for cities, bailouts for the auto industry, bailouts for homeowners, etc. etc. This all amounts to the federal government having their fingers in everyone's pie. With federal money comes federally-attached strings. Uncle Obama Sam is no philanthropist. He expects government control in return for his money.
  

These are scary times. The economic problems would concern anyone. Add to that the Obama Administration's seeming determination to literally "break the bank" with radical tax increases and spending in the midst of a growing recession. Only fiscal sanity can lead us to the financial recovery we need.

I see no evidence of sanity of any kind in this new Administration.

--Submitted by B. Bryant

Obama's Recession

During the pseudo-state of the union that Obama hosted this week, I played the game that I downloaded from the American Spectator - OBINGO. It was a bingo card with 'likely phrases' that Obama would work into his speech. One of the squares was "the trillion dollar deficit that we inherited." He said it three times.

I went to High School in a time when they still taught irony. As Obama is pitching the Pelosi pork plan , which will easily triple the deficit in 2009 and 2010, he was blaming his predecessors. Unbelievable!

Obama certainly inherited a recession, as did George W. Bush. And I would agree that Obama's recession is far worse. The difference is, Obama is making every move that will prolong the recession and worse.

He is raising taxes on the very people that create jobs and innovate. He is instituting the long awaited cap and trade policy, which will unilaterally cripple U.S. manufacturing and force more jobs offshore. And this is in spite of overwhelming evidence that global warming is not happening. He is creating a trillion dollars of government spending that will plague the U.S. economy for decades.

None of his actions will have any positive impact on economic activity in 2009 or 2010.

Does he care? Does Pelosi care? No and No. This is about social engineering. They are striking while the iron is hot. They know that they will have very few opportunities like this. A world-wide recession, panic and a democratically controlled country. Heaven help us!

In the end, two to three years from now, the economy will still be languishing. He will still be blaming George Bush. Hopefully, the public will stop buying it by then.

Submitted by D. B. Jackson

Red Ink As Far As The Eye Can See [Link]

Remember when the Democrats complained about $450 billion deficits in a wartime, post-911 budget? Try quadrupling that and you will have the deficit of the first Obama-Pelosi-Reid budget. This avalanche of red ink is just the beginning. Expect more and greater deficits in the future.

The budget that Barack Obama will submit to Congress has a projected $1.75 trillion deficit. When Obama made his grandiose promise to half the budget deficit by the end of his term, he was talking about a deficit in the $2 trillion dollar range. Even with his rosy predictions and under the best of circumstances, we will still be looking at a $800 billion to $1 trillion deficit in four years.

Obama's budget projections, like those of all Presidents, assume the best of all circumstances will occur. That never happens so that projections never pan out. A prime example of that is the money allocated for universal health care. Obama's 2010 budget sets aside $634 billion as a down payment for universal health care. This sum is alleged by Obama to be two-thirds of the 10 year price tag for a universal health care package that they say will cost $1 trillion. If any of you actually expect Obama's socialized medical coverage to cost only $1 trillion over 10 years, I have some prime swampland in Louisiana I'd like to sell you.

We are in serious trouble as a nation. When a nation casts aside fiscal sanity for the sake of ideological or political gain, we are heading down the road to third-world financial status. Certainly, Republicans, as well as Democrats, have contributed to this mess. The Presidency of George W. Bush, while commendable in many ways (and certainly patriotic), was not a time of fiscal conservatism. Because of that, Repubicans must regain their credibility to speak on fiscal matters. They can begin doing that by standing shoulder-to-shoulder in opposition to the Obama Democrat's attempt to turn American into a European socialist state.

Let's hope that someone in Washington will exercise some fiscal responsibility...and sanity.

--Submitted by B. Bryant

Going Hat in Hand to the Commies

In a dangerous world in which the United States is engaged in two foreign wars, the Obama Administration is sending a strong signal as to where its true focus will lie. In her first diplomatic venture as Secretary of State, Hillary was dispatched to Beijing to plead with the Chicoms to continue buying American treasury bonds, i.e., continue funding American deficit spending.

Many Americans ignore budget deficits. This is not surprising since the U.S. has balanced its budget only about 3 times over the past 60 years. We have budget deficits because the federal government spends more money than it takes in via tax revenue. Those deficits must be made up each year by either borrowing or printing money. Printing money devalues a currency and brings inflation so the federal government borrows money by selling treasury bonds to whomever will buy them.

Communist China is the biggest holder of United States debt. China currently holds $696 billion of U.S. debt in the form of treasury bonds. The Obama Administration needs for them to buy much, much more. According to the London Telegraph:

The Treasury says it needs to raise almost $500bn (£350bn) in debt in the first quarter alone. Estimates for 2009 reach as high as $2 trillion, a huge sum in a world starved of capital at a time almost all the major governments are launching fiscal rescue packages.

This need for cash has almost totally silenced any criticism on the part of the Obama Administration of China's human rights policies as pointed out here by the Times of London.

[Note: It is extremely sad that one has to turn to foreign newspapers to find any substantive criticism of the Administration of Barack Hussein Obama but I digress.]

The Telegraph also noted that Hillary Clinton's actions are completely contradictory to her statements while running for President.

Mrs Clinton's plea for Beijing to keep buying US bonds comes in sharp contrast to comments during the presidential primaries when she said Chinese ownership of US government debt had become a threat to national security.

Secretary Clinton tried to persuade the potential Chinese investors that the continued prosperity of both parties depended upon China's willingness to continue funding American debt.

"We are truly going to rise and fall together. Our economies are so intertwined, the Chinese know that to start exporting again to their biggest market the United States has to take some very drastic measures with this stimulus package, which means we have to incur more debt."

To be fair, deficit spending did not begin with Barack Obama. Republican as well as Democrat Administrations have engaged in it. However, it is unprecedented for the chief diplomat of the United States to be sent to a former enemy to beg for money in such a public, and embarrassing, manner.

Maybe this is what Barack Obama meant when he said, "Change is coming to America."

--Submitted by B. Bryant

Mileage Tax Reprieve...For Now

Ray LaHood, Transportation Secretary for the Obama Adminstration raised eyebrows last week with his suggestion of a mileage tax to replace gasoline taxes. In an AP article appearing on Yahoo.com, LaHood said that gasoline taxes can no longer be counted on to fund infrastructure needs.

He said:

"We should look at the vehicular miles program where people are actually clocked on the number of miles that they traveled."

The article went into further detail on how such a tax would be implemented.

The system would require all cars and trucks be equipped with global satellite positioning technology, a transponder, a clock and other equipment to record how many miles a vehicle was driven, whether it was driven on highways or secondary roads, and even whether it was driven during peak traffic periods or off-peak hours.

The device would tally how much tax motorists owed depending upon their road use. Motorists would pay the amount owed when it was downloaded, probably at gas stations at first, but an alternative eventually would be needed.

What is truly interesting is the culprits named for the shortfall in gasoline tax revenue...more efficient cars and a decrease in driving. The "shortfall" is expected to increase as motorists switch to electric and alternate-fuel automobiles. Of course, the term "shortfall" must be interpreted. "Shortfall" refers to the disparity between the spending that the Obama Administration wants to do versus the funds available with which to do it.

The Administration was quick to deny that they had any plans to impose a mileage tax. Their denials ring pretty hollow when you consider the extent to which this Administration seeks to control their message. What this actually sounds like is a minor Administration official floating a trial balloon so that administration can immediately shoot down. What makes the Obama Administration's denials even more questionable is the fact that a blue ribbon national transportation commission is expected release their report next week recommending the adoption of a mileage tax. In such a case, the Obama Administration could immediately say that they oppose such a tax but must consider it because the "experts" say it is needed.

The upshot of all of this is the old canard that "no good deed goes unpunished." American motorists have responded to high gasoline prices by doing what the Left has wanted all along. They have reduced their driving and switched to more fuel-efficient vehicles. This has resulted in something that the Left loathes far more than carbon fuels...lower tax revenues.

Be warned, dear readers, this is only the beginning. Just as Larry Holmes said that Michael Spinks threw punches from places he had never seen, this adminstration will bring new tax proposals in ways never anticipated by the public.

I wonder if the American people will continue to go along with the Obama Administration's radical plans to impose European-styled socialism on the most efficient industrial society in history.

We will have to wait and see but, for my take, like Rush Limbaugh, I hope Obama fails...miserably!!!

--Submitted by B. Bryant

Now She Tells Us

After years of media disparagement of George W. Bush and portrayals of him as being out of touch and inarticulate, a major news personality finally sets the record straight. In an interview with Lloyd Grove of The Daily Beast, CBS News anchor Katie Couric let slip a trade secret of the national news: "George W. Bush was not the ignoramus we made him out to be."

Couric said this to Grove:

I didn’t get a chance to interview President Bush all that often. I often went to lunches that I was invited to before the State of the Union, before they announced the "surge," and that was really interesting because I think President Bush felt a lot more relaxed and was a lot more facile with information and details and policy than I think probably the American people gave him credit for and were exposed to.

Couric's last statement..."were exposed to"...is the most telling statement. If the American people somehow drew the conclusion that George W. Bush was not intellectually up to the task (I'm not sure they did even though it was an article of faith among the American Left), it was because he was portrayed that way by the mainstream media.

I will be waiting with bated breath to see if Ms. Couric and Co. apply the same standard (or lack thereof) in reporting on President Barack Hussein Obama. Somehow, I think we will see a stark change in how the presidency is viewed.

Prove me wrong, Ms. Couric...please!

--Submitted by B. Bryant

Amateur Hour

"The bottom-line is, Obama has no idea what the hell he is doing." Mark Levin

"This is Amateur Hour!!" Dick Morris

We have confirmed two things this week. Democrats love to raise our taxes, but will do almost anything to avoid paying them themselves. Over half of Obama's nominees have had serious tax problems. Tom Daschle topped the list with over $100K of back taxes.

The other obvious conclusion here is...these jackasses have no idea what they are doing.

The trouble is..change is coming and the lemmings that elected Obama and those that did not are watching the conversion of our wealthy and moral country as it is being fed to the wolves of socialism and secularism.

Abortion is being forced down our throat and so is government run industry; complete with salary caps for the investment class.

Nothing that has happened should come as a surprise to his supporters or his detractors. If it does, you have been in a coma. He is a Saul Alinsky and Jeremiah Wright disciple and he is executing the game plan.

The good news is, the Republicans are standing up to him and the public is wary of some of the tactics and, certainly the specifics of the stimulus package.

We picked a bad time to fight. It is going to be a bad year to be a Catholic and a bad year to be a Capitalist.

Can we do more than slow things down? We'll try.

Submitted by D. B. Jackson

1_20_09: CHANGE !!

Dana Delaney (some actress, I have never seen her in anything) was asked by a fox news reporter what the most important thing that Obama can do now that he is president. She said that he needs to "make abortion accessible to all women in all nations." Did you hear a single democrat, actress, reporter or college professor ever say that abortion was the most important thing that the president can do at any time DURING the election? I certainly did not. They were well behaved then. They talked about war, privacy, global warming...

Two things that Obama has in abundance is Charm and Self-confidence.

As we enter into his first term, the electorate appears willing to follow our new leader almost anywhere. People follow confidence, especially in troubled times - if you add an warm smile to that confidence, we'll go almost anywhere.

Policy? Ideas? Doctrine? These are now meaningless concepts as we are told that we are to 'give our new leader a chance.'

A chance to do what? I'll give him a chance. He has signaled a move to the center (a weak signal), especially regarding economic issues.

A woman asked me today, what would cause you to turn on him. Any one of the following, I replied:

1. Abortion
2. Gays in the Military
3. The retreat on the war on terror.

She disagreed with me 100% on each item. She accused me of intolerance. She almost said that she would turn on our new president if he didn't do the exact opposite of my direction. I didn't accuse of her of intolerance.

In the end, the stimulus package under BHO would have been 90% the same as the stimulus package had MCain won the election or Bush remained in office. The things that matter over the long run, the things that make America the greatest nation on earth are in jeopardy.

Tomorrow, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, hundreds of thousands of Americans will protest the 1973 ruling - an abomination of law if there ever was one. I expect that Obama will sign, as an executive order, the Freedom of Choice Act that very day...just a few thousand feet away from these silent protestors. If we say anything but 'thank you, sir, may I have another,' then we are not supporting the president.

I'll give him a chance. That is more than Bruce Springsteen and Al Franken did for the former president.

Submitted By D. B. Jackson

Had Enough?

When people ask me what my problem with the Democrats is, I usually net it out to the following…

They don’t understand economics.
They don’t have a clue about defense or international relations
They don’t understand human nature
They are hostile to religion and the first amendment
They don’t recognize the second amendment
And because they have no serious scrutiny from the media, they tend to be much more corrupt.
(and that is REALLY netting it out, I could go on much longer)

To prove my last point, I would pit the last few weeks of the ‘president-elect’ period against any in history for corruption, incompetence and circus. Had enough? We still have a couple weeks to go…and then four years of the media swooning over the soon-to-be accomplishments of the country’s greatest future president. When the scandals are filling the front page of the left wing media, you know you have a serious ‘tip of the iceberg’ situation in the party. It stands to reason.

To name a few:
Democratic IL governor tries to sell and profit from the vacant Obama senate seat.
Amidst indictment, impeachment and scandal, he cynically appoints a black statesman from IL to occupy the seat
MN Canvassing board steals an election from the ‘election night’ winner Norm Coleman and hands it to an SNL comic
Bill Richardson, ex Gov. of NM pulls his name out of the nomination process for Commerce Secretary amidst some quid pro quo scandal investigation in NM. For this media favorite to withdraw without a fight, the situation must be BAD.

Had enough? We have a long way to go.

Submitted by D. B. Jackson