Archive for the ‘Barack Obama’ Category

Yes, Mint Our Money

January 10, 2013

The $1T coin idea you may have heard of is being mocked by conservatives. I, too, think it is a terrible idea, but not for the same reasons conservatives typically give.

Let me propose a better, yet similar, idea.

In order to meet our budget, the government is spending north of $1T more than it brings in in revenue. Right now, we’re borrowing that money from lenders, one of whom is this corporation you might have heard of called the Federal Reserve. Rather than mint currency and deposit it in the Fed, we should, instead, stop borrowing the money altogether. Let’s just print what we need.

Now, people are going to scream that that is inflationary. It’s too late. What the Federal Reserve is doing by financing our debt is inflationary. They’re already printing cash in absurd amounts and sending it off to DC. The difference between us printing it for ourselves and us printing it for the Federal Reserve is that when we do it for ourselves, we don’t enslave our children, grandchildren, and great-great-great grandchildren to debt. The money is ours.

If we do print too much money and cause inflation, then it’s a problem we deal with right now. Once the deficit matches the growth of the economy, inflation disappears. On the other hand, if we don’t print enough money, then we may see deflation, which is a horrible beast far more devastating than inflation, but the solution is, once again, simple and immediate, with no long-lasting effects.

How much should the deficit be? I propose it should be about the change in the real, non-governmental GDP. That is, if our economy grows from $15T to $16T in 2013, then we print $1T in new currency to keep inflation and deflation away. If we’re not too certain, then we can print a little extra, maybe $1.2T, so that we definitely won’t hit deflation. Think of it: this is free money, money that we owe no one for, money that must be printed and put into circulation anyway so that the people have a stable currency they can trust and use for everyday transactions.

We can, today, write a law preventing the Federal Reserve from printing another red cent using our country’s name. Let them make their own money, and see if anyone wants to use it, like any other bank. We can print all of the money our economy needs with our own name and faith and credit, and we can use the surplus that needs to be printed to keep our economy growing for whatever we like.

Some will argue that the Fed serves an important purpose by preventing bank collapses and keeping the economy stable. I say they have a terrible track record, and we are better off leaving that responsibility with congress than the Fed.

If President Obama chooses to print that $1T coin, then I hope he doesn’t stop there, and pulls an Andrew Jackson and takes on the banks and wins by keeping the power to print money to the federal government alone. If he were to exercise his dictatorial presidential powers to do something like that, I would call him a hero.

Romney’s Knock-Out Punches

October 17, 2012

If the presidential debate was a boxing match, then Romney landed quite a few knock-out punches. Obama seemed to put up his guard, and even tried to throw a few punches of his own, but he couldn’t stop the devastating force of Romney’s fury.

The most memorable is Romney’s closing statement. He believes in God. He believes we are all children of that God, and that everyone has a solemn duty to care for one another. After that, he described his missionary service and his service as a pastor, how he cared for and helped the people that he came in contact with in ever walk of life. The message was not so important as the delivery. Here was a sincere man sharing his sincerely held beliefs and his compassion and understanding for every American.

The second most terrible punch was when Romney laid out every failure of the Obama administration. It wasn’t in the spirit of trying to hurt Obama, but in trying to help him understand what has happened to the American people under his presidency. Romney didn’t blame Obama’s motives. He didn’t even blame his competency. He simply said that what he did didn’t work, and it’s time to give something else a try, for the sake of the American people. Every American who has suffered under the Obama presidency felt something, I believe, in that moment. The fact that Candy Crowley didn’t allow Obama to reply probably saved Obama from putting his foot in his mouth. It didn’t matter. There was nothing Obama could say, except, “I’m sorry, I’ll do better next time, if you trust me, which you can’t.”

The third most terrible punch was on Obama’s energy policy. When Romney challenged Obama’s rebuttal that what Romney said was a lie, Obama faltered. He couldn’t answer the question, so he filibustered. Romney gave Obama as much rope as he wanted. When Obama finally realized what had happened, and turned Romney’s time back to Romney, the deed was done.

The question about equality in the workplace for women should have been a gimme for Obama. Instead, Romney got to answer first, and completely obliterated any liberal idea on the topic. One, as governor, he sought out for and hired and accommodated women in the workplace. He remarked that he gave his chief of staff the time she needed to be with her children spoke to the millions of single and married moms in the workplace. Work is not the goal for them: the family is. Too often jobs place work over family, which is why women don’t want to work even if they should. His second point, that a robust economy, where workers are in high demand, does not care about the gender of their employees, and would bend over backwards to make room for women was also heard and understood. Obama’s returning blow was wonkish and weak. Romney’s counter punch was a solid punch landing on a fighter crumpling at the knees.

The first question to Romney gave Romney a chance to unload a series of devastating blows on Obama, one after the other. Obama came out of his corner strong, but from the very beginning, his face was bruised and he was faltering. The mid-way comment about Obama’s economic failure was the point where Obama should’ve turned around, and instead, he feel even further behind.

The question about gas prices and energy policy gave Romney a chance to land several devastating, crushing blows to Obama. The closing remark, asking people whether they are paying more at the pump, more for electricity and heat, more for energy in general, and whether they could afford four more years of that, sealed the deal.

The one faltering blow, Romney’s accusation that Obama didn’t identify the Benghazi terrorist attack as a terrorist attack, didn’t land cleanly at the debate. It even looked like Obama blocked it and countered with a nice sucker punch. While the impression of this to those who watched seemed to be reality, what really happened is now we are going to have a debate about how Obama handled the terrorist attacks under his watch for the next few weeks. Now Obama is going to have to fight the message sweeping America that he is weak and incompetent when it comes to the terror issue. Of course, Romney was right. It took two weeks for Obama to say the attacks were terrorist attacks and not protest rallies about some obscure YouTube video. But that’s going to come out over the next few weeks, and the Americans who plan to vote this year are going to hear it.

This was another disastrous debate for Obama. He is tired. He is repetitive. He has nothing interesting to say. His attacks on Romney were weak and easily defended. At times, he seemed even to parrot Romney. His closing statement was weak. In no case did he try to defend his record. His defenses were either “I didn’t do it, Bush did”, “It’s hard being president”, or “You can’t do any better.” That’s not what Americans want to hear, not now, not ever.

Edit: In terms of devastation to words, this was the phrase that was the most powerful: When talking about how he would be different than President Bush, Romney pointed out that Obama condemned Bush for spending half a trillion dollars over budget. But then Obama doubled it. The audience gasped.

Also, the smoothest counter-punch came when the moderator attacked Romney for flip-flopping on guns while he was governor. Romney’s smooth deflection, that he brought the pro-gun and anti-gun people together, and signed legislation they both agreed to, was brilliant. The counter-punch, that Obama was incapable of doing anything like this, and Romney would resolve the division in DC, was marvelous. It was like watching a master at work. Lots of minds were changed at that moment, I believe.

What Our Founding Fathers Knew But Obama’s Forgotten

September 12, 2012

The political system that the Anglo-Saxons lived under worked in protecting the people’s freedom to live their lives as they saw fit. However, the invading Vikings meant that they had to, of necessity, from time to time, join together, put on their armor and bear weapons, and kill as many of the enemy as they could. We don’t talk about much what the Anglo-Saxons did with the Vikings who survived and did not make it back on the boat. They were killed. They were killed to send a message to the Vikings that they would not be forgiven. They were killed to ensure the next invasion had that many fewer enemy.

Ultimately, the system fell apart, not because of the kings that organized the armies, but the apathy of the people in forming an army and working together.

This pattern has been repeated countless times, in countless ways, in countless cultures. When the people bind together to fight invasions for the common good, they enjoy that many more years of peace. Failure to do so, allowing petty politics to get in the way, means that the necessary military force is not assembled in a timely manner, leaving the country to be enslaved.

The United States won independence from the king because he failed to protect the people. The king became the invader. So they rebelled, and decided to try their own hand at protecting themselves. They were inspired because they had already done so successfully, fighting the French and Indians in a previous war.

The United States government was reformed in 1786 not because of petty political reasons, but because it was the only way they could see to create an entity that could adequately provide for the common defense. Taxes were no longer optional. A single man was the commander in chief. A body of delegates had the power to appropriate funds to wage war. That was the real reason why we had to form the United States under the new constitution. The additional benefits, of domestic tranquility, of unifying the states into one political body, bound by free trade and commerce, was an added benefit, a benefit believed to be necessary to make the first condition exist.

Our federal government is, fundamentally, a war machine. That is why it exists. That’s why we tolerate it. When push comes to shove, we’re going to push harder, and we’re going to make sure the pushers stay down. Our federal government has been tremendously successful in that regard. There is no credible threat to our security and freedom on the planet. The next largest militaries could be wiped out in a matter of minutes or days, if we decide to do it.

We don’t have perfect security. We never will. Non-state actors can still harm us, as we saw on 9/11. So we decided to do things a little differently. No longer could we ignore the petty warlords and terrorists in God-forsaken lands. We had to use our military capabilities to “bring them to justice”, meaning, killing them.

That was the purpose of the War on Terror. Rather than waiting for them to come here, we were going to hunt them down in their own countries, and kill them, before they could step foot in our country. That way, we don’t have to watch for terrorists at home. You don’t have to watch people coming and going through the airports, and scan them for bombs. You find the threats, root them out, and eliminate them. You make THEM live in terror, rather than the other way around.

The Obama Administration started off by declaring the War on Terror over, in not so few words. Now terrorist attacks were considered “man-caused disasters”. Now we were going to try and be buddy-buddy with the terrorists. “Oh, sorry for flushing your Koran down the toilet! We won’t do it again! We swear!” The intended effect was to melt the hearts of our enemies, so that they would be our friends, and we can drink beer together in the White House garden to resolve our differences.

This has turned out to be a colossal failure. The bad guys didn’t appreciate our signs of weakness. They decided to take it to the next level. They would overthrow their governments. They would threaten our allies.

Now, and ambassador is dead. His name doesn’t matter, because he is an ambassador. It wasn’t an attack on him personally, it was an attack on me, you, all of us. It wasn’t him alone that died, it was us. Our power has been challenged.

What does our president do? He apologized. He blames us for the attacks. He says, “You guys have to tone down that freedom thing you got going there.”

You know what, Mr. President? You have completely forgotten what the federal government is for. You have sought an office of an organization you cannot even comprehend the purpose of. It’s like you’ve become the CEO of GM and decided it was now your mission to save the world instead of build cars. (Oh wait, you did that!)

The federal government is a war machine. It exists to keep the bad guys away from our people, so that we can live and work and love and die in peace. It’s there, chained by the constraints of the constitution, and by the power of the people, hanging in the shadows with weapons of unimaginable fury. When one of us is threatened, it steps forward and lays the hurt down. When a lot of us are threatened, we unleash it to break things and smash stuff and make people very unhappy with their decision to fight us.

Mr. President, you have the presidency. Use it for its purpose! Tell these people they are going to die a most horrible death! Tell them they are not worthy to run their own country, and that you plan to establish a government friendly to us, and you’re willing to kill anyone who thinks that’s a bad idea. Tell them!

President Obama, Why Don’t You Sell Your Jobs Bill at Preschools?

September 15, 2011

President Obama,

As you travel the country demanding that congress forfeit even more money of generations of Americans yet unborn, why don’t you pay a visit to any preschool in America?

You can tell the children the truth about your plan. Your message might read something like this.

“I’m here today to explain to you what my plan means for you. See, we’re going to be spending money we don’t have, and we won’t have, probably forever. That means America’s debt is going to grow a little larger. Someone will have to pay that debt, and the interest on that debt, and that someone is going to be you and your children, and their children and so on forever.

“Debt is financial slavery. See, when you go into debt, it’s not unlike selling yourself as a slave. You have to pay principal and interest on your debts, and until you do, your debtor has a claim on your property. You are, in effect, working for someone else. That’s why people recommend you don’t get into debt, and you pay off your debts as quickly as possible. But that’s not my plan for America. I like debt, and I want more of it! I don’t ever want to see our country in a position where we actually pay down the debt, or make plans to pay it all off.

“I’m familiar with slavery since my skin color happens to match the skin color of many people who were actually slaves a long time ago, even though my ancestors were not slaves. You should feel bad if you disagree with me because my skin color is the same as their skin color. I know this isn’t what your teacher is telling you, but I’m going to use whatever I can to get re-elected, and talking about my skin color seems to work, so I’m sticking to that.

“I can’t actually tell you I support slavery, and I’ll tell you that I oppose it, and it’s a bad thing. Why? Well, I can’t really say, except that there would be a lot of very angry people who would probably do something as extreme as start a civil war if I tried to bring slavery back. That actually happened. Radical Republicans used to do things like hide slaves and help them gain their freedom, and they used to even go as far to threaten or even kill slaveowners who abused their slaves. We don’t need that kind of country, do we? Why would someone actually kill someone else over slavery? It boggles my mind, even now.

“In reality, I actually support slavery, a lot, even though we don’t call it that anymore. See, we, the political masters of this country, have been given enormous powers to control every aspect of the lives of the lowly citizen, which are people like you. We believe we have this power because you’re too stupid to understand what’s happening around you. And we use our power to do things like sell you and your future children into financial slavery. We also do other things to you people, but I don’t want to talk about those things right now.

“By supporting slavery, I’m going to get the political support I need to get reelected. See, my entire political power is based on the idea that I can take something from someone and give it to someone else. I am, in effect, no different from the slavers of time past who came to the continent my father grew up on, grabbed as many people as they could, and sold them into slavery, except in this case both those I steal from and those I give to end up as slaves to me. The rich who pay their taxes beg me for tax breaks and favors, and the poor who get checks from the government have to do everything I say, no matter what, or else they think they will die.

“My political opponents, the TEA Party and the Republicans, are opposed to this plan. They talk about things like fiscal responsibility, which means not selling yourself into slavery, and things like individual freedom. They also don’t believe I have the power to control their lives, and they are doing things to stop my plan, things that involve the law and courts and elections and quaint notions like representative government. They’ve even gone to the extreme lengths to arm themselves in case I get any wise ideas. (To be honest, the fact that they have so many guns makes me a little scared of doing things I would otherwise do.) They claim that the power to govern comes from the people, and that the government has only limited power which should only be used to protect individual freedoms.

“I’m counting on you to be good little slaves to the government. Don’t listen to the TEA Party and the Republicans. Don’t think about what they are saying. If you do, you might be “brainwashed” and come to believe in the things they do, and my entire political power structure would be destroyed. Next thing you know, you might actually free yourselves from the slavery we worked so hard over the last century to create!”

I’m sure it will be a hit.

Romney on Warming

June 8, 2011

A lot of electrons have been moved bemoaning the phrase “I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that” uttered by by Mitt Romney in response to a question on global warming. Over at Power Line Blog, the response Romney should’ve given is neatly summarize in hundreds of words.

Look, as one of the “deniers” who sees through the science fraud and can point to solid evidence that should convince anyone that the Global Warming doomsayers are making it up, I cannot disagree with the substance of what Mitt Romney said.

One, “I believe the world is getting warmer.” OK, I have no way of knowing whether it is getting warmer or colder, since I don’t know how any can take the temperature of the entire earth accurately. Certainly, average temperature is meaningless. However, you are free to believe what you want, and here he says he BELIEVES the world is getting warmer. This is not a scientific statement, and I can’t condemn anyone who believes in nonsense of one sort or another, as long as it is harmless. Simply believing the earth is getting warmer is harmless. I don’t hold it against my friends that they believe the earth is getting warmer, anymore than they believe in the Big Bang or in monkeys-to-men evolution. I’m fine having a Baptist, a Jew, or a Muslim in the Oval Office, whose beliefs differ from my most sincere beliefs very much so.

Two, “I believe humans have contributed to that”. Again, a BELIEF.

The only question I care about is what Romney intends to do on climate policy. His stance? Don’t enact Cap & Trade & allow the free market to innovate as needed. The man could be accept every scientific claim of AGW theory and I wouldn’t care as long as he intends not to impose his will on the people, anymore than I’d care if a Muslim got into the White House as long as he intends not to impose his will on the people.

Nothing more needs to be said. It doesn’t matter what he believes, as long as he believes the answers lie within the free market, not government bureaucracy.

What we have in office today is a man who believes he has the power to dictate to the three hundred some odd million Americans how they should live their lives. I don’t care what scientific fact that he cites for justification to do so, I BELIEVE anyone who thinks like that deserves no part in our government.

I don’t expect Mitt Romney to argue about global warming on the campaign trail. I shudder to think anyone would want a scientific debate to be settled on any campaign trail. Campaigns are for rallying your political allies and diminishing your political opponents. Campaigns are for putting people who will protect your rights at the expense of government in office. Isn’t religion and beliefs irrelevant in all of that? If Mitt Romney’s moderate stance on the issue of AGW earns him 1% more votes from the left and middle, then by golly, I’m proud that we have a candidate who believes in something other people agree with, even if I don’t share his beliefs!

2012 is Going to be a GREAT Year for Republicans

June 7, 2011

Before we begin, there are 3 different polling samples, and only one matters. First is “all Americans”, second is “registered voters”, and finally is “likely voters”. Guess who counts in American politics? Hint: if you don’t vote, you don’t get to say how our government is run.

Two polls: #1, Romney Beats Obama among registered voters (Pawlenty is 1 point better than Palin); #2 Republicans are more popular than Democrats by 6% among likely voters.

This is really, really big news. After the massive success of the Tea Party and Republican leadership in 2010, you’d expect quite a few eekers would lose their seats. It’s look like that will not be the case. In fact, with so many democratic senators facing election, it’s a possibility whoever is president in 2013 will have a Republican house and senate.

It’s also apparent that Mitt Romney is the front runner, and not just among republicans, but for the president in November. People know Obama, they know Romney, and they choose Romney.

Romney is going to run a different kind of campaign, where he relentlessly attacks his opponent’s records, broadcasts his bold vision for America (the same vision our Founding Fathers had), and takes away the election in a sweep. He doesn’t have a record that Obama can legitimately attack him on, because if the Massachusetts health care bill isn’t compassionate, then ObamaCare is pure evil.

I don’t know what Obama will do but run against a generic republican. This means Romney is going to be asked to clarify his positions by the voters, and he’ll get a chance to set the tone. Romney is establishment enough that he’ll bring coattails for republicans across the country, but distant enough that he gets to distinguish himself from Bush.

Communists Are Either Stupid Or Insane

May 26, 2011

I don’t believe this is a false dichotomy, because I cannot imagine any other scenario for someone actually supporting communist ideas. They are either stupid, meaning ignorant, incapable of reasonable thought, or insane, meaning they desire that which is not good for themselves or others.

To understand why, you first need to understand communism. The idea sounds simple enough: Let’s have everyone share everything so there is no rich and no poor. Indeed, that’s the idea behind the United Order as revealed by the prophet Joseph Smith. It’s an ideal I aspire to. I want to live in a society where there is no rich and no poor, even if it means that I live a lower standard of living.

However, and this is the key, it is the means by which communism intends to impose this vast equality of economic means that leaves communism as a failed, and outright evil, philosophy. It is this means which the stupid or insane people who support communism either ignore, misinterpret, or pretend doesn’t exist.

Let me help you understand. If you want to have no rich and no poor, then you need a few components to make it happen. One, a way to determine who has more than their fair share, and who has less. Two, a way to obtain the surplus property from the rich. Three, a way to distribute the property to the poor.

Under the United Order, the means are as follows. One, people determine, according to their conscience and input from their bishop, whether they are rich or poor, and how rich or poor they really are. People do not concern themselves with other people’s status, because it is an individual determination between God, that individual, and his conscience. Two, the rich voluntarily give their surplus to the bishop. Three, the bishop gives the surplus to the deserving poor. Meaning, those poor people who refuse to work and support themselves get nothing, whiles those who do are given the means to provide for themselves.

Looking at the United Order in this way, it becomes clear that sloth and pride are both eliminated. Pride in both sense: pride in thinking that you know better than someone else whether they are rich or not, and pride in thinking that you are more deserving than someone else of your own property. Those who live by the order, in their hearts, are rewarded with the blessing of living among people who share their values, and knowing that they have truly sacrificed all they have to the Lord, and what property they have is a gift of the Lord to them.

Under communism, the means are as follows. One, the rich and poor are defined in purely political terms, namely, in those terms which will help the communists obtain and keep power within the government. Two, property from the rich is obtained through government force. Those who refuse to comply are put into prison, slave camps, or executed, along with their friends and family. Three, the poor are given what little is left after individuals in the government and the communist party have taken their share of the pie, which in many cases is not enough to survive.

It doesn’t have to be argued whether or not what I just said is true. We have far too many examples from history, both in our own country and without. Even a casual examination of the facts will expose what I have described to be the truth.

Granted, communists will yell and shout and try to label me an idiot for exposing this truth. This is a demonstration of their own idiocy or their insanity. Being confronted with the truth, they do not argue it logically or reasonably, being open-minded and considerate of the fact that other people besides themselves are capable of higher human thought. Instead, they embrace their own ignorance, or realizing the truth, continue in the march towards communism anyway.

Communism is the most evil philosophy to appear on the face of the earth. The evils of the empire, an absolute monarch who ruled by blood and terror, at least had the veil of securing for the people some degree of liberty. Even the evil Roman Empire, which committed vast acts of genocide and slaughter obtained for the world, at least temporarily, Pax Romana, which made it possible for one tiny man from Galilee to preach against the status quo and form the Christian faith.

What does Communism leave in its wake? Not even peace. Those who live under communism are under constant threat from their masters, the members of the communist party and government. They live in fear, watching every word they say, and doing their best to appear as a good little communist.

One day, I am sure, it will be apparent to all that Satan is indeed alive and well, and he is at the helm of the communist movement. Those who cannot see communism as evil are the same who look over the world and say there is no devil. Being confronted with evil in such absolute terms, and deciding that it is no evil, they can see no devil even though his work is evidence throughout the globe.

The coming election in 2012 is a vote between re-electing a president who obviously supports the ideas behind communism, and is quite open about his support for those ideas, and someone else. I can’t think of any president, not even Wilson or Carter or FDR, that was so open in their detest of the American way and so open in their support of the statist way. I hope and pray our country chooses the “something else” option, to show that we do not want any part nor parcel with communist ideals.

50 Cent Gang

May 26, 2011

An Australian ABC reporter does an investigation in China about the underground Christian movement there. He notices he’s being followed by the same group of people, and then confronts them. Their reaction is priceless.

I installed an add-on in my Firefox, gTranslate, and started going through the comments on YouTube. Most of the Chinese comments are vicious attacks on their state police and spy agencies, calling them scum, garbage, and the whole problem with China.

A few commenters chimed in that the Western media is trying to undermine the whole system of government in China, so that the West can feed like vultures on the chaos that will ensue.

The comments respond to these posts calling them “50 cents”. Of course, they can’t mean the American rap idol! Looking up the slang for that particular Chinese phrase, I discovered that there is something called the 五毛党 — the 50 cent party. They are a bunch of commenters throughout the internet paid 50 cents to post in support of the Chinese government.

This almost seems laughable, really. Yet I wonder what compels so many people to defend the indefensible in our country. For instance, we have for a president, a complete joke and a sham. He has broken every campaign promise, made both to the right and the left. He sets a new record for presidential lows every day.

Just now, his USDA is persecuting magicians for having rabbits, saying they need permits and hand washing stations if they are going to use rabbits in their show. His NLRB ordered Boeing not to move to South Carolina, because that’s a union-busting tactic.

I wish half the things I read about President Obama and his insane administration were made up. I find it hard to believe myself until I see his officials saying those things with their own mouths, and the actual letters people receive from them.

It wouldn’t surprise me if he had his own 50-cent gang trolling the internet, inventing comments to make him look better than he is, spreading the pack of lies he wishes were the truth. Our own representative, Adam Smith, has been feeding us lies about what Obamacare is really doing, and what the Paul Ryan proposal really is, rather than confront the truth and propose a way out of the mess he caused with his own votes to bankrupt America.

Perhaps that’s what the Democratic Party has become today: President Obama’s 50-cent gang.

Meme Busting Bill Whittle

May 12, 2011

Bill Whittle is at it again. He provides clarity in a world of confusion.

University of Michigan Students Call Obama a Liar

May 9, 2011

When President Obama came to the University of Michigan, there were no disruptions or protests of any kind.

When Ohio Senator Rob Portman spoke, 100 students walked out. Why? Because Sen. Portman supports marriage.

But the funny thing is: President Obama has the exact same stance on the issue as Sen. Portman. Why didn’t they protest Pres. Obama?

The answer is simple: It’s because those protestors believe President Obama is a liar. That is, they believe that although he publicly opposes homosexual marriage, secretly he supports it.