Saturday, May 02, 2009

100 Days of Devastatingly Swift Success
by Newt Gingrich
Posted 04/29/2009 ET

To mark President Obama’s 100th day in office, I’m going to say something you might find unexpected, even shocking:

President Obama’s first 100 days have been spectacularly successful.

President Obama is the strongest domestic Democratic President since Lyndon Johnson. His ability to get Democrats in Congress to give him things that undermine their own power is impressive.

In just 100 days, President Obama has been devastatingly effective in moving forward swiftly the most radical, government-expanding agenda in American history.

Successfully Moving to a European Model of Government Control

At home, in everything from his economic policy to his energy policy to his just-announced science policy, President Obama has successfully moved the country from a traditional American model of entrepreneurship and private initiative to a European model of regulation and government control.

Abroad, he has succeeded in his apparent goal to be the un-George W. Bush; replacing aggressive, if sometimes flawed, American leadership with a humbled, weakened America on the world stage.

Judged by these standards, President Obama’s first 100 days have been a remarkable success.

Getting Congress to Give Him Things That Undermine Their Own Power

The Obama record in the first 100 days includes three instances of spectacular political impunity:
• Under the guise of “economic stimulus” he was able to pass a $787 billion gift for his liberal special interest base. And he did it so quickly that no member of Congress was able to read it before they voted.
• After campaigning on a pledge to end earmarks, he signed an appropriations bill loaded with 8,000 earmarks -- and paid no political penalty.
• President Obama has kept congressional Democrats marching with him in lockstep. House Democrats tow the party line an amazing 94 percent of the time and Senate Democrats vote Democratic 91 percent of the time.
Two Historic Bureaucratic Power Grabs

In these first 100 days, the Obama Administration has achieved two historic bureaucratic power grabs:
• President Obama has transformed the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) into giant engines of unsupervised spending. Together, they’ve spent the equivalent of the entire federal budget for 2007, without having to disclose where the money went.
• Just two weeks ago, the President presided over an unprecedented bureaucratic power grab when his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ruled that greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health. This seemingly innocuous decision opens the door to wholesale regulation of American life by government. The threat is so great that politicians and activists are using the specter of an out-of-control EPA to force Congress to pass a $1 trillion to $2 trillion energy tax in the form of cap-and-trade legislation.
In Foreign Policy, Weakness and Self-Delusion

The Obama 100 days record also includes remarkable weakness and self-delusion overseas:
• In an attempt to overcome anti-Americanism abroad by agreeing with it, President Obama has gone on a global apology tour, labeling America as “arrogant, dismissive and derisive” in front of foreign audiences.
• President Obama has unleashed a domestic war over the meaning of guilt by caving in to the anti-American left and leaving the door open to prosecuting Bush Administration officials over the interrogation of terrorists who plotted to kill Americans.
All Other Obama “Accomplishments” Are Only a Prelude to His $3.5 Trillion Budget

But all these successful expansions of government at home and retractions of American leadership abroad are merely a prelude to President Obama’s looming crowning achievement: His 2010 budget which remakes our health care system, remakes our energy system, raises taxes and forecasts an amazing $9 trillion increase in the national debt.

As I write this, Democrats in Congress are fashioning a deal to pass the budget’s provisions on health care by preventing Republicans and moderate Democrats from having a voice in the debate.

Think about that. The Obama-Reid-Pelosi political machine is going to pass legislation that fundamentally affects every single American -- as well as 17 percent of our economy -- by cutting the elected representatives of half of all Americans out of the process.

If they succeed, the budget will be President Obama’s most enduring -- and devastating -- accomplishment.

Will the Future Bring Change We Can Believe In? Or a Change in What we Believe?

One thing is clear at this point in President Obama’s presidency: His control of Washington Democrats has been so masterful, and his policies so successful, that he has officially claimed ownership of the American economy.

Going forward, it won’t be possible to continue to place blame on former President Bush and the Republicans. If President Obama fails, it will be his failure and his alone.

As for us, the “success” of the first 100 days of the Obama presidency raises a threatening possibility.

As my daughter and columnist Jackie Cushman put it, if we’re not careful, instead of change we can believe in, we’re going to have change in what we believe.

It’s something to ponder for the next 1,361 days.

A little boy goes to his father and asks "Daddy, how was I born?"

The father answers, "Well, son, I guess one day you will need to find out anyway! Your Mom and I first got together in a chat room on Yahoo.

Then I set up a date via e-mail with your Mom and we met at a cyber-cafe.

We sneaked into a secluded room, where your mother agreed to a download from my hard drive. As soon as I was ready to upload, we discovered that neither one of us had used a firewall, and since it was too late to hit the delete button, nine months later a little Pop-Up appeared that said:

"You got Male!"

Friday, May 01, 2009

He Wanted to Take It With Him

There was an Italian immigrant who had worked all his life, had saved all of his money, and was a real "miser" when it came to his money. Just before he died, he said to his wife, "When I die, I want you to take all my money and put it in the casket with me. I want to take my money to the afterlife with me."

And so he got his wife to promise him, with all of her heart, that when he died, she would put all of the money into the casket with him.

Well, he died. He was stretched out in the casket, his wife was sitting there - dressed in black, (what else), and her best friend was sitting next to her. When they finished the ceremony and just before the undertaker got ready to close the casket, the wife said, "Wait just a moment!" She had a small metal box with her; she came over with the box and put it in the casket. Then the undertaker locked the casket down and they rolled it away. 

So her friend said, "Girl, I know you were not fool enough to put all that money in the casket with your husband." The loyal wife replied, "Listen, I am an Italian Catholic and I cannot go back on my word. I promised him that I was going to put that money in the casket with him." 

"You mean to tell me you put that money in the casket with him!?!?!?"

"I sure did," said the wife. "I got it all together, put it into my account; I wrote him a check. If he can cash it, then he can spend it."

Thursday, April 30, 2009

by Patrick J. Buchanan (more by this author)
Posted 04/21/2009 ET

For 50 minutes, Obama sat mute, as a Marxist thug from Nicaragua delivered his diatribe, charging America with a century of terrorist aggression in Central America.

After Daniel Ortega finished spitting in our face, accusing us of inhumanity toward Fidel Castro's Cuba, Obama was asked his thoughts.

"I thought it was 50 minutes long. That's what I thought."

Hillary Clinton was asked to comment: "I thought the cultural performance was fascinating," she cooed.

Pressed again on Ortega's vitriol, Hillary replied: "To have those first-class Caribbean entertainers all on one stage and to see how much was done in such a small amount of space. I was overwhelmed."

Thus the nation that won the Cold War, contained the cancer of Castroism in Cuba, liberated Grenada, blocked communist takeovers of Guatemala and the Dominican Republic, and poured scores of billions in aid into this region was left undefended by its own leaders at the Summit of the Americas.

Nor was this the only unanswered insult. Hugo Chavez, who has called Obama an "ignoramus" and Bush "El Diablo," walked over to a seated U.S. president and handed him the anti-American tract "Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent."

The book blames Latin America's failures on white Europeans.

It opens, "Renaissance Europeans ventured across the oceans and buried their teeth in the throats of the Indian civilizations."

Civilizations? Before Pizarro and Cortez, the Inca and Aztec empires these conquistadors overthrew were into human sacrifice.

Evo Morales, the Aymaran president of Bolivia, who is using the race card against Bolivians of European descent, implied a U.S. role in an assassination plot against him.

Argentina's Cristina Kirchner, who allegedly received black-bag money from Chavez, ripped into America for its role in the 1980s. Under Reagan, America aided Britain in the Falklands War, after the Argentine junta invaded the islands, and assisted the Contras in their war of national liberation to oust Ortega's Sandinistas.

Again, Obama offered no defense of his country.

President Lula da Silva of Brazil, who blames the world financial crisis on "white, blue-eyed bankers," told Obama that any future Summit of the Americas without the Castro brothers was unacceptable.

Perhaps Obama believes in turn-the-other-cheek diplomacy, though it is hard to find much success in history for such a policy. Perhaps pacifism is in his DNA. Perhaps he shares the indictment of America that is part of the repertoire of every Latin demagogue.

Whatever his motive, in Trinidad, there were not two sides to the story. There were the trashers of America on the Latino left and a U.S. president who wailed plaintively, "I'm thankful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was 3 months old."

But, the Bay of Pigs, had it succeeded, would have given Cubans 50 years of freedom instead of the brutal dictatorship they have had to endure. And it took place four months before Barack was born.

Obama's silence -- signifying, as it does, assent -- in the face of attacks on his country is of a piece with the "contrition tour" of his secretary of state.

"Clinton Scores Points by Admitting Past U.S. Errors," was the headline over Saturday's New York Times story by Mark Landler:

"It has become a recurring theme of Hillary Rodham Clinton's early travels as the chief diplomat of the United States: She says that American policy on a given issue has failed, and her foreign listeners fall all over themselves in gratitude.

"On Friday, Mrs. Clinton said ... that the uncompromising policy of the Bush administration toward Cuba had not worked. ...

"The contrition tour goes beyond Latin America. In China, Mrs. Clinton told audiences that the United States must accept its responsibility as a leading emitter of greenhouse gases. In Indonesia, she said the American-backed policy of sanctions against Myanmar had not been effective. And in the Middle East, she pointed out that ostracizing the Iranian government had not persuaded it to give up its nuclear weapons ambitions."

Sandler wrote that Hillary brought to mind Bill Clinton:

"On a single trip to Africa in 1998 ... Bill Clinton apologized for American participation in slavery; American support of brutal African dictators; American 'neglect and ignorance' of Africa; American failure to intervene sooner in the Rwandan genocide of 1994; American 'complicity' in apartheid ... ."

Yet, as C.S. Lewis reminds us in "God in the Dock," "The first and fatal charm of national repentance is ... the encouragement it gives us to turn from the bitter task of repenting our own sins to the congenial one of bewailing -- but, first, of denouncing -- the conduct of others."

Bewailing the policies of Bush as failures and standing mute in the face of attacks on his country and predecessors may come back to bite Obama.

For when Jimmy Carter assumed a posture of moral superiority over LBJ and Richard Nixon, by declaring, "We have gotten over our inordinate fear of communism," it came back to bite him, good and hard.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Interesting Statistic

If you deposited a million dollars into a pot every day since the birth of Jesus, you would still not have enough to pay for the proposed stimulus package.

(2,008 years x 365 days x $1M = $732.9B).

from email

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Arlen Spector Bolts Republican Party for Dems

We always knew that Senator Arlen Specter could not be trusted. Today, he made it official.

Petrified that he will lose his Senate seat, liberal RINO Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter left the GOP today and joined the Democratic Party! That means the Democrats now have the votes they need to jam their big-government agenda down the throats of American taxpayers.

Some of the radical bills on the agenda would be very unpopular with the public, if the public learns what's in the bills.

We must redouble our efforts now to educate the public and pressure the House and Senate to make the political winds howl so that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi find they can't get the votes they need to pass bills to:

*Increase taxes on American workers and investors.
*Nationalize health care.
*End the secret ballot for labor union elections (card check).
*Impose a huge new cap and trade tax on energy use.
*Run up huge new debts.

But we have seen that Democrats are having second thoughts about the details in many of the proposals.

The card check bill is stalled, for now.

The cap and trade tax is struggling, for now.

But thanks to Arlen Specter's betrayal, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have an easier job.

(The rest of the email goes on to ask for contributions, so I'll omit it.)

Chris Chocola
President, Club for Growth

Chris Chocola
President, Club for Growth

Just so you'll know
Fast Tracking Socialized Health Care

LAST NIGHT, House and Senate Democrats struck a back-room deal that puts socialized healthcare on the fast track as part of Obama's massive, tax-increasing budget.

The budget resolution now moves to the floor of the House and Senate for final votes that could take place any time in the next 48 hours.

This back-room deal means Democrats will only need 50 votes to pass socialized healthcare (not the normal 60 votes), and any real debate will be stifled.

Sen. Judd Gregg compared the fast-track trickery to "embracing" Hugo Chavez' political strong-arming tactics, and added:

"What you've essentially got here is negotiations where one side decides to pick up a gun and load it, and the other side has the gun pointed at its head."

If you oppose socialized health care, or oppose back-room dealing, contact your Congressional employee and let them know that you expect them to stop this in it's tracks.

I don't want socialized health care, but I particularly dislike back-room dealing. I operate under the theory that if something can't be done out in the open, then it's probably something I don't want anything to do with.

July 12, 2009 - National Day of Mourning

Centennial of the Income tax

Repeal the Income Tax go here to sign the petition

Understanding The FairTax Webinar

Date: Wednesday April 29, 2009

Time: 8:00 pm - 9:00 pm

Location: Your Home, Your Computer

Notes: The FairTax is a forward thinking solution to our current tax code abomination - a tax code so complex it now tops 67,000 pages- worse, stifles economic growth & punishes people & businesses for saving & investing. (Not to mention stifles ambition and punishes people who want to prosper to provide more for their families. It also punishes people who start businesses and create jobs.)

This event is a Webinar presented by Marc Manieri, CC in Seminole County,FL. After the presentation Q & A will be held.

Future Webinars will include presentations of specific elements of the FairTax to help supporters learn more of about the great features included in the FairTax legislation.

To register, go to After registration you will be sent a confirmation and instructions for logging on to the Webinar.

This presentation will not only be a refresher for those already familiar but a good place for new potential supporters to learn about the FairTax.

The time is Eastern Daylight Savings, 8PM, 7 Central, 5 Pacific.

Contact: Marc Manieri, or 407-719-5117 with questions or for more information.
An Email for Your Consideration

April 17, 2009

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Mr. Obama:

I have had it with you and your administration, sir. Your conduct on your recent trip overseas has convinced me that you are not an adequate representative of the United States of America collectively or of me personally.

You are so obsessed with appeasing the Europeans and the Muslim world that you have abdicated the responsibilities of the President of the United States of America. You are responsible to the citizens of the United States. You are not responsible to the peoples of any other country on earth.

I personally resent that you go around the world apologizing for the United States telling Europeans that we are arrogant and do not care about their status in the world. Sir, what do you think the First World War and the Second World War were all about if not the consideration of the peoples of Europe? Are you brain dead? What do you think the Marshall Plan was all about? Do you not understand or know the history of the 20th century?

Where do you get off telling a Muslim country that the United States does not consider itself a Christian country? Have you not read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States? This country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and the principles governing this country, at least until you came along, come directly from this heritage. Do you not understand this?

Your bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia is an affront to all Americans. Our President does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia. You don’t show Great Britain, our best and one of our oldest allies, the respect they deserve yet you bow down to the king of Saudi Arabia. How dare you, sir! How dare you!

You can’t find the time to visit the graves of our greatest generation because you don’t want to offend the Germans but make time to visit a mosque in Turkey. You offended our dead and every veteran when you give the Germans more respect than the people who saved the German people from themselves. What’s the matter with you?

I am convinced that you and the members of your administration have the historical and intellectual depth of a mud puddle and should be ashamed of yourselves, all of you. You are so self-righteously offended by the big bankers and the American automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about the real thieves in this situation, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Frank, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses, and the Freddie Mac bonuses. What do you intend to do about them? Anything? I seriously doubt it.

What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to their staff members – on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises that lawmakers gave themselves? I understand the average House aide got a 17% bonus. I took a 5% cut in my pay to save jobs with my employer. You haven’t said anything about that. Who authorized that? I surely didn’t!

Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million in bonuses over an eighteen-month period, that's $45 million more than the AIG bonuses. In fact, Fannie and Freddie executives have already been awarded $51 million – not a bad take. Who authorized that and why haven’t you expressed your outrage at this group who are largely responsible for the economic mess we have right now.

I resent that you take me and my fellow citizens as brain-dead and not caring about what you idiots do. We are watching what you are doing and we are getting increasingly fed up with all of you. I also want you to know that I personally find just about everything you do and say to be offensive to every one of my sensibilities. I promise you that I will work tirelessly to see that you do not get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful country.


Every real American


The above is an email that is currently making the rounds of the Internet. I don't totally agree with everything said, and I sort of resent the use of the term "Every real American" in the signature.

I personally want to wait to see what happens as Mr. Obama grows and matures in his job description. I believe that 2008 did not present us with much of a choice for President. I can't say that McCain would have been a better choice, but I do believe that he at least had the experience and maturity that Mr. Obama lacks as a politician. And, I'm sorry, I believe that it does make a difference. I would prefer that my President have some experience of running something such as a city or state before trying to run the country. But, we have to learn to live with what we have, rather than what we want.

I said before the election that, in my opinion, Mr. Obama was too green, inexperienced, and immature in the politicial arena to be a viable candidate and thought that would be his undoing. I think that too many voters looked beyond that and could only see his skin color. I am not suggesting that is the only reason he was elected, but I believe that his skin color was a big consideration for people on both sides.

I think that some of the things he's done, such as bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia (and there is debate as to whether that was really a bow) happened simply because of his inexperience. Perhaps someone not used to meeting heads of state automatically did what others were doing. Could it be that although Mr. Obama knows he is the POTUS, it was sort of a "Wow! That's the King of Saudi Arabia!" and reacted as the "common" citizen he has been for forty-some years, not as the POTUS he has been for weeks? If so, it's the immaturity of the politician, not necessarily that he was bowing in any sort of submission.

There is also a certain amount of courtesy involved. I would never suggest that our President bow in submission to another head of state, but acknowledgement when visiting another country of the sovereignity of the ruling monarch is something I can personally live with. To me, that indicates more character than either submission or immaturity.

As for the signature, "Every real American" implies that if you disagree with the writer, you are not a true American. I beg to differ. I believe that most of the people who support Mr. Obama are "true" Americans who believe that he can make America what they think it can and should be. It's a rather subjective topic.

In some ways, I'd like to return to the "simpler" days of say, mid-twentieth century. But then, they had to deal with WWII, Korea, the Cold War, and without the conveniences of computers, cell phones, microwave ovens, laser surgery, iPod and MP3 players, automatic transmissions in cars, call waiting and forwarding (which I could really do without), the medical advancements of the last 50 years and a whole host of other things that we take for granted. And, if you think about it, sometime in the future, we'll look back on today as "the good old days", or a "simpler time".

In any case. I'm a real American. And as a real American, I believe that everyone is entitled to an opinion. And while I don't agree with everything "Every real American" wrote, he (or she) is entitled to an opinion.

Thank God we still have that right.

The Negligee

A husband walks into Victoria Secrets to purchase a sheer negligee for his wife. He is shown several possibilities that range from $250 to $500 in price -- the more sheer, the higher the price. Naturally, he opts for the most sheer item, pays the $500, and takes it home. He presents it to his wife and asks her to go upstairs, put it on, and model it for him.

Upstairs the wife thinks (She's no dummy), "I have an idea. It's so sheer that it might as well be nothing. I won't put it on, but I'll do the modeling naked, return it tomorrow, and keep the $500 refund for myself."

She appears naked on the balcony and strikes a pose. The husband says, "Good Grief! You'd think for $500, they'd at least iron it!"

He never heard the shot.

Funeral on Thursday at Noon. Closed coffin.
I believe -

That you can keep going long after you think you can't.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Good grief. I can't believe someone actually approved this "photo op". Some one's head was up their a$$ on this one. And yes, considering the money involved in this stunt, I used the $$ on purpose, not necessarily to mask using the word "ass".

What a stupid move. Can you imagine what was going through the minds of the people who saw this happening? People were fleeing from high rise buildings in absolute fear of their lives. Had I been there, I would have been right with them. Not a doubt in my mind.

It's bad enough that someone, Caldera or whoever, had the bright idea to use NY landmarks as a photo op, but I'm also wondering just how much this cost. This dumb move needs to come out of some one's pocket and I don't mean the taxpayer's. It's bad enough that we're paying for Wall Street screw-ups, I don't want to pay for this dumb-a$$ move.

Has Caldera and the WH military office never heard of Photoshop? No, they can't use stock footage, they have to film something new, something exciting! They have to have stock footage they can show when Obama is flying in and out of NYC. They have to burn, and I do mean burn, thousands of dollars shooting film that will be used how? how often? For what reason?

This is one time I want to know who, why, how much, and who's paying for it.

Stupid, no, beyond stupid.


Update: I sent emails to my three Congressional employees expressing my anger over such an act. First, what it did to the people who saw the low-flying planes and relived the terror and horror of 9-11 as they ran from their buildings, and second, over what it cost in the light of today's economy.

Personally, if I were among those running from their buildings, reliving the terror of September 11, I would be looking for a lawyer to sue the socks off someone. Generally, I don't hold with suing "just because" someone endured a little stress, but this is beyond the pale. At the least, it was thoughtless and inconsiderate to inflict this nightmare on NYC without notice. At the worst, considering how we're being inundated every day by how bad the economy is, how long it's going to last, I think there might be some misuse of public funds involved.

As a result of someone's stupid, lame-brained, dumb-assed idea, the taxpayers are going to pay for the 747, two fighters, their crews, and any lawsuits that come out of this stupid stunt.

Maybe the expense caused by this exceedingly stupid idea should come out of the budget of the White House military office. Or better yet the pockets of the yahoos who came up with the idea, and who signed off on it.

Update 4-28: Apparently, it costs somewhere in the vicinity of $56,000 an hour to put AF1 in the air. I'm assuming that's the cost of the 747, fuel, crew, and everything else down to the last bag of peanuts on board.

@ 11:52 am by Eric Zimmermann

How much did the NYC fly-over photo-op cost? If Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) recent musings are any clue, Republicans may be looking to seize on this. It's hard to know the exact cost without more details of the flight, but a 2006 report by the House Government Reform Committee gives us a clue.

The report was prepared at the request of Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) while Democrats were in the minority. (Waxman is now chairman ofthe committee). Entitled "THE COST OF PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE PRESIDENTIAL POLITICAL TRAVEL," the report was clearly intended to criticize President Bush and Vice President Cheney's extensive travel around the country to campaign for Republicans in the midterm elections.

It reads in part: "This report assumes that flight operating costs are $56,518 per hour for Air Force One and $14,552 per hour for Air Force Two. These figures are based on the perhour cost figures cited by GAO for fiscal year 2000, adjusted for inflation."

Now the question becomes, how many hours was the plane in the air?

Looks like the report Waxman requested (to embarrass Bush?) may come back to bite the Dems in the butt.
How Would You Fix the Economy?

This is from an article in the St. Petersburg Times Newspaper on Sunday. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on "How Would You Fix the Economy?"

I think this guy nailed it!

Dear Mr. President:

Please find below my suggestion for fixing America's economy.

Instead of giving billions of dollars to companies that will squander the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use The following plan.

You can call it the Patriotic Retirement Plan: There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force.

Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
2) They MUST buy a new American CAR. Forty million cars ordered - Auto Industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage - Housing Crisis fixed.

It can't get any easier than that!

If more money is needed, have all members of Congress and their constituents pay their taxes.


And maybe Cabinet nominees?
Posted By Bobby Eberle On April 23, 2009 at 7:27 am

Last week, approximately 750,000 people gathered at events large and small to protest the federal government's tax and spend policies. The "tea party" protests received extensive coverage on Fox News, but slight coverage elsewhere. Worse yet, some so-called media outlets actually mocked the events and the people who attended. I guess in their eyes, it's ok to protest a war, but it's not ok to protest a government that is broken and out of touch.

Scott Rasmussen has just released a new Rasmussen Reports poll on the tea parties and how the American public viewed them. The results point out differences in attitudes between Republicans and Democrats, which is to be expected. In addition, the poll found stark differences between mainstream America and what Rasmussen calls the "political class." Those differences sum up what the Tea Parties were all about.

April 15, 2009 was not only tax day, it was Tea Party day. Americans are fed up with government. With nearly trillion dollar bailouts, half a trillion dollar spending bill, and a 3.6 trillion dollar budget, Americans have had enough. There is too much spending and too much taxes. The feelings hit the boiling point with Obama and his socialist policies, but the anger did not start there. It was been brewing for many years, and the Tea Parties were the result.

According to Rasmussen, "Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans have a favorable view of the 'tea parties' held nationwide last week, including 32% who say their view of the events is very favorable." In contrast, "[t]hirty-three percent (33%) hold an unfavorable opinion of the tea parties according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Fifteen percent (15%) are not sure."

So, most Americans have a favorable view of the Tea Parties including one-third who have a very favorable view. However, when the same questions were posed to what Rasmussen calls the "political class," only "13% of the political elite offered even a somewhat favorable assessment while 81% said the opposite." Even more striking is the fact that "[a]mong the Political Class, not a single survey respondent said they had a Very Favorable opinion of the events while 60% shared a Very Unfavorable assessment."

Rasmussen hit the nail on the head, and the video brings it home. Although more Republicans than Democrats hold a favorable view of the Tea Parties (see the Rasmussen poll), the key contrast is between ordinary Americans and the political/media elite. Most of these elitists come from the left, but Washington Republicans also bear a share of the blame. The Tea Parties were directed at ALL politicians who have lost their way and no longer represent the will of the people or who respect that average American.

A "revolt at the ballot box" is what every politician should fear following the tax day Tea Parties. If the media continue to mock the American people, if Obama and company continue to place massive debt and higher taxes on the backs of Americans, and if our so-called leaders act as if they are ashamed of the very country that leads the world, then the American people will be there to not only send a message, but to also take action. It's time the Washington elite find their place in the unemployment line.

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Three boys are in the school yard bragging about their fathers.

The first boy says, 'My Dad scribbles a few words on a piece of paper, he calls it a poem, they give him $50.'

The second boy says, 'That's nothing. My Dad scribbles a few words on piece of paper, he calls it a song, they give him $100.'

The third boy says, 'I got you both beat. My Dad scribbles a few words on a piece of paper, he calls it a sermon, and it takes eight people to collect all the money!'