Rattle & Hum-bled by the Norwegian Royalty

Opinion 1.0

I want everyone to read this. I agreed and liked Obama's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech in Oslo, Norway. I didn't say everything. I agreed that he should be humbled and have a lot of humility accepting the Nobel. I think he really didn't deserve the prize, that he hasn't accomplished much (if anything). I did like how he spoke of the justification of the Afghanistan war and wars in general. The thing I liked the best was the Norwegian heirarchy with their mouths wide open, listening to Obama talking about war and he just authorized 30,000+ troops headed for Afghanistan. Do you think they were wondering why they selected a war time President for a peace prize? I love how the President mentioned Gandhi and King, talking of peace and understandng. I believe it is called "situational politics", saying the right thing when necessary. Of course, he couldn't make a speech without some miniscule attack on America. I mean, he is the "Harbinger of America Bashing and Persecution."  Case in point, "Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: the United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms." The old back-handed compliment! The Washington journalists and political pundits are mixed about his speech. The antiwar liberal left didn't care for it and a descent number of the right liked it. I did see remnants of Bush in this speech, which is like driving a stake in the liberal left's hearts. I don't think this will help Obama's approval or his poll numbers in the states. He has alienated the independents and now, many democrats. I was disappointed he didn't mention some of the past Nobel awardees, Arafat, Jimmy Carter and Al Gore, Jr. (esteemed alumni). Save our sense of humor.

Obama-yea or nay?:



The No Bull Newsletter is written by a group of attorneys in Australia. You may learn more about them by Googling the name "No Bull Newsletter". This article does give you a great deal to think about!


Who's Really Running the Show?

I have been having a nagging intuition lately that something is not quite right about Barack Obama. I am not suggesting there is something wrong with the man, per se. Nor am I talking about the crazy, even dangerous, policies coming out of the White House. No, lately, I have been wondering if Barack Obama is, in fact, the person who is actually functioning as President of the United States

I mean, there's no doubt that he fills the position of POTUS but is he really the one in command? The man actually seems lost at times. He seems to be reacting to ideas about which he does not really have a clue. He has left the writing of this health care bill to Nancy Pelosi's House of Representatives and she, in turn, has farmed the writing out to several fairly radical community action groups. When questioned about health care, he seems not to know or understand the details and even with his silver-tongue seems unable to demonstrate any leadership on the issue

With respect to Afghanistan and the rest of our foreign policy, he seems equally lost. Especially when it comes to dealing with other world leaders. He makes beautiful speeches but seems to be unable to cut deals which benefit our nation. He seems to be acting as a pawn of much more clever world leaders.

The more I watch the man, the more I see a person who appears to be the "face" of some other entity or group. He seems like a "front man". And it is becoming clear that his strings are being pulled by someone else. He does not appear to be the man in command of the ship of state. At least, he is not in the driver's seat.

You might recall that people said about Bush that he was a front man for the neo-cons and that it was really Dick Cheney that was running the show. It turns out that Dick Cheney was not as influential in Bush's second term as many thought but, perhaps it is true that the neo-cons, whoever they may be, were pulling some of Bush's strings.

On the other hand, with Obama, it does not appear that there is anyone who is visible to we the people or the media who is pulling the strings. If they are there, they are not in elected positions as Cheney was. They are better hidden than that.

We know that he has been and remains surrounded by life-long radicals, professed communists and anti-capitalists, some of whom he has even appointed as czars in his administration. Thirty six czars, to date. But is it Obama who is picking the czars or is it the czars who are running the show and propping up Obama as their front man?

I know all this may sound crazy but, really, when you look at the man without the idolatry and media worship, does he really look like he knows what he is doing? Does he seem to have a direction? Firm convictions? Something he deeply believes in? The more he talks now, the more his words seems empty of content. Platitudes about America and the American people which, when he says them, simply do not ring true. They are words being mouthed but not believed by him.

Okay, so maybe he is really clever, is firmly moving the ship to the left while mouthing the words of a centrist but I don't think so. What I used to think was that he was a really slick conman who was making us watch his left hand while he was manipulating us with his right. But, now I don't think that so much. I think the man is more plastic than real. Now I begin to see him as the "Great and Powerful Oz": a fearsome presence who is being manipulated by men behind the curtain. And while Obama does not have strong convictions, the men behind the curtain do. And they are moving this country down a dangerous path. All the while, we are being distracted by Obama and what he says and does.

Okay, maybe I am simply a mildly paranoid conspiracy theorist. Why, you might ask, have Obama up there? Why not have one of the actual people behind the curtain run for President. Well, being a paranoid conspiracy theorist, I can come up with an answer to that question. Those other people behind the curtain have backgrounds that are so radical that they would never have made it past the first few days of a campaign. Additionally, they are life-long community organizers and they know what kind of face can be effective if you wish to radically change the nation. First, you need a black man to gain the support of the vast black minority. Second, you need a pale skinned black man so as not to be too much of a threat to white Americans. For the same reasons, you need a mixed race man who allies himself with the poor and down-trodden. And you need someone who speaks well enough to co-opt the language of the right and appear to be a uniter, not a divider. Someone who sees, or at least can articulate, both sides of an issue. This is the kind of man you would pick to be your front man so that while you move things drastically and dramatically left, the vast majority of Americans will not believe that was the intention of the moderate appearing front man.

Yes, Obama was a community organizer. Yes, he could be clever enough to have all this be his idea. But he really wasn't a community organizer for that long. And when he was, he didn't do anything truly radical. It was more a time during which he was being trained than a time when he was driven by a personal sense of commitment to anything in particular. There are people who are now in his government who have been community organizers and radical left wing activists for 20-30 years. These people have deeply ingrained commitments to changing the system and have been actively trying to do so for all that time. Obama is not one of them.

In my view, Obama has been trained and used as a puppet by others for a long time. His successes seem to have come too easily, as if they have been orchestrated. His life appears to have been pre-planned. I mean, Harvard Law Review without publishing a single paper of note. That is unusual. A community organizer for a short time, a State legislator for a few years, a freshman US Senator, a convention key-note speaker, and then POTUS. How does that happen? A person with zero governmental administrative experience is running the entire government of the United States ..

How do 1100 page documents get developed and put out in such short order? Who is writing all these proposals? Does it not seem that something is just not quite right here? Forget about the specifics of the policies for the moment. Have you seen this level of activity in the first few months of any other administration in your lifetime? Does Obama seem like the kind of person that could manage this level of activity in so short a time? Too much does not make sense here.

So, slowly but surely, I am becoming convinced that it is not Barack Obama who is running the show. The White House has been captured by a group of people who are using Barack Obama as their front man. He is nothing but an articulate but empty suit. We have to start looking behind the curtains to find out who is really controlling the "great and powerful Obama".

Daft statement of the day:
"Eat less meat and dairy to fight climate change."
Professor Tim Lang, Sustainable Developement Commissioner

CODE RED Action Alert:

We need you to show up at the Capital in Washington, DC on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 at 1:30pm. There will be a lot of people there to protest the healthcare reform and spending in general. Reid and his sycophants are pushing this Obamination of a bill. We need to push back twice as hard. This is your opportunity to voice your disgust and opposition. Please show up and make your presence known.



Kill Bill Vol. III:


Opposition to Senate Healthcare Bill: Call your Senators!

"We the people" must stop the Obamacare Proposals: I am formally asking (pleading) with you to muster up the initiative and enthusiasm to fight the healthcare bill that will emerge in the end of the year. First, there are 2 bills (proposals) that will somehow be merged into one bill. Liberals are adamant about some form of "Public Option." (Government Run Option) I think the democrats believe they can push this bill through while we are sleeping. The democrats have blocked many bills that would allow the final bill to be posted on the internet 72 hours prior to a vote. Why? you know why. We must oppose this more than we did over the summer. Let them know, we are not against healthcare reform, just not a total makeover. Call and email your representatives. I have emailed and called mine so many times, they are referring to me by my first name. Write an old fashioned letter, it has a lot of importance. Attend your local tea parties and townhalls to voice your opinions and make a overwhelming presence. Below, is a little list how you can get involved. It is our civic duty. "It is our Country."

http://www.congress.org/
http://www.joinpatientsfirst.com/
http://www.freedomworks.org/
http://www.resistnet.com/
http://www.teapartypatriots.com/
http://www.teaparty.org/
http://www.taxpayer.org/
http://www.taxpayer.net/
info@cmpi.org
http://www.fairtax.org/
http://www.conservativeamericansunited.org/

CALL YOUR SENATORS! EMAIL YOUR SENATORS! CALL YOUR SENATORS! EMAIL YOUR SENATORS!

Polls you can live by:

28 Strongly approve of President Obama's job performance.
40% Strongly disapprove.
Presidential Approval Rating Index: -12
46% Somewhat approve of President's job performance.
53% Somewhat disapprove
41% Approve of healthcare reform.
51% Disapprove of healthcare reform
-10 difference.
76% prefer a free market economy.

Quote du jour:
"I cannot teach you violence, as I do not myself believe in it. I can only teach you not to bow your heads before any one even at the cost of your life."
(Gandhi talling to Obama at a nightclub in Chicago)
Mahatma Gandhi

Contact: conservative09@gmail.com

References:
http://www.hotair.com/
http://www.thehill.com/
http://www.drudge.com/
http://www.americanthinker.com/
http://www.politico.com/
http://www.youtube.com/
http://www.rasmussen.com/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
http://www.quotationspage.com/
Ed Wynns
http://www.snopes.com/

Hoax & Chains - How is working out for you?

Opinion 1.0

Does everyone get up in the morning and wonder if our inept political leaders really think we, the American people buy the crap and propaganda they dish out on a daily basis? They are a bunch of liars. I don't say this to be funny. It is pathetic what supposed representatives say, whether it is an ouright lie or something very offensive. Personally, I don't rate our representatives on either side of the aisle, with respect, faith or trust. That to me, is very strong language, but, it seems they don't care what the American people want, they will do what they want to do. On Tuesday, December 15th, at 1:30pm, the American people (patriots) will descend on the Capital for a "Code Red" rally to tell Obama and congress, we do not want their healthcare reform and their out-of-control spending. This will be my third time there in four months. I am expecting a lot of people to show up because congress thinks that we are tired and not ready to fight for what we feel is right. They couldn't be more wrong. The 912 DC Rally was grassroots, this will be grassroots. There won't be any big, headliner names, just a bunch of p%#*ed off citizens. Years ago, politicians had honor and pride for the office they held and were representing the will of their constituents. Today, They will lie, cheat and steal for their causes. Senator Harry (Dr. Smith) Reid embarrassed the people of Nevada when he accused anyone who opposes healthcare, was the same as the slavery advocates. Does that mean that Doctors, American citizens or Black Americans (to name a few) who oppose the democrats' version of healthcare reform is a racist? Harry, resign, you are burned out and off you're rocker. You will lose your seat next November, anyway. Reid said they have come to an agreement on healthcare, however, he isn't giving details and other democrats are saying there isn't an agreement. Lie, Lie, Lie. President Obama spoke of how the econonmy is getting better, unemployment is down to 10%, (down to 10%?). I read in two articles today, the government will adjust up the unemployment rate because they forgot about 400,000 unemployed. Minor discrepancy, just an oversight like the TSA manual available online. I believe voter confidence is at an all time low, Citizens do not believe a word the representatives spew. The hypocrisy is running amuck, The treehuggers in Dopenhagen use private jets and limousines instead of public transportation which is almost empty. Pelosi flies back and forth from San Francisco on a government jet that we pay for, but she wants to tax everyone that has a dollar left. Obama is flying back and forth from Europe with his entourage, (Copenhagen), Washington, Oslo tonight, and he tells us to purchase weather stripping for our windows and reduce our Co2 consumption.  I want to be an Eletists! The EPA is attempting to blackmail the congress threatening to regulate Co2 if they don't pass Crap & Trade. I think the country is ready for a revolution. The representatives for the U.S. are not what we envisioned to manage our great nation. Next November, we must vote out a large number of career politicians and vote in representatives with a little common sense. Needless to say, I will right there in front of the Capital, come Tuesday. Save our way of life.

The Obama Deception:



The Washington Post Op-ed and Response to Climate Change and Gravity


Today at 2:34pm

Copenhagen’s political science

The Washington Post

By Sarah Palin

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue.

“Climate-gate,” as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known, exposes a highly politicized scientific circle -- the same circle whose work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference. The agenda-driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worse.

The e-mails reveal that leading climate “experts” deliberately destroyed records, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in peer-reviewed journals. What’s more, the documents show that there was no real consensus even within the CRU crowd. Some scientists had strong doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.

This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. I’ve always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics. As governor of Alaska, I took a stand against politicized science when I sued the federal government over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population had more than doubled. I got clobbered for my actions by radical environmentalists nationwide, but I stood by my view that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of “climate change impacts” was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act. This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska’s economy and the nation’s, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development.

Our representatives in Copenhagen should remember that good environmental policymaking is about weighing real-world costs and benefits -- not pursuing a political agenda. That’s not to say I deny the reality of some changes in climate -- far from it. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. I was one of the first governors to create a subcabinet to deal specifically with the issue and to recommend common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska’s communities and infrastructure.

But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can’t say with assurance that man’s activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs. And those costs are real. Unlike the proposals China and India offered prior to Copenhagen -- which actually allow them to increase their emissions -- President Obama’s proposal calls for serious cuts in our own long-term carbon emissions. Meeting such targets would require Congress to pass its cap-and-tax plans, which will result in job losses and higher energy costs (as Obama admitted during the campaign). That’s not exactly what most Americans are hoping for these days. And as public opposition continues to stall Congress’s cap-and-tax legislation, Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people.

In fact, we’re not the only nation whose people are questioning climate change schemes. In the European Union, energy prices skyrocketed after it began a cap-and-tax program. Meanwhile, Australia’s Parliament recently defeated a cap-and-tax bill. Surely other nations will follow suit, particularly as the climate e-mail scandal continues to unfold.

In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a “deal.” Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people. What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen is more pressure to pass the Democrats’ cap-and-tax proposal. This is a political move. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs -- particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.

Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The president should boycott Copenhagen.

Go Sarah!

Obama paid off Hillary's debt:
I had a sneaky feeling that Obama paid off Hillary. And he did. Our stimulus money (taxpayer funded) paid Bursom Marsteller, ran by Mark Penn, Hillary's pollster, a mere $5.97million and nearly $2.8 million on the contarct went to Penn, Schoen, Berland & Associates who were the pollsters.A large portion of this money was for a marketing campaign for the television conversion from analog to digital. Of course, this money created a supposed 3 whole jobs. Change, you can believe in. And the pay-offs continue...

Daft statement of the day:
"It is morally correct to force taxpayers to pay for abortions."
Diane Feinstein, D-CA

Reid says tentative agreement reached between Dems


Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

By Matthew DoBias

Posted: December 9, 2009 - 7:45 am ET

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid late Tuesday said that a “broad agreement” had been reached on a major—yet thorny—component of a legislative package aimed at overhauling the U.S. healthcare system and keeping insurance companies in check.

But the Senate's top Democrat declined to offer specifics and, in a hastily called news conference Tuesday night, left more questions than answers.

Still, Reid said that the package would be sent to the Congressional Budget Office today for a financial assessment before details would be shared with many of his Democratic colleagues.

Joined by Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Reid said that the deal would ensure that insurance companies would have more competition in the market and Americans more choices, but declined to unveil specifics.

Earlier in the day, however, Schumer outlined an emerging package that would greatly reshape the national public health insurance option included in the Senate's bill in favor of a host of provisions that include an early buy-in for Medicare, insurance industry reforms and more.

Those options would make up a major part of the broader, $848 billion bill that lawmakers have been debating for more than a week.

One model to emerge would create a national menu of insurance options that would be administered by the Office of Personnel Management and closely mirror the Federal Employee Health Benefits program.

At one point, Reid called newspaper stories that labeled the public option as being dead as being off base, then added, “That's not true. What you've heard to this point, you could be surprised what we've sent to CBO.”

“I already know that all 60 senators in my caucus don't agree on every piece of the merged bill,” he said. “But that doesn't mean we disagree with what we said here.”

Sen. Jay Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), echoed Reid's assessment, but hinted he would support the measures. “You're going to find nobody who is happy,” he said, referring to all components of the package.

The group of 10 senators, split among the party's liberal and conservative wings, have been meeting behind closed doors for the past six days, saying little publicly about negotiations but nevertheless pressing a path for reform privately.

Sen. Thomas Carper (D-Del.), a member of the group, said that the CBO could release a score of the revised bill over the next several days.

“We have made a lot of progress,” he said.

A CP hidden camera at the opening of Copenhagen Climate Change Conference:


CODE RED Action Alert:
We need you to show up at the Capital in Washington, DC on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 at 1:30pm. There will be a lot of people there to protest the healthcare reform and spending in general. Reid and his sycophants are pushing this Obamination of a bill. We need to push back twice as hard. This is your opportunity to voice your disgust and opposition. Please show up and make your presence known.

Kill Bill Vol. III:

Opposition to Senate Healthcare Bill: Call your Senators!

"We the people" must stop the Obamacare Proposals: I am formally asking (pleading) with you to muster up the initiative and enthusiasm to fight the healthcare bill that will emerge in the end of the year. First, there are 2 bills (proposals) that will somehow be merged into one bill. Liberals are adamant about some form of "Public Option." (Government Run Option) I think the democrats believe they can push this bill through while we are sleeping. The democrats have blocked many bills that would allow the final bill to be posted on the internet 72 hours prior to a vote. Why? you know why. We must oppose this more than we did over the summer. Let them know, we are not against healthcare reform, just not a total makeover. Call and email your representatives. I have emailed and called mine so many times, they are referring to me by my first name. Write an old fashioned letter, it has a lot of importance. Attend your local tea parties and townhalls to voice your opinions and make a overwhelming presence. Below, is a little list how you can get involved. It is our civic duty. "It is our Country."

http://www.congress.org/
http://www.joinpatientsfirst.com/
http://www.freedomworks.org/
http://www.resistnet.com/
http://www.teapartypatriots.com/
http://www.teaparty.org/
http://www.taxpayer.org/
http://www.taxpayer.net/
info@cmpi.org
http://www.fairtax.org/
http://www.conservativeamericansunited.org/

CALL YOUR SENATORS! EMAIL YOUR SENATORS! CALL YOUR SENATORS! EMAIL YOUR SENATORS!

Polls you can live by:
29% Strongly approve of President Obama's job performance.
39% Strongly disapprove.
Presidential Approval Rating Index: -10
48% Somewhat approve of President's job performance.
52% Somewhat disapprove
41% Approve of healthcare reform.
51% Disapprove of healthcare reform
-10 difference.
76% prefer a free market economy.

Quote of the day:
"The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away. "
Ronald Reagan

Contact: conservative09@gmail.com

References:
http://www.hotair.com/
http://www.climatedepot.com/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
http://www.youtube.com/
http://www.motivational-inspirationalcorner.com/
http://www.americanspectator.com/
Matthew DoBias
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/
Sarah Palin
http://www.thehill.com/

Confessions of a Spendaholic, by Barack Hussein Obama, the Ganef

Opinion 1.0


It's the economy, stupid. In a speech at the Brookings Institute today, President Obama threatened to spend our last bottom dollar. With an estimated $600 Billion still not spent in the stimulus bill, Obama now wants to spend the TARP funds paid back early from financial institutions. Actually, Congress would have to approve this. Is this an admission that the stimulus bill is a failure? Unemployment is at 10% and small businesses are still not hiring. Why not spend the remaining stimulus bill funds, as it was intended for. I can answer that question, President Obama has slated the rest of the stimulus monies in 2010, an election year. There isn't an ulterior motive, just strategic timing. The President spoke of "spending our way out of this recession." That really scares me. Why not use that money to pay back the debt. I posted last week that small business is sitting on the sidelines waiting to see the financial impact they will be burdened with. President Obama is not helping matters with his waffling on any sound decisions that often accompanies fudiciary inexperience. Also, I think the "statute of limitations" has now run out on blaming the Bush administration for everything. Obama criticized the previous administration's mis-management of TARP. He must have forgotten that he voted for it and pressured Bush to sign it. The President spoke of spending money on infrastructure, (highway & bridge construction) small business tax cuts and possibly retrofitting homes for energy efficiency. Why is the federal government paying for our house repairs. I need a new LCD television for the basement?  Obama often talks of being fiscally responsible, if he spends this ill gotten money, he will go down in history as a typical tax and spend liberal democrat. Our government is so out of touch with the people they work for. Maybe that is why his approval is the lowest in history in eleven months as President. Stop spending our Grand kids money.

POTUS speaking at the Brookings Institute:


He never gets it, he was the false choice:


 President Obama, Meet Margaret Thatcher


By Andrew B. Wilson on 12.8.09 @ 6:08AM

Mr. Obama plans to present a list of ideas to Congress on how to "jump-start private sector hiring and get Americans back to work." Here are some suggested ideas for his list.

#1). Begin with the admission that that you, as the leader of our government, are not equipped to solve the problem of joblessness. As Margaret Thatcher said, "The fact is that in a market economy government does not -- and cannot -- know where jobs will come from: If it did know, all those interventionist policies for 'picking winners' and 'backing success' would not have picked losers and compounded failure."

#2). Own up to some fuzzy thinking when you said last week that "I still consider one job lost one job too many." This is the same mistake that Eleanor Roosevelt made when she wrote in a syndicated newspaper column in 1945, "We have reached a point today where labor-saving devices are good only when they do not throw a worker out of his job." Jobs are constantly being both created and destroyed in a dynamic free economy. In a competitive marketplace, every employer strives to become more economical and efficient -- investing in new and better equipment in order to reduce the amount of labor that is required to produce a given output.

#3). This is not -- as commonly supposed by liberals -- a race to the bottom. Rather, it is the real key to lifting living standards and generating stable employment. Through private sector capital investment, workers become more productive, better paid, and therefore better able to trade the fruits of their labor for what workers in other professions or industries have produced. As Thatcher said, "The right way to attack unemployment is to produce more goods more cheaply, so more people can afford to buy them."

#4). Propping up losing companies like General Motors and Chrysler is ultimately counter-productive from the viewpoint of saving jobs. The essence of private enterprise is that businesses go out of business if they fail to satisfy their customers and provide a competitive return on investment to their owners or shareholders. The threat of failure hangs like the sword of Damocles over all business. It is a necessary and powerful incentive for improved performance.

#5). Now would be a good time to announce the cancellation of all future "job summits." These high-level confabs bringing together leaders of industry, organized labor and government only serve to stoke the "fatal conceit" -- as Friedrich Hayek called it -- that it is possible to bring together a group of people who will be able to outperform the marketplace in knowing how best to run the economy. This is a socialist idea, and it has been proven wrong again and again.

#6). Now would be an even better time to announce that you have had a change of heart regarding the misnamed and undemocratic Employee Free Choice Act, which takes away from workers the right to a secret ballot in union elections. Elimination of this legislation would be an extremely positive step in restoring business confidence.

#7). One should dispense with the idea that tinkering at the edges with broad tax credits to businesses that expand their payrolls will do any good. This would have the unintended consequence of rewarding of employers that were planning to hire anyway. More to the point, however, it incentivizes the wrong thinking and behavior. Businesses shouldn't start with the idea of creating jobs; they should start with the idea of creating value for customers.

#8). The best thing that government can do to help create private sector employment is to take less money away from the private sector by reducing both taxes and public spending. Again, as Thatcher said, "Since jobs in a free society do not depend upon government but upon satisfying customers, there (is) no point in setting targets for 'full' employment. Instead, government should create the right framework of sound money, low taxes, light regulation and flexible markets (including labor markets) to allow prosperity and employment to grow."

Jobs or Snow Jobs?


By Thomas Sowell

President Obama keeps talking about the jobs his administration is "creating" but there are more people unemployed now than before he took office. How can there be more unemployment after so many jobs have been "created"?

Let's go back to square one. What does it take to create a job? It takes wealth to pay someone who is hired, not to mention additional wealth to buy the material that person will use.

But government creates no wealth. Ignoring that plain and simple fact enables politicians to claim to be able to do all sorts of miraculous things that they cannot do in fact. Without creating wealth, how can they create jobs? By taking wealth from others, whether by taxation, selling bonds or imposing mandates.

However it is done, transferring wealth is not creating wealth. When government uses transferred wealth to hire people, it is essentially transferring jobs from the private sector, not adding to the net number of jobs in the economy.

If that was all that was involved, it would be a simple verbal fraud, with no gain of jobs and no net loss. In reality, many other things that politicians do reduce the number of jobs.

Politicians who mandate various benefits that employers must provide for workers gain politically by seeming to give people something for nothing. But making workers more expensive means that fewer are likely to be hired.

During an economic recovery, employers can respond to an increased demand for their companies' products by hiring more workers-- creating more jobs-- or they can work their existing employees overtime. Since workers have to be paid time-and-a-half for overtime, it might seem as if it would always be cheaper to hire more workers. But that was before politicians began mandating more benefits per worker.

When you get more hours of work from the existing employees, you don't need to pay for additional mandates, as you would have to when you get more hours of work by hiring new people. For many employers, that makes it cheaper to pay for overtime. The data show that overtime hours have been increasing in the economy while more people have been laid off.

There is another way of reducing the cost of government-imposed mandates. That is by hiring temporary workers, to whom the mandates do not apply.

The number of temporary workers hired has increased for the fourth consecutive month, even though there are millions of unemployed people who could be hired for regular jobs, if it were not for the mandates that politicians have imposed.

Economists have long been saying that there is no free lunch, but politicians get elected by seeming to give free lunches, in one form or another. Yet there are no magic wands in Washington to make costs disappear, whether with workers or with medical care. We just pay in a different way, often a more costly way.

Nor can these costs all be simply dumped on "the rich," because there are just not enough of them. Often people who are far from rich pay the biggest price in lost opportunities. A classic example is the minimum wage law.

Minimum wage laws appear to give low-income workers something for nothing-- and appearances are what count in politics. Realities can be left to others, so long as appearances get votes.

People with low skills or little experience usually get paid low wages. Passing a minimum wage law does not make them any more valuable. At a higher wage, it can just make them expendable. Raising the minimum wage in the midst of a recession was guaranteed to increase unemployment among the young-- and it has.

None of this is peculiar to the current administration. The Roosevelt administration created huge numbers of government jobs during the 1930s-- and yet unemployment remained in double digits throughout FDR's first two terms.

Constant government experiments with new bright ideas is another common feature of Obama's "change" and FDR's New Deal. The uncertainty that this unpredictable experimentation generates makes employers reluctant to hire. Destroying some jobs while creating other jobs does not get you very far, except politically. But politically is what matters to politicians, even if their policies needlessly prolong a recession or depression.

Daft Statement of the Day:
 "spend our way out of this recession."
Barack Hussein Obama, December 8, 2009 Mr. Obama, we are out of money. CP

Hypocrisy of the week:
140 private jets + 1200 limos = Copenhagen Carbon Party. I guess it's easy to promote pulbic transit when your "public transit" has wings and burns 700 gallons of taxper funded fuel per hour.

Kill Bill Vol. III:


Opposition to Senate Healthcare Bill: Call your Senators!

"We the people" must stop the Obamacare Proposals: I am formally asking (pleading) with you to muster up the initiative and enthusiasm to fight the healthcare bill that will emerge in the end of the year. First, there are 2 bills (proposals) that will somehow be merged into one bill. Liberals are adamant about some form of "Public Option." (Government Run Option) I think the democrats believe they can push this bill through while we are sleeping. The democrats have blocked many bills that would allow the final bill to be posted on the internet 72 hours prior to a vote. Why? you know why. We must oppose this more than we did over the summer. Let them know, we are not against healthcare reform, just not a total makeover. Call and email your representatives. I have emailed and called mine so many times, they are referring to me by my first name. Write an old fashioned letter, it has a lot of importance. Attend your local tea parties and townhalls to voice your opinions and make a overwhelming presence. Below, is a little list how you can get involved. It is our civic duty. "It is our Country."

http://www.congress.org/
http://www.joinpatientsfirst.com/
http://www.freedomworks.org/
http://www.resistnet.com/
http://www.teapartypatriots.com/
http://www.teaparty.org/
http://www.taxpayer.org/
http://www.taxpayer.net/
info@cmpi.org
http://www.fairtax.org/
http://www.conservativeamericansunited.org/

CALL YOUR SENATORS! EMAIL YOUR SENATORS! CALL YOUR SENATORS! EMAIL YOUR SENATORS!

Polls you can live by:

27% Strongly approve of President Obama's job performance.
38% Strongly disapprove.
Presidential Approval Rating Index: -11
47% Somewhat approve of President's job performance.
52% Somewhat disapprove
41% Approve of healthcare reform.
51% Disapprove of healthcare reform
-10 difference.
79% believe we should audit the Fed.

Quote du jour:
 "Never spend your money before you have it." (Mr. Obama)

Thomas Jefferson (1743 - 1826)

Contact: conservative09@gmail.com

References:
http://www.hotair.com/
http://www.weeklystandard.com/
http://www.americanspectator.com/
http://www.realcleapolitics.com/
http://www.newsmax.com/
http://www.newsbusters.com/
http://www.thehill.com/
http://www.drudge.com/
http://www.biggovernment.com/
Andrew B. Wilson
http://www.rasmussen.com/
Thomas Sowell
http://www.youtube.com/
http://www.msnbc.com/
http://www.quotationspage.com/