Jun 6 2012

Scott Walker Wins! Huge Defeat for Liberals and Union Lackies.

Gov. Walker: It’s time to move on and forward

Mayor Barrett: We have seen this democracy come alive

Fox News projects Wisconsin’s Walker will survive…
Wisconsin GOP Gov. Scott Walker wakes up Wednesday knowing he’ll get to finish his term, after voters by a wide margin sided with him in a recall election that attracted national attention and divided much of the state — from opposing political parties to neighbors and even family members.
However, several key questions remain unanswered, including whether Wisconsin now can move past the recent acrimony and what impact the recall results will have on the presidential election just five months away.
“Now is the time for us to come together,” Walker told supporters after claiming victory. “Tomorrow we are all Wisconsinites.”
Walker’s Democratic challenger, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, made a similar plea in his concession speech late Tuesday night, urging residents to put aside their differences.
“Now we must look to the future,” said Barrett, who also lost to Walker in 2010.
With nearly all precincts reporting, Walker had 53 percent of the vote, compared with 46 percent for Barrett. The margin of victory was wider than many expected and slightly better than Walker’s 5.8 percentage-point victory over Barrett in the 2010 race. Some 2.5 million voters cast their ballots.
Walker’s lieutenant governor, Rebecca Kleefisch, and at least three Republicans in state Senate races survived recalls. Unofficial results showed the Democrat ahead in the other Senate race, the outcome of which will determine which party controls the Senate at least through the end of the year.
The recall effort began when the first-term governor and Republicans in the state legislature rolled back what they considered excesses in the collective bargaining agreements of public-employee unions — an effort to cut Wisconsin’s estimated $3.6 billion budget shortfall.
Wisconsin went for President Obama in 2008, but the recall results give Republicans hope that their presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, can win there in November.
“Governor Walker has demonstrated over the past year what sound fiscal policies can do to turn an economy around, and I believe that in November voters across the country will demonstrate that they want the same in Washington,” Romney said.
Republicans see Walker’s win as evidence voters across the country want their elected officials to keep government living within its means. They said this paves the way for Romney to become the first Republican candidate to carry Wisconsin since Ronald Reagan in 1984.
The outcome Tuesday is also a blow to the labor movement, which poured considerable resources into the failed effort to oust Walker.
Of the three recall elections of governors in U.S. history, only Walker has survived.
The recall effort started about a year and a half ago, after the legislature passed Walker’s proposal to curb public employee union power, while also requiring most public state workers to pay more for health insurance and pension benefits.
Democrats and unions argued the governor had gone too far, and they helped organize massive statehouse protests and gather 900,000 signatures for the recall vote.
Roughly $63 million was spent on the race, with much of Walker’s support coming from outside of the state.
The Republican Governors Association spent $1.5 million in a last-minute, get-out-the-vote effort. However, most voters seemed to have decided long before Election Day.
Democratic groups — including those funded by unions, the Democratic Governors Association and the Democratic National Committee — poured in about $14 million, based on a tally from the government watchdog group the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. Barrett’s $4.2 million in donations were mostly from inside Wisconsin.
The race attracted some big names on both sides. Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie appeared on behalf of Walker, while former President Bill Clinton came out for Barrett in the race’s final days.
Though Romney visited the state with Wisconsin GOP Rep. Paul Ryan earlier this year, President Obama did not travel to Wisconsin to campaign for Barrett, though he tweeted his support Monday night.
Since taking office, Walker has reduced the state budget and seen a drop in the state’s unemployment rate.
Walker, the 44-year-old son of a minister, remained unflappable throughout the campaign, as he was during the massive protests that raged at the Statehouse for weeks as lawmakers debated his proposal.
Along the way, he has become the most successful fundraiser in Wisconsin politics, collecting at least $31 million from around the country since taking office.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Comments Off on Scott Walker Wins! Huge Defeat for Liberals and Union Lackies.   |  tags: , , | posted in Politics

Mar 14 2012

Obama Is ‘No. 1 Regulator’

One week after he signed Executive Order No. 13563, mandating that all executive branch agencies “identify and consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens,” President Obama delivered his 2011 State of the Union Address: “When we find rules that put an unnecessary burden on businesses, we will fix them,” the chief executive declared on Jan. 25, to applause from the joint session of Congress.

Yet over the course of the year that ensued, a new study finds, the Obama administration enacted 32 new “major” regulations – rules that carry an estimated price tag of $100 million or more. These measures stand to cost the U.S. economy $10 billion a year, along with an additional $6.6 billion in first-time implementation costs.

Federal data marshaled in “Red Tape Rising,” a report by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, convey an even starker picture of regulatory growth during the Obama administration’s first three years. Since January 2009, 106 new “major” regulations have been enacted, at a total estimated cost of $46 billion, plus almost $11 billion more in implementation costs.

This track record leads the study’s author, Heritage senior fellow James Gattuso, to label President Obama “the No. 1” regulator in American history.

“Now, there is some competition – and competition not just from Democrats, but from Republicans,” Gattuso hastened to add, in an interview with Fox News. “Both of the Bushes engaged in a lot of regulation, if you look at the record. But on present track, President Obama may be the most pro-regulation president we have ever had.”

The greatest number of new major regulations issued last year – a full dozen of them – sprang from the massive overhaul of the financial services sector known as “Dodd-Frank,” a law sponsored by then-Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts and signed into law by Obama.

The most expensive new regulations, however, emanated from the Environmental Protection Agency, which issued four “major” rules costing the U.S. economy an estimated $4 billion a year.

Spending outlays for the nation’s major federal regulatory agencies has grown with breathtaking speed over the last half-century – and under presidents of both parties. Such expenditures totaled $533 million under President Kennedy; reached $7.29 billion by the middle of Jimmy Carter’s on term in office; skyrocketed to $25.49 billion by the end of the 1990s; and are projected at $57.33 billion for the end of this year.

“There’s a predisposition among agencies, both under Republican control and Democratic control, to expand regulation,” Gattuso told Fox News. “If you’re not doing that, you feel like you’re not doing your job.”

Supporters of the Obama White House contend that studies like the Heritage Foundation’s can never quantify the savings amassed when a given regulation does its job: prevents an outbreak of E. coli that would devastate the American beef industry, for example, or averts another oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, with its catastrophic effects on energy, tourism and other sectors of the economy.

“I think the real question is not how many regulations [President Obama] did, but how good they were, how smart they were,” says Scott Lilly, a veteran of three decades on Capitol Hill who is now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal Washington think tank. “I think [regulation] is driven much more by the events of the times that we live in than it is by the ideology of whoever’s in the White House.”

Comments Off on Obama Is ‘No. 1 Regulator’ | posted in Politics

Jan 28 2012

America After Obama

America After Obama
By Jeff Lukens

Barack Obama has gone from the “one we’ve been waiting for” to the one we can’t wait to kick out. No one ever thought one man could bring the nation to its knees, but here he is living in the White House. And on our knees we have been praying for the day that he leaves.

The audacity of a president hell-bent on destroying our great nation has truly been a stunning spectacle to observe. No lie is too ridiculous to tell about anyone who opposes him. With a compliant media behind him, the smears this Demagogue-in-Chief promises to unleash on his opponent this fall could divide the county so badly that it becomes ungovernable.

The societal tensions Obama promised to ease have worsened by his politics of envy. The racial healing he promised has been made worse. Despite overwhelming opposition, he forced a health plan on the people that few want. He has trampled on the Constitution, and infringed on powers granted to Congress. He has bailed out auto companies, investment bankers and insurance companies. He has given Constitutional rights to terrorists.

Obama’s greatest transgression, however, has been the explosion of government spending to the point where we are enslaved to a mountain of debt that can never be repaid. He has given us $1.6-trillion deficits, and will have added more than $6 trillion to the debt by the end of his term. He has risen the percentage of GDP consumed by government to 25 percent. And all his spending has stimulated nothing.

If you believe what the government reports, total unemployment is currently 15.2 percent as measured by U-6. During Obama’s tenure, true unemployment has been running greater than 20 percent and is near Depression Era levels. In sum, Obama’s presidency has hastened a financial disaster upon the nation.

Obama calls his policies “transformation.” In an earlier age, they would have been considered something akin to treason. Our enemies could not have planted someone to have caused more damage. And now, with financial collapse on the horizon, our very way of life is threatened.

Altogether, Barack Obama will probably go down in history as the worst president of all time. Until now, historians have long given that dubious distinction to James Buchanan, who left office to Abraham Lincoln as the nation was falling apart and headed toward civil war. It is no exaggeration to say the 2012 election is every bit as important as was the 1860 election. James Buchanan at least had good intentions. The same cannot be said for Barack Obama. His intent is not to build up, but only to tear the nation down, and then to cover his tracks. There is no other way to explain his actions.

Millions of Americans, however, have finally had enough. A counterrevolution is rising to a level rarely seen in our history. There hasn’t been this intensity of grassroots activity since the abolitionist movement of the 1850s. People are making themselves visible in the community. They are organizing rallies and call-in campaigns. They are studying the Constitution, and will not be silenced by charges of racism or any other falsehood uttered by the Left.

And when the new president is sworn in, collective relief will be felt across the land. But the long and hard road to recovery will have only begun. Whether America avoids financial collapse will be uncertain for years to come.

For a government that borrows 36 cents of every dollar it spends, the math is simple. We will need real cuts to the federal budget near 36 percent to survive. Factor in modest economic growth and perhaps the cuts could be 30 percent. But failure to make real cuts on this scale risks runaway inflation and disaster. Any way you look at it, people’s pain will be deep, and it will be real.

With Obama gone and the threat of reprisals removed, people will begin to talk, and eventually the truth about Obama’s mysterious past will come out. What was hidden, scrubbed, and not vetted in 2008 — including his grades, his college records, his passport, his personal associations, and yes, even his birth — will all be exposed. It is all just a matter of time. The duplicity and deceit to be uncovered will shock even his most ardent supporters.

Who knows? A pariah status could very well attach itself to Obama on a level reserved for few individuals in American history. Obama could be regarded as the Benedict Arnold of our time. The masses may come to shun him, and rightly so. If there is poetic justice in this world, this will be his legacy.

November is not just another election; it is a seminal moment in American history. If Obama is reelected, expect ObamaCare to stay, the debt to crush us, our defenses to be laid bare, Iran to get the bomb, and at least two liberals to be named to the Supreme Court. If Obama is reelected, America as we know it will be gone forever. Collapse will be certain.

For true hope and true change, perhaps we should try returning to a limited Constitutional government. We all need to be involved. Whether or not we can turn around the disaster Barack Obama has foisted upon us hinges first on removing him from office. Now is the time to go about the work of doing just that. This is the year, folks. Buckle up. It’s going to be a rough ride.

– – – –

Jeff Lukens is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.Comments link

Comments Off on America After Obama   |  tags: , , | posted in Politics

Jan 4 2012

Voter ID Laws MUST Be Used To Prevent Fraud!!

The Push for Voter ID Laws

According to a new Rasmussen report, 70 percent of Americans believe voter identification, such as a driver’s license, should be required in order to vote.

Nonetheless, Attorney General Eric Holder intends to examine new state laws that require photo ID before voting for potential racial bias.

Heritage Foundation legal scholar Hans Von Spakovsky explains there is no evidence to support claims of racial bias:

Election data in Georgia demonstrate that concern about a negative effect on the Democratic or minority vote is baseless. Turnout there increased more dramatically in 2008 — the first presidential election held after the state’s photo-ID law went into effect — than it did in states without photo ID. Georgia had a record turnout in 2008, the largest in its history — nearly 4 million voters. And Democratic turnout was up an astonishing 6.1 percentage points from the 2004 election, the fourth-largest increase of any state. The black share of the statewide vote increased from 25 percent in 2004 to 30 percent in 2008, according to the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. According to Census Bureau surveys, 65 percent of the black voting-age population voted in the 2008 election, compared with only 54.4 percent in 2004, an increase of more than ten percentage points.

The data above also seems to indicate how many racists there are. The election mentioned is of course the where Obama was somehow elected.  Huge increases in black voters with a partially black man running is plain racism.   No one will say that because its politically incorrect to call it like you see it.  Most liberals like their double standard too. They cry “racism” at virtually anything they don’t like. Thankfully people are catching on the the “liberal that cried racism.” Unfortunately, it will be harder to see when there really IS racism.

Comments Off on Voter ID Laws MUST Be Used To Prevent Fraud!!   |  tags: , , | posted in Politics

Nov 23 2011

Dirtbag Hoffa Reelected Teamsters President

“Hoffa Re-elected Teamsters President.  With all ballots counted, Hoffa wins 60 percent of vote in the union’s general election.  James P. Hoffa was re-elected to a fourth term as general president of the Teamsters union Friday, winning 60 percent of the vote.  Fred Gregare of Wisconsin won 23 percent of the vote, while for New York Teamster Sandy Pope won 17 percent.”

This Obama supporter managed to stay in charge of the money laundering outfit called Teamsters.  Money is taken from the union members and after the union takes its cut, they donate much of it to liberal politicians.  These politicians then reward the union with  contracts.  The sad part is, many of these idiots willfully give their dues to an organization that refuses to show its members where its money has been spent.  They also are comprised of many thugs that feel they are “owed” something by you, the tax payer, and the union is the way to take it fr0m you.  Sadly, I am in a forced union position and they have done nothing to get us a good contract. They just want one signed so they can collect their dues.

Comments Off on Dirtbag Hoffa Reelected Teamsters President   |  tags: , , | posted in Politics

Sep 30 2011

Ford Pulls Commercial Critical Of Bailouts After White House Pressure

Not to long ago we showed you Press Conference Chris a commercial Ford aired showing a mock interview with Chris, who recently purchased a new Ford F-150. Chris stated that the reason he chose Ford was he “wasn’t going to buy another car that was bailed out by our government”.

The commercial has now been pulled from the airways and Youtube after what the Detroit News calls “pressure from the White House”.

The ad, pulled in response to White House questions (and, presumably, carping from rival GM), threatened to rekindle the negative (if accurate) association just when the president wants credit for their positive results (GM and Chrysler are moving forward, making money and selling vehicles) and to distance himself from any public downside of his decision.

The article goes on to point out that Ford Motor Company did indeed support the bailouts, before Congress even did. Alan Mulally was a huge player in getting the bailout money passed using his testimony in front of Congress to make a case that without the bailouts all of the American auto companies would fail.

We thought the commercial was great marketing in that it has taken the emotion of the unpopular bailouts and current economic situation and castes Ford as a “more American” company.

 

Comments Off on Ford Pulls Commercial Critical Of Bailouts After White House Pressure   |  tags: , , | posted in Politics