Need Help Today!!!

This is from my sister-in-law. I encourage everyone to please read it and make some phone calls.

Hello Friends,

The Senate is trying to pass, on a weekend so there is less press coverage - the 2,000 page health care bill, that they haven't even had time to read fully, TOMORROW. So I'm sending the link below with a plea to you, to call both your senator's office and Harry Reid's office today - phone calls do matter even if your senator already doesn't support the health care bill. Plus you can send information to anyone you know, especially anyone in Nevada and any of the blue dog democrat states. I talked with my Senator's office yesterday and they said the only thing we can do at this point is call - and spread the word so that others call. So I'm doing it - the prospect of this passing is frightening.

Here's a link to show all the added taxes - frightening stuff even if we aren't considering the way the quality of health care will decline and the socialistic nature of this bill!

http://www.atr.org/userfiles/111809pr-comptaxreid%282%29.pdf

There is no excuse for not doing something if you believe it's wrong. Please call.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091119-717535.html

Jenn

To find your US senator and contact info:
http://www.senate.gov/

Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You... Unless You're a Democrat

In local Utah news, a mayor was voted out of office this week. A few days before the election, this mayor had fired a police officer for giving his son a ticket for driving without a license. The question is: Had it been anyone other than his son, would he have acted the same way? (I guess the public thought not.)

The past year since the presidential election has been an eye-opening experience. For example, what if George W. Bush had talked about the amount of lives he saved that would have been lost had his policies not been in place during Hurricane Katrina? He would have been ridiculed.

Yet Pres. Obama continues to cite jobs that he's saved that would have been lost had it not been for the stimulus, and where is the uproar from the Democrats as jobs continue to be lost in droves?

Democrats were in an uproar about Bush golfing while troops were dying in Iraq. (He decided to give up golf for that very reason.) Yet they are silent as we find out that Pres. Obama has already played more rounds of golf in 9 months than Pres. Bush did in his entire presidency. Troops are still dying, and our economy is crumbling. Where are the protests?

In fact, August was the deadliest month for troops in Afghanistan. Barack Obama could have pulled all of the troops out of Afghanistan. Where is the uproar?

(I actually gained a little bit of respect for Cindy Sheehan as she protested Barack Obama for vacationing in Martha's vineyard. Unfortunately, there was no support from fellow Democrats (or the "unbiased" media.))

If it's Democrats protesting, then they're exercising their rights to free speech. If it's Republicans protesting, it's a bunch of crazy, mind-numb kooks that should be ignored. Ever notice how you never hear of Republicans trashing Democrats for protesting? We understand it's an important right.

Any liberals reading need to be honest with themselves. Let's say that a story broke tomorrow that said:

"Pres. George W. Bush Accused of Conspiring to Hide Evidence in Afghanistan Deaths"

Now what if the story instead said:

"Pres. Barack Obama Accused of Conspiring to Hide Evidence in Afghanistan Deaths"

If how you react to the story depends on who the story is about, there is something wrong. A principled person would react the same regardless of who the story was about.

Democrats' opinions are based on what is politically expedient at the time. That is why they haven't passed health care reform. If Democrats truly believed that universal health care was a right of every American, they would simply pass the bill based on principle. They have the majority -- There is nothing that the Republicans could do to stop the bill from being passed. But Democrats are scared, because the vote they thought would make them popular with the masses is turning out to be extremely controversial.. but they now have to pursue the bill because they can't afford the implications of a political loss this early in Barack Obama's presidency.

When Pres. George W. Bush sent our troops to war, Republicans supported him. (So did Democrats... until it was no longer politically expedient.) When Pres. Bush passed his tax cuts, Republicans supported him.

But when George W. Bush supported the McCain / Kennedy immigration bill, Republicans protested and fought against the bill. When he wanted to bail out the banking industry, Republicans protested and fought hard against the bill.

For Republicans, it truly doesn't matter who presents the idea. If Barack Obama were to announce tomorrow that he was slashing the capital gains tax in order to stimulate investment, Republicans around the country would cheer and support him.

This is all generally speaking, obviously. I'm sure there are principled Democrats and unprincipled Republicans. But I believe the last year has been telling.

Any other examples come to mind?

Is This What Liberals Really Think?

Bill Maher was on The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien on Monday night. I think it goes without saying that Maher is a liberal (regardless of what he claims to be -- A libertarian would never support government-run health care.) What scared me about the interview was that Bill Maher might be saying what other liberals are thinking. Here are a few highlights:

CONAN O'BRIEN: Some people got upset because you said that America is stupid.
BILL MAHER: Yes.
O'BRIEN: And they got upset.
MAHER: You know who did? The stupid people.

O'BRIEN: You have said, and you may have a point here, that you think that President Obama, uh, in how many day has he been in office now? They were counting for a while. It's his ninth day. It's his 100th day. And I don't know what it is now -- it's 140 days, 120 days in office -- that he's overexposed. Do you think our president is overexposed?
MAHER: Well, he is. I mean, at some point, 'Change we can believe in' became, you know, 'Tyler Perry meets the Obamas,' which is fine. I like him. I mean, let's put this in perspective. I'm glad he is the president. You know, I mean, it's a big difference from what we had, just grammatically, you know.
When the president speaks, English teachers don't cry now. But, yeah, there is a fine line between transparency, which we did not have with the previous administration, and being overexposed.
I mean, I get it. He likes to be on TV. I like my bong. I take it out of my mouth every once in a while.

MAHER: Right, right. Uh, but, yeah, I mean, you know, they're talking about 60 votes they need. Forget this stuff, 60.... You can't get Americans to agree on anything 60 percent. Sixty percent of people don't believe in evolution in this country.
He just needs to drag them to it. Like I just said, they're stupid. Just drag them to this. Get health care done, you know, with or without them. Make the Gang of Six an offer they can't refuse. This Max Baucus guy? He needs to wake up tomorrow with an intern's head in his bed.
O'BRIEN: Good Lord.
MAHER: I'm serious. You know, this is where, I said this months ago and people criticized me, this is where the president needs to be a little more like Bush. Bush had horrible ideas -- torture, deregulation, massive tax cuts for the rich, preemptive war -- horrible ideas.
But you know what? He had that swagger that said, 'I'm just gonna get it through. Suck on it, America, if you don't like it.'
O'BRIEN: So, you think Obama needs to get to that level of toughness.
MAHER: He needs to marry his good ideas with that kind of attitude.
They asked Dick Cheney once, 'Most of Americans are against the Iraq war.' Do you remember what he said? 'So?'
In other words, 'We got elected. You have your opinions. Fine. That's what Twitter is for. But, I'm gonna do what I have to do.'
And that's what Obama should do. He should wake up tomorrow and say, 'Jesus told me to fix health care.' I'm certain about it. Seriously.
O'BRIEN: Well, he does. It's one thing to say that he needs to get tough, but we have a two party system. He needs those votes. He has to convince....
MAHER: He doesn't need those votes. That's the point. He does not need those votes. They have 60 votes. They only need 51.
O'BRIEN: But there is something to be said probably for making in a two party system...
MAHER: He has tried. We do not have a two party system.
O'BRIEN: Right.
MAHER: We have two parties, but we don't have the right two parties. We have one party that is a good party if you're defending banks, credit card companies, big agriculture, pharmaceutical lobby. That would be the Democrats. And then on the other side, we have a fringe party of religious lunatics, flat-earthers, and Civil War reenactors who call themselves...
They call themselves the Republicans, and they take their orders from Rush Limbaugh. And they think Obama is a socialist. Socialist? He's not even a liberal. What we need is a progressive party in this country. We don't have it.

I think Bill Maher's comments speak for themself. (I did cut out a few comments because Maher is a crass individual, and I didn't think they needed repeating.) Sometimes we don't even have to say anything -- We just need to stand by and watch the person shoot him/herself in the foot. If Bill Maher were President, this is what he would do!

Maher did make one good point that we need to remember. I need to preface my saying that by refuting Maher's argument that Bush and Cheney simply said "Suck on it, America, if you don't like it." Here is the voting record from 2002 for authorizing the war in Iraq:

Republicans
Yea: 263
Nay: 7

Democrats
Yea: 111
Nay: 147

71% voted to go to war in Iraq, Bill, including 43% of the Democrats. Bush and Cheney never told anybody to "suck it." In their second term, they didn't even have majorities in the House and Senate.

And even when they did have Republican majorities in the House and the Senate in their first term they still never told Americans to "suck it." Look at the voting record for the Bush tax cuts in 2001:

Republicans
Yea: 211
Nay: 0

Democrats
Yea: 28
Nay: 153

62% voted for the tax cuts, including 18% of the the Democrats! For tax cuts!

That being said, Maher was correct in saying that the Democrats don't need any Republicans to pass the Health Care Reform Bill. So why aren't they just dragging us "stupid" people to it and get it done like Maher is suggesting?

The reason is that the Democrats are afraid to go at this alone. They realize there will be repurcussions at the voting booth. They don't want to pass it alone because they want to be able to share the blame with the Republicans when health care reform fails.

A vote for socialized health care is political suicide, and they know it. They've seen it at town hall meetings around the country.

What Bill doesn't understand because he is an elitist is that the government doesn't control the people; the people control the government. The "stupid" people have spoken and will continue to speak as long as bad ideas are presented.

I hope and pray that Bill Maher does not represent the liberal viewpoint, or our country is in serious trouble.

The Largest Business in the World, Run by a CEO with No Business Experience

Studies have shown that for people who open a restaurant, 26% fail in their first year, another 19% fail in the second year, and 14% more fail in the third year. So in the first three years, almost 60% of new restaurants fail. (Some estimate that average to be higher.) Why would that be?

Somebody makes some killer food and loves doing it. Friends and family start telling them they need to open a restaurant, and they start thinking about how much they would enjoy that. So they find a place to buy somewhere, take out a second mortgage to pay for it, put a kitchen together, throw up some decorations, and open for business.

Everything moves along fine for the first few months as customers show up and that first dollar is tacked to a wall somewhere. The money starts adding up, but so do the expenses. Before long, the owner tries to figure out why the numbers aren't adding up.

This chef has never had a class in accounting, or finance, or marketing, or management. He's never heard of a cash flow statement, or net present value, or niche markets, or reward systems. All he ever wanted to do was cook.

A bad month or two hits, and the dream turns into a nightmare. The same thing is happening to our country.

CHARMED

President Barack Obama graduated from high school and attended Occidental College. After two years, he transferred to Colombia University, majoring in political science. He worked as a research associate at Business International Corporation (mainly a publishing firm) and then at New York Public Interest Research Group.

Four years later, he moved to Chicago and worked as a Community Organizer for three years. Nobody really has a good definition for what a community organizer does. According to Wikipedia, community organizing is a process by which people living in proximity to each other are brought together to act in common self-interest. (The only familiar example of community organizing I could find is ACORN, which organizes community members to register dead people to vote and hand out cigarettes to have voters register 72 times.)

In Obama's case, he was the director of Developing Communities Project, a church-based community organization comprising eight Catholic parishes. The main purpose of the 13-person organization was to set up a job training program. The budget came from fundraising (which Obama found he excelled at.)

Obama then went on to Harvard Law School, earning his Juris Doctorate. He was the editor and then president of the Harvard Law Review. He directed another community effort called "Project Vote." He spent time as a lecturer at at the University of Chicago and worked at a law firm.

He was elected to the state legislature, where he stayed for 7 years, and then was elected as a U.S. senator. He served for 5 years (2 of those on the road, campaigning.) And he was finally elected President.

HOW CAN YOU TELL WHEN A LAWYER IS LYING?

Barack Obama has never run a business. He is a lawyer. He specializes in politics and the law. Most of his career has been spent in government. He is a talented speaker and writer. His specialty is researching, writing, talking, and voting (assuming he's actually there to vote.) He has never, in all of his experience, had to worry about turning a profit. In his world, if you run out of money, you simply raise more.

How far would we have to go back to find another President with no business experience:

• George W. Bush: M.B.A from Harvard University, ran oil companies, the Texas Rangers, and the state of Texas
  
• Bill Clinton: Ran the state of Arkansas, and studied Economics in school
  
• George Bush: B.A. in Economics, co-founded and ran an oil company
  
• Ronald Reagan: Ran the Screen Actors Guild and the state of California.
  
• Jimmy Carter: Ran a peanut farm, and the state of Georgia
  
• Gerald Ford: No business experience, but at least a B.A in Economics.
  
• Richard Nixon: Lawyer
  

The answer is Richard Nixon (although he, unlike Obama, had at least served as vice-president.) He was a lawyer and a career politician. With the exception of George H.W. Bush (who had been vice-president for 8 years), every President in the last 33 years has been a governor of a U.S. state previous to being elected, which makes perfect sense.

THE GOVERNATOR

Governor and Senator are two vastly different positions. The position of a senator is legislative and requires expertise in law. The position of a governor is executive and requires expertise in business.

A senator studies issues, and proposes bills, sometimes as a member of a committee. Debates occur and speeches are given. After many hours, a vote is taken. The situation is very much like a courtroom, with procedure and formality, posturing and rhetoric.

A governor, on the other hand, does exactly what the President does, just at the state level. The governor runs the "business" with thousands of employees. The governor works through his/her "managers", all the way down to last employee, to accomplish tasks. The governor controls the national guard, signs and enforces law, and makes appointments. The governor works on a fixed budget. (No printing money at the state level.)

This is why it was so comical that any liberal would question Sarah Palin's two years' experience as a governor + 6 years' experience as a mayor (which is also an executive position, just at the city level), in light of Barack Obama's experience.

COMMON CENTS

So Obama is now getting on-the-job business training in his first executive experience as the Commander-in-Chief. His inexperience is apparent.

Anybody who has studied business would understand, for example, that you can't decrease unemployment by raising taxes. A tax discourages a behavior. When you raise the tax on a business, the business has less money, and has to find ways to cut expenses. The quickest way for a business to cut expenses is to slash jobs.

Even the anticipation of raised taxes leads to higher unemployment. Businesses realize, unlike Obama, that money doesn't grow on trees. Introducing a health care bill that plans to insure all Americans, after spending $1 trillion of money we don't have, and in the middle of a financial crisis, is an incredibly stupid idea. In a meeting today, the university I work for spoke about cutting back in anticipation that things are going to get worse. I'm guessing the business you work for is doing the same.

And even if you happen to be a liberal and believe in demand-side (trickle-up?) economics, you would realize that stimulus money should be used to actually stimulate the economy. Back in the Great Depression, FDR (who ran the state of New York as governor before being elected, by the way) used the New Deal to put people back to work. They built roads, bridges, schools, and houses that didn't exist -- Huge projects that required a lot of people and work. Obama is using the stimulus money, as expected, to push his liberal agendas.

For example, spending $8.3 million to replace perfectly functional light bulbs at an airport with overpriced high-efficiency "green" light bulbs. How many jobs does that create? What kind of lasting value does that have? I drove past a school today that the New Deal built 71 years ago. Where will those light bulbs be in 71 years? How about 10? How about even 5?

We won't even mention the perfectly functional cars...

AND IN THE END...

Obama thinks like a lawyer, not a businessman, because that's what he is. He has grown up under privileged circumstances, having nearly every penny he's "earned" in his career being handed to him by fundraising or through taxpayers. He is using this financial crisis to posture and position in order to push every item on his liberal agenda through. Nothing he has done, or is currently doing, has been for the financial good of the country.

So we shouldn't be surprised that the economy continues to crumble when a manager at McDonald's has more business experience than the current leader of the free world.

Obama Won't Accept Health Care Limits for His Own Family

I don't have time to write more about this, but wanted to post the link to an interesting article. It comes from an ABC News special on health care reform.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/HealthCare/Story?id=7919991&page=1


Thanks to Skylar for sending it in!

The Conservative Solution to Health Care

I was watching the Health Care Reform infomercial channel (CNN) yesterday, and they continually made comments that gave the impression that the big bad Republicans were blocking the Democrats' attempts to help the poor downtrodden citizens of the U.S. to recieve good health care. Completely false. The Republicans simply realize there is a better way:

"Mr. President, what's the rush?" by Mitt Romney

Imagine that... Provide health care to all citizens, allowing them to maintain their freedoms, at no additional cost, limiting government control, and all the while creating a structure that will continually drive down the costs of health care. 2012 will not come soon enough.

Palin and the Wolf

I just flipped over to CNN (as I do sometimes when I want to get the liberal viewpoint). Wolf Blitzer was talking about Sarah Palin and played her quote where she tells the media to quit making things up.

After they played the clip, Wolf asked the question: "If she wants national office, is that a smart strategy for her?"

I rewound it and listened to it again to make sure I'd heard right. That is exactly what he said, word for word. Wolf, probably without even knowing it, was showing his true colors. His comment was a threat.

It used to be that journalists would report the news. The mark of a great journalist was objectivity. But somewhere along the line, the media decided that rather than simply reporting the news, they wanted to influence the news. Like most liberals, they consider themselves elite (i.e. smarter than others), and they seek for power. Rather than just standing by and reporting the outcome of elections, they want to actually influence who gets elected. Wolf believes that if Palin wants to get to White House, the road goes through the media. Cross them, and they will crush your dreams.

Better watch out, Sarah! If you're not careful, the media will attack your experience as a mayor of a small town, your record and investigations, your education, your record as governor, your husband, your teenage daughter, your handicapped son, the way you talk, the way you dress, the state you were governor of, your religion, your hobbies, your finances, your win in a pagent 20 years ago, and everything you do or say, and it will continue long after the election is over!