THIS IS MY NEW BLOG: http://eyeonthenation.wordpress.com/
CHECK IT OUT
CHECK IT OUT
THIS IS MY NEW BLOG: http://eyeonthenation.wordpress.com/
CHECK IT OUT
CHECK IT OUT
Just a few thoughts here: it will be interesting to see how the media treats the foreign policy developments. Obama was thought to have manageed the Middle East and other countries with tact and precision. Diplomacy, and intellect, and tact – those were the things that were going to undo the terrible damage that George Bush had wrought for eight years. And now, on the anniversary of September 11, the Muslim world ironically and coincidentally erupted into demonstration and violence against the US embassies because of a cheap movie that ridiculed the Prophet Muhammed? Of course, it wasn’t terrorism. It couldn’t be a genuine, planned demonstration against the US, could it? And the response that the US should have when one of its ambassdors is assassinated is to spend most of the time condemning some misguided movie? As if that movie had any significant bearing on any of the acts of terrorism.
It was eerily reminiscent of the decisive action that Bill Clinton took in response to multiple terroristic attacks during his Presidency, wasn’t it? And we know that the terrorists reacted to Bill’s decisive response by altering their antagonistic approach, right?
It was also comforting to hear the President refer to one of our allies in the area as not an ally. I also feel more secure and confident since Obama diecided to rebuff the overture of the Israeli Prime Minister so that he had more time to talk about his ‘eye candy’ visit to The View.
Best of all was the media’s attention to Obama’s decisions to not mind any of the stores.
Kumbaya — Hope and Change — Romney’s taxes — 1% — thank heavens for Obamacare. 47%.
Oh, and by the way, a few hundred more thousand people stopped looking for work today.
Late last night a group in Libya over ran the U.S. Embassy and murdered Ambassador Stevens and four Foreign Service Officers. The President did nothing about it. He praised the protesters and their use of “free speech”, How dare you support the murders who killed a government official working hard trying to rebuild Libya. The only thing Obama did was worry about his upcoming debates. We need to remove all aid given to Libya and close down the Embassy for the time being. America will not be held against their will by foreign terrorists. The attacks on our embassies and diplomats are a result of perceived American weakness. This is a clear sign that it is time for Pres. Obama to leave!!! We need to find these killers and bring them to justice. Obama needs to change his alliances. He either supports and defends the country or he sides with the enemy. He must choose. He will not be allowed to sit on the fence.
1. Tax cuts have been effective historically at spurring growth of GDP. Both Reagan and Clinton cut taxes in critical ways. The economy boomed.
2. Medicare and Social Security need to be addressed now. Failure to do so will cause irreparable harm to the economy, and will render the government incapable of providing safety nets for seniors and the disadvatntaged fairly soon.
3. We will not be able to repeal Obamacare. Doing so will be fiscally irresponsible. Instead, we will need to revamp the program without gutting it.
4. We will not be able to control healthcare costs unless we address frivolous lawsuits and malpractice insurance and fraud.
5. Our energy issues are not going to addressed in the short term by tilting at windmills and basking in the sun. Responsible drilling is essential, as is the renewal of development on refineries, pipelines, and nuclear plants.
6. Risk is part of every good plan. What the government proposes, from either side of the aisle, comes with a modicum of risk. We can’t categorically scrap plans because of what might happen. We must minimize risk wherever possible, and develop contingency plans to respond to negative developments.
7. Pro-choice and Pro-life are not campaign issues. The Supreme Court currently has a law on the books. What one candidate believes on the issue will never be the deciding factor in changing that law. Stop pretending that people should decide how to vote by considering a canddate’s stance on issues like this.
8. No president yet has been inclined or able to determine the course of the country by adhering to the tenets of his religion. Once the President is elected, he is responsible to the people.
9. By the time we get to a national ticket, all of the parties are products of the political establishment. No one can truly claim to be outside the establishment after using the very system to get where he or she is.
10. Four years ago you voted for Hope and Change. We invite you to look at where we are four years later, and vote for hope and change again.
The Supreme Court can make one of three basic decisions in the case before it about the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). It can:
Revealing in these three possibilities is the revelation of who is really in support of PPACA. According to Moody’s Investor Service, a SCOTUS decision that decides the individual mandate is unconstitutional will have negative implications for particular commercial segments of the health care market.
If the individual mandate is unconstitutional, but much of the law remains intact, then Moody’s says hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and medical device companies will all be negatively affected.
If the individual mandate is unconstitutional and the entire law goes down with the mandate, then Moody’s says hospitals would be affected negatively both in the short term and long term, and pharmaceutical companies and medical device companies would be negatively affected in the long term.
I have a simple question to ask all who read this missive, who was PPACA written to benefit?
In the words of the Watergate scandal’s Deep Throat, “Follow the money.”
For all of you who have already been infected with the virus that is slowly turning you into a zombie, I’ll go ahead and answer it for you. The PPACA was passed for the benefit of the commercial hospitals, the pharmaceutical companies and the medical device manufacturers. Aside from a few bones thrown to the consumer health lobby, this law was never intended to benefit Americans or our societal health. It is a Trojan Horse of sorts, with a veneer of social fairness, but filled with goodies for special interest groups harmful to society and to the health of individual citizens.
The news is the Tea Party is in what is referred to as “Tea Party 2.0”.
This is in contrast to the previous actions of the Tea Party as essentially a groundswell of Americans gathering to protest Government overspending—stimulus– and excessive involvement in our personal lives and financial choices—as personified by the Affordable Health Care Act, Obamacare. Two years ago “we the people” gathered peacefully in extraordinary numbers in a civil tone to compel our “representatives” to, well, represent us rather than their party. They chose instead to keep it real with their socialist peeps.
Never have so few spent so much for so little.
With our elected officials deaf to our concerns, rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic that is our economy, and lining their pockets through insider trading, fact-finding trips, overcompensation with extraordinary perks, the Tea Party began to form into more sophisticated groups with core members and quasi-leaders. A close examination followed of the electoral system that got America into the position we find ourselves in. By this I am referring to intra-party elections and appointments.
It was obvious that “Primaries” were only keeping the status quo—favoring the incumbents and making it cost prohibitive for would-be opponents. Also, because we do not identify voters by party in Virginia, Democrats could (and would) cross over to vote in the primary—giving us a weaker, more liberal candidate.
The answer was clear. We need to pick our candidates through conventions rather than primaries. To accomplish this we need to control the state party. With our (The Tea Party) victories we’ve accomplished our short-term goal of seizing control of the state party allowing us to move to conventions from primaries and ensuring that we field conservative candidates in future elections. This election cycle will hopefully be the last where we have primaries. When Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli runs for Governor next year it will be a room of true conservatives deciding on whether he is the Republican candidate.
The Ron Paul people have elected many representatives within the Republican Party and they tried in Virginia as well but due to their earlier victories we were ready to fend them off. The Ron Paul people only ran in a few select categories because they had to pay an additional fee to vote for all categories. But between the Ron Paul people and the Tea Party, the Republican Party is being pulled toward a more fiscally responsible right leaning stance. The RINO’s are being weeded out.
Things are looking up.
I know that numbers crunchers are advising the candidates about the demographics which will determine the outcome of the November presidential election, and I won’t dispute whatever conclusions they draw. However, this one man’s observation is quite simple: two camps who won’t determine the outcome are on the far side of each aisle. Staunch Democrats see in Obama the embodiment of their principles of liberal government, even when his actions belie the platform. They will vote Obama no matter what. Staunch Republicans are just as incapable of seeing anything good in Obama. He could convince Al-Qaeda to denounce Islam and hand over all their guns and ammo, devise the means to make the US an economic juggernaut, and cure cancer, and those opponents would still vote Romney.
So the middlers and the independents are the ones whose votes are out there to be won. The question is which subgroup will be influenced by which issue. I think that Obama will begin now with solidifying the issues that liberals promote, such as gay marriage and environmental issues. I think Romney will do the same with staying firm on immigration and reducing the size of government. What I am wondering about are the other issues and the effects on the undecided or the still-to-be-influenced voters.
Will Obama relent and support the Keystone pipeline? Will he open up oil reserves to reduce gas prices and take the high price complaint off the table? Will Romney soften his stance on gay marriage, or make any and all tax increases a target for his stump speeches?
I have trouble with this component of the process because I don’t think the monor issues, like gay marriage, and abortion, and a number of others are critical issues. We have had more than 40 presidents, and they have had myriad opinions on those side issues, and we don’t evaluate them as effective or ineffective presidents on the basis of those issues.
The legacies of presidents are determined by some simple issues. Did they keep the American people safe? Did they promote the expansion of the economy and thereby foster a higher standard of living for the people? Did they support programs that allowed or encouraged individuals to improve themselves and their lot?
I did not like John McCain’s positions on a number of things, and momentarily considered voting Democrat in 2008. However, when Obama made larger government a natural effect of his vision, I ran in the right direction. Because Obama will be the left candidate, I am among those whose vote cannot be won. I am fascinated to see what each candidate will do to sway the swayable.
What do you think the issues of significance will be?