The Road to Greece?

We are almost at the point where the rubber meets the road. One of the rules of life that everyone should memorize is: Actions have Consequences. President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Reid pushed and fought and arm twisted to pass Obamacare. As our economy has continued to suffer, and as jobs have disappeared, the Democrats in Washington have continued to spend money as if the Washington Monument was loaded with cash.

Whether you agree with these policies or not, the policies of the Democrat controlled congress has come with a price tag. The Tea Parties have argued that President Obama and Congress are taxing our children and our grandchildren. We have word now that the reality may be worse: our children and grandchildren may not have the jobs to get taxed. Dick Morris writing yesterday says:

Meanwhile, the nation watches nervously as the same policies Obama has brought to our nation are failing badly and publicly in Europe. When Moody’s announces that it is considering downgrading bonds issued by the government of the United States of America, we find ourselves, suddenly, in deep trouble. We have had deficits before. But never have they so freaked investors that a ratings agency considered lowering its opinion of our solvency. Not since Alexander Hamilton assumed the states’ Revolutionary War debt has America’s willingness and ability to meet its financial obligations been as seriously questioned.

And the truth begins to dawn on all of us: Obama has no more idea how to work his way out of the economic mess into which his policies have plunged us than he does about how to clean up the oil spill that is destroying our southern coastline.

If our bonds are being downgraded, then we can see the road to Greece from here. A combination of lowered credit, mounting debt in the form of Social Security and Medicare, with a good, strong helping of national health care puts us on a path towards Greece. As we rush to implement national health care, Canada is looking for a way out of it. Canada has discovered what the Tea Parties have said for months now: Free health care is very expensive. We have two choices. We can continue down this road. We may even have some good times, but at some point, we will have to pay the bill for this. When that happens, we will be in the same place Greece is today.

Or we can get off this road. We can realize that a national health care system will cost money. We can stop trying to cut our own throats and start using all the energy at our fingertips: oil, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal. You name it, we use it. At some point we have to make a decision: Will we continue to be the world's Superpower, or will we follow Greece?

Will the President Continue to Ignore Jobs?

We are currently at an important crossroads for President Obama's legacy. Typically, I would say a little over a year into a presidency is an odd time to evaluate the entire four years. However, President Obama has been embarking on a course that will truly define his presidency. The next few months may define his four years in office.

For his entire first year in office, and into this second, the President spent all of his political capital on health care reform. This reform, recently signed into law, will make the most sweeping changes to our health care system ever. It will do so to the tune of over $1 Trillion, and in spite of the fact that most Americans opposed it when it was signed into law, and continue to oppose it a month after its passage. Most Americans believed, and continue to believe, that fixing our economy was much more important than the push for Health Care reform. Trying to get some breathing room for reform, and trying to acknowledge that Americans wanted more of a focus on jobs, the President vowed in his first State of the Union address to focus on job creation. The Guardian UK started their coverage of the address with this:

"Barack Obama bowed to the wave of US public anger over unemployment and other recession-related issues when he promised in his first state of the union speech last night to make the creation of a million jobs the overwhelming priority for the coming year."

What we didn't know then is that job creation would take a backseat to politics in order to get Health Care Reform passed.

Once health care reform passed, many thought President Obama would move to job creation. However, the President seems to have ignored jobs, and forgotten his promise from the State of the Union. Once again, the President has dashed the hopes of American voters. In the month since health care reform passed, the President has tried to pass a new financial regulation bill, has discussed resurrecting the job killing "Cap-and-trade" bill, and has now launched a major campaign aimed at immigration reform. None of these policies will create jobs, and some, such as "cap and trade", will actually cost jobs.

No one is predicting Democrats will gain seats in November. The question is whether or not Democrats will hold onto their majorities in one or both houses. Without the super majorities the Democrats hold, it's going to be very tough to pass any of President Obama's agenda after January of 2011. With the elections about seven months away, there may not be time to pass any major legislation between now and November. This means, after the President's first four years in office, he may look back and only have health care reform to show for his efforts. If Republicans campaign on repealing that reform and win, he may not even have that.

The President campaigned on uniting the country. During his first State of the Union, he promised to focus on job creation. It's time for the President to live up to his promises. He should stop trying to pass an ultra-liberal agenda, and start working to put Americans back to work.

A Call to Action

I consider myself an amateur historian. Amateur because I don't study history for profit, I study it because I find it an incredible story. I would argue that the story of America is one of the richest, most beautiful stories ever told, and stands against any work of fiction ever written. I love the National Archives in Washington. Seeing the actual Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution is a very moving experience. On the west side of the Archives, the following inscription is written in big bold letters:

The glory and romance of our history are here preserved in the chronicles of those who conceived and builded the structure of our nation.

I never fail to be moved when I read that inscription. As an amateur historian, I will tell you that I find it hard to believe the tyranny that has been forced on our nation by the U.S. Congress, by the U.S. Senate, and by the current President of the United States. I do not use the word "tyranny" lightly. Tyranny is defined as "oppressive power". Today, Tuesday, March 23, 2010, President Barack Obama signed into law the most massive redefining of our economy to take place since The Great Depression. Under the guise of "health care reform", this law gives the government the power to decide what kind of health care you and your family receive.

In addition to this travesty, it will increase our deficit according to Democrats own internal memo's. The law costs $1 Trillion. That's $1 Trillion we don't have to spend. The law attempts to pay for itself through taxing the very services, devices, and people, it claims to help. A few days ago a comment on this blog went, "Oddly, when I woke up this morning and looked outside, I didn't see any communist nationalistic troops with tanks rolling down my street." True. However, is your health care better today? Do you get better appointments at the Doctor's office? Is your Doctor even still in business? Do you suddenly have medicine you couldn't get on Saturday? Is the "change" in your insurance worth the estimated $500 Million in new taxes we will see on January 1, 2011? The honest answer to most of these questions is "no".

This health care law by itself hasn't destroyed our nation. However, with its passage into law today, I can see the end of our nation from here. Our country can't afford the price tag of this bill in this economy, coupled with the price tags of Social Security and Medicare. Both of these programs are running out of money. Some estimates state they will be out of money in the next ten years, just as we're paying increased taxes for the law signed today. The Democrats in Washington have decided a one and a half year crusade to centralize healthcare decision making power is more important than getting people back to work, and more important than improving our economy.

The "Greatest Generation" fought to protect our country, and the west in World War II. However they failed to pass on the values of their generation to their children. The Baby Boomers are starting to retire, and failed to fix Social Security or Medicare, and failed to protect our nation from the encroachment of soft tyranny. This "beneficial tyranny" believes in protecting everyday people from themselves at the price of their freedoms. President Obama says, "I will protect your health, just give up your right to make your own health care choices."

It's now up to our generation to stop this soft tyranny, and to begin to repeal it. It's up to the Baby Boomers who are still willing to fight, the Generation X-ers who must fight, and Generation Y that is coming into its own politically. Lines have been drawn around freedom, and around uncontrolled, nation destroying spending. If you're reading this blog, YOU must make a choice. You must decide if you will continue to fight for this country or if you will sit back and let Democrats in Washington decide how to run your life. Will you take care of yourself and your family, or will you trade your freedoms for the shackles of government handouts.

In 1964, Ronald Reagan told an audience that they had a rendezvous with destiny. Today, we face that same rendezvous. Will we fight for our freedoms? For our nation? In the coming months, each of us must ask, as Reagan did, "Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves." Another famous Reagan quote also applies to today:

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.

Now is a time when we must decide: Will we protect our nation and leave freedom and this great country to our children and grandchildren, or will we let planners in Washington make our decisions for us and voluntarily put the shackles on our children's children?

Temporary Unemployment Benefits – Now for 99 Weeks!

Unemployment benefits have been in the United States in one form or another since 1932. For most states, the maximum benefit period was 26 weeks. However, you can now draw unemployment benefits for 99 weeks in some states. That's just less than two years. If you lost your job through "no fault of your own", then you would be able to stay out of work for 99 weeks and receive a check from the government. Of course this check isn't as large as your standard paycheck, but it is a paycheck. The government has extended this benefit period through a number of "emergency extensions" that are set to run through the current economic crisis.

A few weeks ago, Senator Jim Bunning (Republican –Kentucky) objected to a bill that included an extension to the unemployment benefits. This was billed as another heartless Republican trying to screw the common man. However, Bunning had a legitimate concern. Early in February, President Obama signed into law a Paygo bill. This means any new spending must be offset with some sort of savings to pay for the bill. Democrats in the Senate labeled the bill an emergency bill meaning it is exempted from Paygo (for the record, every bill the Democrats have tried to pass since Paygo passed has been considered an emergency bill). However, Bunning had a solution: take the funds from the unspent portion of the Stimulus bill. That would be approximately $15 Billion for the recent bill out of the $787 Billion stimulus bill.

Not every Republican supported Bunning in this effort. John Kyl said that while he didn't agree with holding up the bill, he did feel that Senator Bunning had a point. According to the Washington Post, "…about 11.4 million out-of-work people now collect unemployment compensation, at a cost of $10 billion a month. Half of them have been receiving payments for more than six months, the usual insurance limit. But under multiple extensions enacted by the federal government in response to the downturn, workers can collect the payments for as long as 99 weeks in states with the highest unemployment rates -- the longest period since the program's inception." Also according to the Post," …14.9 million jobless Americans have been out of work an average of 29.7 weeks, just below January's 30.2-week average. Those levels are the highest since the government began keeping those records in the 1950s…"

The point of this post is not that we should stop all unemployment benefits. My point is that 99 weeks is very excessive. Our Senate and Congress can't figure how to pay for an extension to the program, let alone the full 99 weeks for those people on it. When they are offered a chance to pay for it, they resort to dirty political tactics to charge the bill to the taxpayer credit card. Our Congress and our President are fighting the wrong problem. If they would learn to drop their white whale of a Health Care bill, and focus on creating jobs, we wouldn't need a 99 week unemployment benefit period.

The Waste of Money at the Census

I just saw the "controversial" 2010 Superbowl ad. If you missed it, you can view it here. I had read a little about this before tonight. A number of people (including me) are upset that the government is spending $2.5 Million on a Superbowl ad to tell people about the Census. Does our government really have the money to blow on a project like this? The Census is required by law, and I don't disagree with it. I do disagree with the multi-million dollar PR ad for the Census. I also disagree with the $133 Million ad campaign as Fox News reports:

The bureau is spending $133 million between January and May -- or, more than $13 million for each of 10 questions, one of which reads: What is your telephone number? -- to publicize the national head-count. Part of that effort is the Super Bowl ad, which Kendall Johnson, a spokeswoman for the bureau, confirmed Wednesday to FoxNews.com cost $2.5 million to air. The ad, produced by actor and director Christopher Guest, also will appear in other media, Johnson said.

If you have seen the ad (which you should do. You paid for it.), you might be a little confused. It looks like the census is some sort of reality movie, or perhaps a giant prank. The ad does very little to inform anyone about the census, or to convince you to let the census counters talk to you.


Early in this piece, I called the ad "controversial". In truth, it shouldn't be. We should all be outraged at the $133 Million waste of money our government has embarked on, and the worthless $2.5 Million Superbowl ad.

Unemployment breaks 10%

If you follow the news at all, you heard a lot yesterday regarding the shooting at Fort Hood. As more information becomes available, I may or may not write about it here. This grizzly news did hide some economic news: The U.S. is not over 10% unemployment. This is the first time it has crossed 10% since 1983. A Fox News article this morning had two other cautionary statements:

Counting those who have settled for part-time jobs or stopped looking for work, the unemployment rate would be 17.5 percent, the highest on records dating from 1994.

And...

Economists say it could climb as high as 10.5 percent next year because employers remain reluctant to hire.

In the middle of all this is talk of a possible Stimulus Part II. Looking at how much we spent to still have over 10% unemployment, I'm not sure a Stimulus Part II is any thing other than throwing money that our government, and our taxpayers, and our grandchildren, don't have.

Godfather Obama and the UAW

This past week has shown us that President Obama will do anything to protect the UAW. The President is willing to break the law, strong arm banks with TARP money, and use the "…full force of the White House press corp…" to destroy any dissent. The President isn't interested in doing what is right, or what is legal, but what protects the UAW.

As Chrysler heads into Bankruptcy court, we should all pay attention. GM (commonly referred to now as Government Motors) is likely to head the same way, and we may see more TARP companies or banks go into bankruptcy before it's all over. Whatever happens to Chrysler is going to set precedent for future bailouts and bankruptcy's.

President Obama attempted to force a bankruptcy down the throats of Chrysler's creditors that violated contracts those creditors had in place. He hasn't given up on this and is actively working on it. Secured creditors loaned money to Chrysler with a contract that stated if Chrysler sold off its assets, these secured creditors would be paid back, dollar for dollar, before any other creditor is paid back. President Obama is attempting to violate this contract simply because it suits his political will. He believes these creditors should only get 28 cents for every dollar they loaned Chrysler. The UAW would get 55% of the entire company.

In a related story, you may have read that some of the banks that received TARP money want to pay it back to the Government. President Obama won't let them. Why? The stated reason is that these banks need to pass a "stress test" to prove they are sound enough that they don't need the money. This is way above and beyond simply bailing out banks. When last I looked, President Obama has no experience running a bank, or a company. Who is he to decide when a bank can or can't pay back the money? More importantly, this money isn't the President's money. The money loaned to these banks, and to the auto industry, is tax payer money. The President is suppose to be a steward of the tax payer's money. Right now, he is failing at that job. Instead of protecting the tax payer, President Obama is controling these banks so they won't object to his version of Chrysler's bankruptcy. Imagine if President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Karl Rove had cooked up a scheme like this...

Perhaps the most disturbing part of this entire story is the threat by President Obama to destroy Chrysler's creditors in the press if they don't submit to his will. This is the classic Chicago political move of "making them an offer they can't refuse". One creditor has gone on the record stating they were threatened by the White House. How many more creditor's have been threatened and are afraid of President Obama, Press Secretary Gibbs, and the Democratic PR machine? These thug style political manuevers got him elected in Chicago, and he is trying to use them to get what he wants now.

President Obama's tinkering with the auto industry threatens property and contract law in our nation. The precedent it starts is that if you have a contract, its only valid as long as the current President says so. This is not the way our government is allowed to operate under the U.S. Constitution.

There are a number of good articles covering this. I have provided links below to the most recent ones I have read.

The Big Business of Big Labor from the Washington Examiner

Chrysler Bankruptcy Exposes Dirty Politics from CBS News

An Offer You Can't Refuse by the Economist

If you think I am simply a crazy conservative, go read those three articles and see if you still think so.

Why I go to the Tea Parties

There have been a lot of comments on here and in an assortment of media outlets regarding the people who attend Tea Parties. Some of the worst comments are those like Jeanine Garofolo saying that Tea Party attendees are only protesting a black man being President. The racist comments are uncommon, but not as uncommon as they should be. What seems more prevalent is the belief that the Tea Parties are organized by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Fox News and that the goal is to overthrow the government. Anyone who says this hasn't spent any real time talking to those who attend the parties.

While kooks are often attracted to protests (both on the left and the right), the majority of people I have seen at the Tea Parties are there because they are upset by the spending going on in government right now. Many were mad at President Bush and the previous Congress for TARP and the bailouts of GM and Chrysler. They are also mad at President Obama and the current Congress for continuing these bailouts, and for the ever increasing budgets and spending programs. Many of the attendees realize there is no way to continue this level of spending without dramatically raising taxes on everyone. The chart below was published originally in the Washington Post, and has been researched and defended by the Heritage Foundation. It shows the deficit under President Bush and the projected deficit under President Obama.

Whether you believe the White House or the Congressional Budget Office, neither of the above estimates are good. The spending in Washington is way out of control. Every idea in Washington revolves around funding a program, spending money on research, or buying something. There are very few elected officials arguing to cut the budget, and not enough officials arguing to stop the bailouts (auto, credit, or bank). My biggest fear is that the bailouts are going to make things worse, not better. By propping up these industries, we are delaying the day they go through the reforms they need. As painful as those reforms are now, they are going to be much more painful down the road.

I go to the Tea Parties to protest the current levels of spending by our government. This includes President Obama's spending and Congresses spending. I am not there to protest just President Obama. If the protests were about Global Warming or some of the other silly idea's this administration has, I probably wouldn't attend. While these ideas are worthy of debate, and I do debate them here, they aren't as dangerous as the continued spending by Washington. If we continue on the pace the chart above shows, our economy is going to get so bad, cap and trade and national health care won't matter. I can't speak for everyone at the Tea Parties, only myself. I can say that many of the people that I have spoken with at these parties have the same concerns I do, and are worried about the same things. The Tax burden on the American Worker is already too high. Spending like we are seeing in Washington is going to make that tax burden much worse.

I also go to the Tea Parties because I don't believe it is the role of our government to do these things. I don't believe our government should bailout financial companies and car industries. I don't believe we should step in and fire private CEO's. I don't believe the government has a right to interfere in how business pays their employees. Every time the government interferes in these areas, all of our freedoms are diminished. Anytime the government is allowed to save a bank, or a car company, or to fire private employees, it represents a time when the government gets to take control of our lives. I think Americans would be much better off without the government telling them what to do. Do we need some boundaries for companies to operate within? Sure. Do we need the constant intervention created at the end of Bush's term and perpetuated under President Obama? Absolutely not.

As I said, I can't speak for every person at these Tea Parties. I can say most of them are every day Americans who work and send their kids to school. These Americans deserve our respect and they deserve to have their voice heard in Washington. I , and many of the Tea Party attendees, believe Republicans and Democrats have stopped listening to voters. That's not good for anyone.

This post was published at Tea Party Patriots and Political Friends.

Is $100 Million more or less than $8 Billion?

While trying to catch up on politics today, I came across this exchange on the Real Clear Video site (video provided by Sevenload)

Link:

The transcript can be found here. I have to give credit where credit is due. I am often critical of the AP and ABC News both for what I feel is a lack of unbaised coverage. However, both of these reporters brought up excellent questions. After watching the video, I don't think Mr. Gibbs answered the original question. President Obama is trying to show sympathy with the public by cutting $100 Million out of the $3.7 Trillion budget over the next 90 days. Why is that a big deal? The $100 Million won't touch the budget and won't even be a whisper when compared to the deficit. Why should voters be excited about $100 Million? And why did Mr. Gibbs describe $8 Billion as miniscule and now ask for accolades for attempting to cut $100 Million? If Mr. Gibbs can't find the money to cut, why not look for programs like the $7 Billion in the stimulus package to improve broadband coverage nationwide. Surely that isn't important in a down economy.

Maui Tea Party

Having attended a Tea Party in Atlanta a while back, I was very excited when the national tea parties started showing up for Tax Day. I was going to be on vacation, but was able to coordinate with the organizers in Maui to be at their tea party today.



Unlike the last one I went to, the weather was great. I asked around, and I estimate there was probably 200 to 300 people at the event by the time I left. This is pretty amazing because most of the people were residents of Maui. Many of them were complaining about their local representatives.

I have heard today's events reported as "tea parties that were started by conservative bloggers, talk show personalities, and republicans." This isn't true. These tea parties are grass roots movements. The one I attended today was organized by a self proclaimed Democrat. In an email to me, he stated that he has supported a number of liberal groups over the years, but he felt the spending in Washington has really gotten out of hand.

As I am on vacation, I thought most of this post would be some of my favorite pictures from today's event in Maui. This first one made me laugh the most:



Considering this weeks revelation of what the Deparment of Homeland Security thinks of out spoken conservatives, I thought this one was pretty good too:


This sign also appeared at another Tea Party in Lahaina earlier in the day:



One participant was kind enough to let me borrow his sign so I could get a photo of me at the demonstration for my readers:

More and More impressed with Michele Bachman

I am on vacation this week with my family, so I haven't been following politics as closely as I normally would. However I found this video clip at Freedom Works. The clip is a little less than 6 minutes, but I think it is very important to watch.





Two quick points. First, the more and more I hear from Rep. Bachmann, the more and more I am impressed with her. At the very end of the clip, you will her Barney Frank call her down. The more and more I hear from Barney Frank the more I wonder why he has a job. If the CEO of GM and other companies can be fired because of their actions at private companies, why can't Mr. Frank be removed from office for his part in getting us into the current mess?

Quick Notes: Dad, the Dow, and more Tea Parties

A couple of quick hits that I wanted to share with the readers. I thought this was a perfect time for another issue of "Quick Notes"


My Dad. My Dad has entered the world of blogging. He has written a very detailed piece examining the rhetoric used by Adolf Hilter prior to taking over Germany, and President Obama's rhetoric on the campaign trail, and as President. Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs has posted it and I encourage people to stop by her blog and read the piece. It is an interesting site, so look around for a bit.

The Dow. I was reading my copy of The American Patriot's Almanac: Daily Readings on America, and came across an interesting entry for today. On this date in 1999, the Dow closed above 10,000 for the first time. I believe it closed on Friday at just over 7776.

Tea Parties. A number of my readers are interested in Tea Parties, and especially the ones held in Atlanta. Jenny Beth Martin is one of the organizers of the ones here in Atlanta. She also has a link to other tea parties across the nation. I found one on Maui I am going to visit on my vacation. It was also from Jenny that I found out Sean Hannity is going to be at the April 15th Tea Party held in Atlanta.

Atlanta Tea Party Update II

This if for those of you interested in what the Atlanta Tea Party looked like on Friday. Michelle Malkin has a number of videos from other cities on her site. I found this clip there.

Quick Notes: The Stock Market, Maryland, and Twitte

Time for another issue of quick notes. In this issue we look at the stock market, religious freedom, and a new way to keep up with yours truly.


Wall Street Votes on President Obama. Today's market closed down almost three hundred points. By almost three hundred I mean 299.64. Wall Street continues to vote on what it thinks about the future. The votes aren't good. You may believe Obama is the new messiah, but Wall Street doesn't. If President Obama's spending policies don't change, we may one day wish for a 7,000 stock market.


The Maryland Constitution. I am reading Enough is Enough by Rick Scarborough. Mr. Scarborough traces some of the religious origins of our country and quotes the Maryland Constitution. While founded by Catholics, their constitution tried to protect the religious freedom of all Christians. It said:


All persons, professing the Christian religion,are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore no person ought be any law to be molested in his person or his estate on account of his religious persuasion or profession, or for this religious practice; unless, under colour of religion, any man shall disturb the good order, peace and safety of the State.


This passage comes very close to how I believe the founders viewed religious freedom. So long as your beliefs didn't harm the rest of the society, you should be left to your own beliefs.


Twitter. Last night I signed up for a twitter account. You can now follow me on http://twitter.com/andyspolitics in addition to this site. There are a number of times I would like to post a very short thought. I will now do that on Twitter. If you aren't familiar with Twitter, it takes about 3 minutes to create an account. I am still an infant on their, but I have found it really easy to post there, and to find others there.

UPDATE: Atlanta Tea Party

In spite of the weather today, I was able to make it to the Atlanta Tea Party. It looks like there were a number of these events from across the nation. People are mad at President Obama and Congress for the spending of the last thirty days.


The event here in Atlanta was met with a, "...monsoon style downpour...". Despite that, I would guess there were around 200 people there. Here are links to the AJC and to 11 Alive news. Both of these articles are pretty accurate based on what I saw. Here are a few pictures I snapped before the great downpour:




This was my favorite sign. If you look close at the umbrella's, you start to get a feel for the rain. I shot this from my chest hiding under my own umbrella:




Freedom Works seems to be doing a lot of work on these protests. If you are interested in the assorted tea parties, or want more information, check out their website.

The Atlanta Tea Party!!

For my readers in the Atlanta, Georgia, there will be a Tea Party tomorrow to protest our Government's massive spending! The event is tomorrow, February 27, 2009 from 11:30 am to 1:00 pm. The organizers are asking people to bring tea and tea leaves to the capitol in Atlanta. For complete details, see the Peach Pundit here.


This idea originated from Rick Santelli's attack on the wasteful spending on air. If you haven't seen it, go watch it here.


People are getting fed up with the government's spending. Go to the tea party tomorrow if you are in Atlanta. If you aren't, look around, a number of these are popping up around the nation.

Wall Street Judges Obama

"The biggest thing I see here is incredible pessimism...the government is doing a lousy job of alleviating fears." --- Keith Springer, President, Capital Financial Advisory Services.

"There's nowhere to hide anymore." --- Jim Herrick, director of equity trading at Baird & Co.

The day President Obama was sworn into office, the Dow opened at almost 8,300 points. This afternoon, it closed at 7,114.78. This is the worst level since 1997. President Obama is trying to rescue the economy, and investors aren't buying. Democrat's and the media may think President Obama is the savior of our economy. Wall Street is worried he may have no idea what he is doing.


Fred Barnes wrote on Friday that the three biggest day's of Obama's presidency were the worst losses of his presidency. The stock market measures investors confidence in the future. Right now, investors have no confidence.


It is time for President Obama to act on his campaign promise. He promised a new era of bipartisanship. He tried doing things the way Pelosi and Reid wanted. Instead of advising Republicans to ignore Rush Limbaugh, it might be time for President Obama to tune into Rush. If he doesn't, we may long for the good old days of a 7,000 plus market.

Does Money Really Grow on Trees?

Our government has reached a point it may never be able to return from.

A few weeks ago I quoted an article from CNN Money. According to CNN, in 2008 our government allocated $7.2 Trillion in rescue funds for the failing economy. On Tuesday, President Obama signed the largest economic stimulus package in our nation's history. It carried with it a price tag of around $800 Billion. No one is sure just how much this bill will cost us over the next four or five years. President Obama signed this bill after demanding that congress act quickly. He said our economy is in a crisis and time can't be wasted. Congress violated the very bill it wrote, and passed the bill before any member of Congress or the Senate could read the bill. I want my readers to think about that for one minute. Congress voted on the largest stimulus bill in the history of our nation without actually reading the bill. President Obama then showed us how quickly it had to be passed by waiting four days to sign it. Congress could have waited the 48 hours the bill required before a vote and still had it to President Obama on Tuesday.

As the ink is drying on this terrible bill, President Obama is putting a new spending bill before the American public. Now he wants to take $75 Billion of tax payer money to prevent home foreclosures. The President says the housing crisis is unlike any we have ever known. While our economy is in bad shape, I'm still not sure this is the worst housing crisis in our history. If this money is so important, why didn't the President ask Congress to include this money in the economic stimulus plan? Maybe President Obama thinks there are money trees in the halls of congress that can just magically give him $75 Billion whenever he needs it. He spent less than one term there as a Senator, and part of the time he was there he was campaigning for President so he may not be that familiar with the Capitol building.

$7.2 Trillion in 2008. $800 Billion on Monday. Today another $75 Billon. GM and Chrysler need Billions more each to stay afloat.

Where does our government get this money? They get it from taxes. The government forces working Americans to give it money so that it can then waste it however it sees fit. These bills are all going to come due one day, and the American taxpayer is going to have to pay for it. President Obama now asks working people who may have a savings, and may have managed their money for a rainy day to pay for others who gambled that home prices would never go down. President Obama says this $75 Billion won't go to people who knew they couldn't afford the home they were buying. He says it won't go to lenders who tried to profit off of others. How can he prevent that? There is no way to qualify that in a federal bailout.

President Obama has done alot in 30 days. It will take years to fix the damage he and his Democratic Congress has done. If he doesn't stop his runaway spending, our country may never be able to undo this.

Transparency in Government?

Didn't President Obama campaign on a new era of transparency in Government? It seems like that era has already come and gone. The more the American people hear about the economic stimulus plan and it's comprimise, the more they don't like it.

You may argue that this isn't President Obama preventing the American public from reading the bill. It is at his urging that the Democrats are trying to push this through so quickly. I am convinced the Democrats konw the public doesn't like this bill. They are trying to pass it inspite of the fact that we don't like it!

Sit back and think about this for a minute. From the time the compromise bill was made avalialbe to the public (late last night) to when the House and the Senate will vote on it will be less than 24 hours. Already Congress has violated this bill. What makes you think they won't violate the rest of it? And if none of our representatives (Republican or Democrat) have time to read the bill they are going to vote on, how can they not violate it?

More Surprises from the "Stimulus" Package

If you are supporting the Democratic Spending Bill before the House and Senate, perhaps this paragraph from Bloomberg (authors Mark Pittman and Bob Ivry) will make you think twice:


The stimulus package the U.S. Congress is completing would raise the government’s commitment to solving the financial crisis to $9.7 trillion, enough to pay off more than 90 percent of the nation’s home mortgages.


I hope you read that very carefully. The money involved would pay off more than 90 percent of all home mortgages, not just troubled ones. I have written a number of times regarding the insane cost of these plans. However, another Bloomberg author has found another reason to oppose these plans. Betsy McCaughey explains that the stimulus package, as currently debated, will usher in a new world for you and your health care.


In her article, Mrs McCaughey references the exact page number each of these provisions are contained in. For brevity, I have not reproduced the page number. To start with, the stimulus package with digitize your medical records. This sounds innocent enough and is even billed as a way to save your life if you are traveling and need medical attention. The doctor will have access to your medical records via a federal website. Assuming you are confident these records are secure, and there can't be any breach at the federal level, we will continue on. If this worries you, don't read any more because the rest of this will terrify you.


Now that your medical records belong to the federal government, a new entity called "The National Coordinator of Health Information Technology" will begin reviewing your files and the treatment your doctor provides to ensure that your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate. If your doctor isn't, and is trying to treat your specific circumstance, or is trying some sort of experimental treatment on you (even with your consent) then your doctor can face very serious repercussions. The exact language of the bill is vague on this, and will create a separate federal group to decide what that penalty is. According to Mrs. McCaughey, most of these recommendations are out of recent Health and Human Services nominee, and non-tax paying Democrat, Tom Daschle's book. In his book, Daschle says our health care should be more like Europeans. We should slow down the development of new drugs and experimental treatments because they simply cost to much. We should also be willing to accept "hopeless diagnosis". In laymen terms this means if it costs to much to keep you alive, the doctor shouldn't be doing it. To quote the article:


Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).


If the stimulus package is signed into law, then a person and council named by the Democrats will decide what treatments you should or shouldn't receive, will be able to penalize your doctor or hospital for not following those treatments, and will decide how much it should cost to keep you or a loved one alive. If it costs too much you shouldn't get the treatment.


Consider this fact from Mrs. McCaughey: the bill provides more funding for these provisions than for the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marince Corp combined.


You may believe this new Health Care system should be implemented. I think it will be a dark day in our country if it ever happens. I also believe our country could be permanently damaged by this. However, either way, it should outrage all Americans that the Democrats and President Obama are trying to sneak this in. This shows that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama know the American people will not support it. The Democrats control the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. If they really thought Americans wanted this, they would create a separate bill and pass it. The Republicans would be powerless to stop it.

I encourage you to contact your Senator and tell them to vote against this. Ask them to defend these Health Care provisions to you and explain why they support them. If you don't know their contact info, look it up here. Don't let them sneak in legislation that could affect how, and how long, you and your loved ones live.