Obama on Sequester for Low Information Voters and other updates

Saturday Night Live aired a very clever parody last week, featuring President Obama (Jay Pharoah) holding a press conference to explain the consequences of sequester.  True to form, Obama brings in individuals negatively affected by the crisis-of-the-moment to illustrate his point.

If you could use a good laugh, watch. My favorite budget cut solution was offered by the air traffic controller.



As for President Obama's take on the dire consequences of cutting $45 billion from future growth this year, maybe he could fund the essential services by cutting back on his perpetual campaign mode travels, which burn $180,000 / hour for Air Force One services and numerous multimillion dollar vacation schedule? Another option would be to "fire Obama's $100,000 a year dog trainer"? After all, the Presidential pooch is no longer a puppy.

Obama could also search the couch cushions in his Oval Office, as Secretary of State John Kerry must have done to give Egypt $250 million (a quarter of a billion dollars) just 2 days after sequester took effect! Pretty good searching for a country that is flat broke.

We have plenty of money. The government's own CBO just revealed Federal Revenue to Set Record in 2013, "In fact, the $2.7 trillion in revenue will be the most money the federal government has collected in history."  Keep this in mind when the President insists we still need to increase tax revenue as a solution to our deficit.  (Been there, done that, in January.)

Clearly, we don't have a revenue problem; we have a spending problem.

UPDATES: Another example of unnecessary spending, considering our financial flat-broke status: TSA Sealed $50-Million Sequester-Eve Deal to Buy New Uniforms.

And this would be an example of cutting the music program so to speak: More sequester pain: White House cancels tours. Guess they had to do this since the Washington Monument already was closed for repairs.

As for our we are so broke we will have to furlough TSA agents, etc., how is it we have the money to post 400 Help Wanted ads for new government workers right after sequester, to do important work such as grow insects for the Agriculture Department or recreation aids for the Forest Service? Maybe they found some new couch cushions to search or started looking through the Presidents pants pockets for loose change?

More Reading:
SNL mocks Obama for sequester, lack of budgeting skills
Forbes: Sequester This! President Obama's Colossal Media Blunder
Kerry Praises Egypt's 'Version of the Democracy' 
CBO: Federal Revenue to Set Record in 2013 

Recent Post: Obama's Sequester Spending Cut Disaster Charade Continues

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, VoteWatchWI, The Way <><

Obama's Sequester Spending Cut Disaster Charade Continues

We've known it was coming. The very idea came from the White House. He approved it a year and a half ago, and in November 2011, insisted it be done. What is it? Why the Sequester, of course.

What is a sequester? Automatic spending cuts triggered to go off in 2013, after the 2012 presidential campaign. Sequester was a gimme the money now, I'll economize later deal.

And here is a graph of that Sequestration deal. Nothing cut from present levels of spending, just $85 billion cut from 2 years of* FUTURE spending! Take a look here. (Put your reading glasses on or you might not notice the change.) *Correction: About $44 billion cut from this year, remaining cuts spread out over the next 7 years.

Now our Spender in Chief doesn't want to go through with Sequester cuts and threatens the sky will fall if we don't increase the increase in government spending on Friday. So much for his famous last words from November of 2011 regarding welching on the deal: “Already, some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts. My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts – domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off-ramps on this one.”

But then our President seems to enjoy running our government in sky-is-falling-crisis mode, or as Peggy Noonan just wrote, "Government by Freakout". And to make sure you freakout, Obama's Federal Immigration officials just approved 100s of illegal convicted criminal detainees released from prison for emphasis on how these budget increase cuts will affect us. Now the President could easily find $85 billion savings by eliminating redundant programs, fraud, and wasteful pork spending but instead chose this avenue to make his point.

Refreshingly, for once Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner is not negotiating this one in advance but is challenging the Senate to 'Get off its [posterior]' to propose other cuts if those in the Sequester deal are unacceptable. Reason being, the House has come up with 2 proposals thus far with no response from the President or Senate. Hope the Republicans stand firm on this.

One reason the president might be balking is that he again is talking about increasing revenues in any substitute sequester deal: "So when the president asks that a substitute for the sequester include not just spending cuts but also new revenue, he is moving the goal posts." 

Increasing revenues could be the real reason for Obama's flip-flop. Incidentally, $85 billion in sequester cuts funds the government for about a week and a half--hardly worth freaking out about.


And here is another heads-up: The debt ceiling/government shut down could come at the end of March, so I would avoid planning any extensive vacations touring our National Historic Sites and Parks until later in the spring. Like a school district facing a budget cut with the threat the cut will eliminate the music program, government threatens to close the Washington Monument* or Grand Canyon, etc. (We had an extensive National Park trip tour planned for the last debt ceiling crisis in April 2011! Rangers told us they put up barricades to block park entrances the eve of the debt ceiling agreement--just in case. That agreement was reached at the 11th hour, 11pm our time.) 
*Washington Monument is presently closed for repairs.


More Reading:
Bob Woodward: Obama's sequester deal-changer
President Obama in 2011: 'No Easy Off-Ramps' on Sequester
Noonan: Government by Freakout
Federal Spending Without and With Sequester Cuts
Boehner tells Senate to 'Get off its [posterior]
Immigrants Released Ahead of Automatic Budget Cuts

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, VoteWatchWI, The Way <><

Can we please talk 'Debt Control'? It's For the Kids

Congress is poised to kick our debt ceiling crisis down the road to May, but instead of using this breathing room as an opportunity for getting our message out, we are still distracted by the topic of the day--gun control and now amnesty.

Debt Limit USA crafted this easy to understand 3 minute piece that explains what our government is doing--borrowing more money than it takes in. They call it Debt Limit - A Guide to American Federal Debt  Made Easy, or as I call it, The Debt Crisis in Terms Even a Low Information Voter Can Understand!
 
It doesn't get much easier than this; watch the whole thing. The ending is applicable to our unsustainable debt problem.

In case you didn't catch the last slides from the clip, the dad's annual household budget had $140,000 household debt, income of $21,700, $38,200 in spending, $16,500 in new bank to loan (debt), budget cuts $385--about 1% of their total household budget. Sound familiar?

Our Federal Budget Deal to Raise Debt Limit was: $14 Trillion total debt (obliviously, this was from the last 2011 debt crisis because we are well over $16T now!), $2.17 T federal income, $3.82 T in Fed. spending, $1.65 T in new debt, and the amount "cut" (from future spending)? A measly $38.5 Billion, about 1% of the total budget.

No matter, our children, grand children and great, great grandchildren will be picking up this tab.

Unlike other It's for the kids pleas, this one IS for the kids! Us too.

More reading:
House Votes to Temporarily Suspend U.S. Debt Ceiling 
Obama's Now Borrowed More Than All Presidents from Washington to W
US Debt Headed Toward 200% of GDP Even After 'Fiscal Cliff' Deal
Speaker: Fitch: Cut Spending or Risk Credit Rating Downgrade
Morning Bell: Don't Raise Debt Ceiling Without Balancing the Budget

I urge you to contact your legislators and tell them to talk about our spending crisis and then stand firm on more debt. We don't have much time.
Contact your Representatives and Senators
Find your  U.S. Senators by last name
Wisconsin's  U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (202) 224-5323
Wisconsin's   U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (202) 224-5653

Find your  U.S. House of Representatives member by state
House Representative James Sensenbrenner Washington D.C. (202) 225-5101, Brookfield (262) 784-1111

House Speaker Boehner phone line (513) 779-5400

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Republicans stuck between a Barack and hard place must unite, stand firm, and go on offense

We averted the so-called fiscal cliff this week with mixed results: some say Republicans caved on raising taxes, some say Republicans protected most taxpayers, some Democrats thought Obama lost. I was surprised that Conservative Senator Ron Johnson voted for it and pleased that Senator Marco Rubio and our Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner didn't. But honestly, under the no floor debate, lame duck, back room negotiating circumstances, I don't know how this could have been resolved in a positive way. If Republicans had voted it down, Obama would just have come back later to play the role of hero by enacting a middle tax cut, knowing he had already turned up the tax heat on all those evil rich. We would have needed more proactive leadership in Congress and have been discussing this all year long, not just in the eleventh hour to achieve a better outcome.

The only positive thing to come out of the deal was that the Bush tax rates were made permanent for 98% of American earners. (Permanent as long as Republicans hold the majority in the House, that is.) But even this is Kabuki theater because our tax burden is still going up with other tax increases already in place as of Jan. 1st and new revenue increases via eliminating some deductions that were part of the fiscal cliff deal as well.

With the Bush tax rates now at least set for the 113th Congress, Republicans could for once in their lives go on the offense and get the message out that our out of control spending cannot, cannot continue. Republicans could redeem themselves by presenting a united front in the House and Senate and standing firm against increasing the debt ceiling by another 3 trillion dollars as the president wants.

But this will only work if they start talking about it now and are willing to draw the line in the debt ceiling sand and say, no further.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Sen. Pat Toomey talked about this on Jan. 2nd. McConnell said, "'We have an immediate opportunity to act: the debt ceiling,' McConnell said. 'Washington’s credit card has reached its limit again, and the Senate majority must act on legislation early in February—rather than waiting until the last minute, abdicating responsibility and hoping someone else will step in once again to craft a last-minute solution for them.'”

Toomey was more emphatic, “'[Obama] got a $2 trillion debt limit increase just 17 months ago — blew through all that,' Toomey said on Morning Joe. 'We will only solve this problem when we finally get the spending under control. And the debt ceiling, and after that, the continuing resolution expiration — those are the vehicles that give us the opportunity to insist on making progress on the real problem.'”  He "suggested" a "partial government shutdown" may be necessary to make the point, where truly necessary spending is continued and funded via tax revenue income, and non-essential spending is stopped.

Getting the Republican message out is a problem with the pro Obama Praetorian press ruling the media markets. Maybe Republicans could hire the same people who created Senator Ron Johnson's ads for his senate campaign. Johnson's ads were short, concise, and explained just what was at stake with our out of control spending. We really need messaging like that in the GOP.  RNC, are you listening?

I urge you to contact your legislators and tell them to stand firm on the debt ceiling. We have less than a month to do this.
Contact your Representatives and Senators
Find your  U.S. Senators by last name
Wisconsin's  U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (202) 224-5323
Wisconsin's   U.S. Senator Herb Kohl (202) 224-5653

Find your  U.S. House of Representatives member by state
House Representative James Sensenbrenner Washington D.C. (202) 225-5101, Brookfield (262) 784-1111

House Speaker Boehner phone line (513) 779-5400

More Reading: 
Norquist: Take 'fiscal cliff' deal
Morning Bell: Fiscal Cliff and Tax Hikes to Start the New Year
Mitch McConnell: Debt ceiling offers opportunity to cut spending
Strassel: The Debt-Ceiling Fight Will Be Dirty h/t Jay Weber

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Taxing rich will hurt already employed, at all pay levels

President Obama, the champion of class warfare rhetoric*, has been chanting the mantra: tax the rich, as a solution to our deficit, poverty, and social class disparity for as long as I can remember. Obama also throws around the phrase fair share to justify tax rates that take more than half their income. And we really should call his attack what it is: tax the successful. Republicans and economists counter with how taxing the successful (rich ) will harm small businesses, who are the majority of job creators in America. Being a Conservative, I side with the Republicans, I view fairness as taxing all income at the same rate.

But one consequence of taxing the rich I have yet to hear anyone mention, who will be the consumers if they have less income once their taxes are paid? Who will be building a new home or hiring the local remodeler? Who will be purchasing that new car or new furniture? Who will be dining out every weekend? Or having their hair and nails done, stopping for a latte, or hiring the yard and cleaning help? Who will be able to afford vacationing in Wisconsin or at popular tourist attractions across America?

American tourism already seems down in the U.S., at least from what I have observed. Hearing a foreign language or accent at Yellowstone or Grand Canyon National Parks is the norm. Last fall, my sister and I observed that Disney World would really be hurting if it weren't for the Brazilians spending their dollars at the Kingdom of the Mouse. An American accent was in the minority at all locations.

But it isn't just the business owners' ledger that takes the hit when tourists cut back, its all the employees at these businesses that feel it too. If Disney, the largest employer in the U.S., the National Parks or even Wisconsin Dells, for that matter, experience a downturn, then area hotels don't need as many housekeepers. Restaurants cut hours or move employees to part time. Peripheral tourist attractions such as raft rides or water parks lose business.

If consumers cut back, because they don't have as much disposable income as they used to, the carpet, furniture, clothing, and tech. stores suffer a loss. That loss is passed on to the employees; the management cuts hours, sometimes pay, sometimes benefits, and often terminates employees.

Of course the truly wealthy will still do and buy these things or just move out of the country, but the $200,000 - $250,000 earners, who file their business taxes on their personal tax returns, will be hurting.

And if you think you aren't one of those upper 2% earners, so your paycheck will be untouched, think again: ObamaCare taxes are coming our way in 2013. More than likely the Payroll Tax Cut will expire, resulting in less take home pay.

So if all of us have less money in our pockets, who will be the purchasers? How will that effect your job?

Contact your Representatives and Senators
Find your U.S. Senators by last name
Wisconsin's U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (202) 224-5323
Wisconsin's U.S. Senator Herb Kohl (202) 224-5653

Find your U.S. House of Representatives member by state
House Representative James Sensenbrenner Washington D.C. (202) 225-5101, Brookfield (262) 784-1111

House Speaker Boehner phone line (513) 779-5400

*Class warfare and even the term middle class are Marxist terms

Past Post: Tax the rich? Every job I had was because of richer person!

More Reading:
Taxing the Rick More Will Backfire on the Middle Class
French star Depardieu moves to lower-tax Belgium
Heritage: Chart: Obamacare's Barrage of Tax Hikes Coming in 2013
Top Five Worst Obamacare Taxes Coming in 2013

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Tell Republicans to stand firm: No New Taxes

They call it the Fiscal Cliff. Falling off it is seen as disastrous to the U.S. economy and will cause us to fall back into recession. (Did we ever leave it?) If we do nothing to avert the cliff, we fall off on New Year's Eve.

But what is the Fiscal Cliff? Primarily, it is the end to the Bush Tax Cuts they band-aided back into law in December of 2010. It also includes expiration of the Payroll Tax Cut, which has little support from either side of the aisle. If you remember, it reduced the Social Security payroll deduction from 6.2% to 4.2% so workers would have a bit more take home pay. (Did you even notice?) However, it also reduced the amount of money flowing into the Social Security coffers--a bad idea for an entitlement already facing solvency issues. The $700 billion or so Doc Fix, military reductions, and some token spending cuts also part of the mix.

Our Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner wrote, Don't trade a cliff for an iceberg.  In it he points out,

Currently, the US debt is on track to reach 187 percent of GDP by 2035. But unlike Greece, there is no "Germany" to bail us out. If our debt reaches this level, an international economic crisis would ensue. 

The President and Congressional Democrats have called for a “balanced” approach to reducing the deficit. 

But their approach has been anything but balanced. The President’s “offer” included $1.6 trillion dollars in taxes and $400 billion in spending cuts. That’s neither balanced nor helpful for our economy. When spending on entitlements is 62 percent of our budget, the President’s focus on tax increases is not going to cut it.

We can’t solve our debt problem without economic growth, and tax hikes could cost 710,000 jobs according to an independent Ernst &Young study.

Simply put, the President wants no cuts in spending, in fact wants even more increases including another Stimulus! Obama wants to increase taxes on the "rich" that will raise only around $85 billion, enough to run our country for 8 and a half days. So losing over 700,000 jobs in exchange for running the government for 8.5 days is a good deal?

House Speaker John Boehner has been offering up plans, even more generous than last time, to President Obama. They include increases in tax revenue by closing loopholes. But on whose authority? Boehner certainly doesn't have the backing of his party. By the way, Obama rejected his offers.

So at this point, if you don't want America to increase tax rates, spending, and debt, I think your representatives need to hear from you.  I would like to see the House pass an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts for all income levels, then see what the President offers. Don't forget we have a debt ceiling deadline coming and Obama will need Republican votes then.

Contact your Representatives and Senators
Find your U.S. Senators by last name
Wisconsin's U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (202) 224-5323
Wisconsin's U.S. Senator Herb Kohl (202) 224-5653

Find your U.S. House of Representatives member by state
House Representative James Sensenbrenner Washington D.C. (202) 225-5101, Brookfield (262) 784-1111

House Speaker Boehner phone line (513) 779-5400

More Reading:
The Social Security payroll tax cut: Let it die
Don't trade a cliff for an iceberg

Boehner tax increase sparks conservative backlash

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Tommy Thompson, Wisconsin & all of U.S. need you to stop Obamacare

It may sound dramatic, but it is true: America must have a Republican majority in the U.S. Senate, if we have any hope of repealing ObamaCare, reducing the size of government, and just plain getting anything done in Washington D.C. Though I supported another candidate in the primary, I wholeheartedly support Wisconsin's Tommy Thompson for U.S. Senate now. Most importantly, Thompson is a social conservative: pro-life, pro traditional marriage, and pro family. He has a record of being able to get things done, even with a Democrat controlled legislature.

In addition, Thompson pledged to be the "51st vote" to repeal "ObamaCare," something the majority of Americans consider to be a #1 priority. From his website: "The law isn’t even close to being fully implemented, but its flaws are already so clearly obvious and the threat to our economy so real that we must start completely over."

The economic threat Thompson referred to is the $716 billion Obama removed from Medicare to pay for ObamaCare, the $800+ billion in new ObamaCare taxes that will kick in on Jan. 1 2013, our rising insurance premiums to cover all the people included in ObamaCare, and my personal favorite, the IRS' latest intrusion coming into your life (and wallet) by adding a new tax form. It will require you to report what qualifying insurance plan you have, or pay the penalty tax--2.5% of adjusted gross income--for not being insured. (That is the fine; it doesn't purchase insurance!)

And Gov. Tommy Thompson's opponent? That would be Madison's extreme liberal, Democrat Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, a self-identified lesbian, favoring gay marriage and abortion on demand up until birth. She ranks so far to the left, Thompson quips, "Nancy Pelosi has to turn left to talk to her," and that isn't just campaign speak. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported, Baldwin's voting record places her among top liberals: Baldwin scored 19th most liberal; Pelosi was the 43rd most liberal.

The Journal also stated, "Baldwin voted in favor of... No Child Left Behind; the $787 billion stimulus bill (now estimated to cost $831 billion); and was a backer of the Affordable Care Act [ObamaCare]" She was so liberal, though she voted for ObamaCare, she didn't think it went far enough--Baldwin really wanted "a single-payer system" a government takeover of our healthcare system that would pay for all healthcare costs.

During her 14 years in Congress, she voted against the Bush tax cuts, which means, she was in favor of raising taxes on the middle class, which is most of us. Baldwin also voted against "tougher sanctions against Iran four times" before she became a U.S. Senate candidate. Now that she is running for Senate, she voted 2 times in favor. Uh-huh.

"What about the claim that Baldwin has accomplished little as a legislator?" Well, the Journal mentioned she renamed a post office, expanded screenings for breast and cervical cancer and also helped visually impaired veterans get disability benefits in 2007. Last year, she introduced the Safe Cosmetics Act, a law that if enacted would put small personal care/cosmetic companies and beauty salons out of business. 

And it is on her lack of accomplishment that her own district's paper, Madison's Wisconsin State Journal endorsed Tommy Thompson! Amazing. They wrote:"Tommy Thompson has a long record of getting things done, often through compromise.His likeable but very liberal opponent, Tammy Baldwin, does not. ...Thompson still shows promise as a leader who will demand action [such as fixing "America's fiscal mess" and "jobs"] in Washington, rather than sticking to partisan games."

The LaCrosse Tribune, a pretty liberal area of the state, also endorses Tommy: Our view: Thompson best choice for Senate  It's clear, they admire Baldwin's passion but support Thompson because "[he] runs on a rich record of accomplishment in leading our state during a period when the governor and Legislature were on different sides of the political fence for 12½ of those 14 years. ...We think that ability is needed in Washington, too."

The Beloit Daily News echos the same sentiments in Thompson for US Senate: "Thompson has a proven track record as a deal-maker and problem-solver. Considering the magnitude of the issues facing the nation, and the get-nothing-done partisanship which has hogtied Congress, we believe Washington could use someone who knows how to get to the handshake." And there are others.

And so it seems, in light of the dire straits we find our nation in, even liberals see the need for common sense measures. We really must start addressing and solving some of our country's problems. Tommy Thompson is the man to do just that. 

Sadly, Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has stated he will not work with President Romney, should he win, and so, the gridlock in Washington will continue unless Republicans gain a majority in the Senate.

This is why Sen.Jim DeMint recently wrote: Why is electing conservatives to the U.S. Senate so important? "Without a conservative Senate, we won't repeal Obamacare... won't balance the budget.... won't secure our borders... we won't stop the bailouts... we won't enact the pro-growth policies needed to get America back to work."

I would add we won't be able to appoint Supreme Court Justices who favor judicial restraint or achieve energy independence by drilling here.

So you see, much is at stake here. We cannot do anything about the out of state senate races except donate to their cause, but in state, we can vote for Tommy Thompson for US Senate and the Mitt Romney / Paul Ryan ticket, 2 races even Madison's Wisconsin State Journal supports: Wisconsin State Journal Flips for Romney 


Side note: Don't forget your Republican Congressmen. If you live in Paul Ryan's Congressional District 1, you vote for him there as well. In Tammy Baldwin's District 2, vote for Chad Lee, a Republican businessman.

More Reading & Link List: 
Tommyforwisconsin
New ObamaCare Tax Form Mandates Americans Report Personal Health ID Info to IRS.
Five More ObamaCare Taxes Hitting in 60 Days  
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Baldwin's voting record places her among top liberals
Tammy Baldwin Sets Benchmark for Far-Left Ideologues

Madison's Wisconsin State Journal: Tommy best to tackle Washington  gridlock 
La Cross Tribune: Our view: Thompson best choice for Senate  
Beloit Daily News: EDITORIAL: Thompson for US Senate
Reid: We Won't Work With Romney
Do you want to repeal Obamacare?
Madison's Wisconsin State Journal: Wisconsin State Journal Flips for Romney "'This is not an easy endorsement to make,' the paper’s editorial board wrote. 'We endorsed Obama for change last time around. Now we’re endorsing change again: Mitt Romney.'"
21 Newspapers Switch to Romney

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

'Big Bird' joins AARP in telling Obama, Don't mention us

In last week's Romney/Obama debate, President Obama proudly referred to AARP* as supportive to his ObamaCare plan. After the debate, AARP promptly said, 'don't mention us again': "“While we respect the rights of each campaign to make its case to voters, AARP has never consented to the use of its name by any candidate or political campaign,” the group posted in a statement. “AARP is a nonpartisan organization and we do not endorse political candidates nor coordinate with any candidate or political party.”"

Now that statement is pretty remarkable, since AARP sold out its members by supporting ObamaCare in the first place! But now that the bloom is clearly off the ObamaCare rose and Obama presidency, AARP is requesting Obama not to refer to them again. Thanks a lot, AARP. You pushed for the legislation, got the equivalent of a waiver for yourself, and now you don't want to be associated with Obama and ObamaCare?

In that same debate, when talking about how to deal with Obama's unbridled spending, adding a trillion+ dollars to the debt a year, Romney gave the example of cutting unnecessary spending. Since PBS's Jim Lehrer was the moderator, Mitt Romney mentioned discontinuing taxpayer subsidies to PBS, as one example of wasteful spending.

Romney said, "I'm sorry, Jim, I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I'm going to stop other things. I like PBS, I love Big Bird. Actually like you, too. But I'm not going to — I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for. That's number one."

Well, after that debate, President Obama jumped on Romney's nixing Big Bird as a campaign issue. He talked about it on the stump. His campaign quickly cooked up an absurd campaign ad featuring Big Bird! Trouble is, like AARP, "Big Bird, it seems, isn't thrilled about his cameo in the presidential race."

In fact, "The folks at Sesame Street are asking the Obama campaign to pull down a TV ad released Tuesday that mocks Mitt Romney for vowing to yank the subsidy to PBS." the "Sesame Workshop, a nonprofit educational organization that produces and owns the show, issued a statement Tuesday saying [like AARP], “we do not endorse candidates or participate in political campaigns. We have approved no campaign ads, and as is our general practice, have requested that the ad be taken down.”

The CEO of Sesame Workshop, Sherrie Westin, stated on CNN that "the Sesame Workshop receives very little funding from PBS".  Apparently, they are able to fund their programing through selling licensed products, donors, and corporate underwriting/sponsorship. Westin does not like Big Bird being the poster child bird for public funding.

The bigger picture here is why is President Obama and his campaign fixating on Big Bird and not the real issues crippling our economy and threatening our nation?

Romney summed it up nicely yesterday,  ""You have to scratch your head when the president spends the last week talking about saving Big Bird," he said. "I actually think we need to have a president who talks about saving the American people and saving good jobs.""

Maybe Obama is hoping you will be thinking about Big Bird instead of why the White House's Benghazi narrative differs so from the under oath State Department testimony. (You mean the attack wasn't a spontaneous response to that anti-Muslim video?)



*Many people, in the past, joined AARP so they could enjoy the travel-related discounts, however, there are many other organizations that provide the same benefits. I am a AAA member; others have joined organizations such as AMAC, a conservative alternative to AARP

1st Debate Transcript 
1st Debate: Romney Presidential, capable, Obama? ...clearly 'a drag'


AARP to Obama: Don't mention us again
How AARP's support for ObamaCare was bought and paid for
After AARP gets 'waiver' from Obamacare, conservative groups fight for information, answers "“It’s payoff time to the AARP (some call it bribery) for selling out seniors and endorsing Obamacare, an awful proposal which makes no sense to seniors who know it’s bad medicine for them,” Martin said in a statement."

Big Bird Wants Out of Campaign Ad

State Department reveals new details of Benghazi attack
Middle East unrest: Romney? presidential, Obama? busy campaigning

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

"Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?"

Last September, I had the privilege of visiting the Reagan Library in California. At the time I snapped this picture, I answered his question with a resounding, NO. Little did I know how much worse off our country and the world would be in the span of just one year.

Most think of this question in terms of the economy. After all, Reagan was running against President Jimmy Carter. But there was also the Iran hostage crisis hanging over our country like a national pall. So Foreign Policy was also a concern.

If we go back to 2008, our country would be about $10.6 trillion in debt, instead of the $16+ trillion we're at now. Obama increased it by 50% in less than 4 years! That works out to $111,414 per taxpayer and counting. And Obama was the one, who in Feb. 2009, pledged he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term!

As Obama inferred in his 2009 pledge, the interest on the debt would increasingly become unmanageable. How unmanageable? Take a look at this: Brother, Can You Spare a Trillion? 




To make matters worse, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke embarked on QE3 to stimulate Obama's flagging economy, at the rate of $40 billion a month, for the election. (QE3 is the 3rd round of quantitative easing: a fancy term for pumping up the money supply or buying our own debt) This bit of insanity earned us another downgrade to our already downgraded credit rating from AA to AA-.

There are so many other aspects of this question to consider besides the economy. There is the disdain and disregard of our Constitution by our president, the bypassing congress by executive order, the loss of liberties, etc. And then, like the Carter years, the weak, apologetic tone of our foreign policy.

So what do you say to Ronald Reagan's question? And what are you going to do about it on November 6th?
 
More Reading:
Morning Bell: National Debt Hits $16 Trillion
Fed Pulls Trigger, to Buy Mortgages
Egan-Jones analyst Hints at US Rating Downgrade Post QE3

US Credit Rating Cut by Egan-Jones ...Again

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Great 1st week for Romney/Ryan ticket

What a great first week Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan had.*  In fact, I would say, adding Paul Ryan to the ticket has reset the Romney campaign: Picking Paul Ryan as VP has removed all doubts about Mitt Romney's resolve to scale back big government and cut our out of control debt.

It is clear Romney and Ryan don't want to get into the gutter of negative campaigning, rather, they just want to talk about the real issues threatening America's future: jobs, the economy, entitlements, etc.

It is exciting to see Americans responding to their message in such a positive way. I saw this excitement for myself at the Romney / Ryan rally at the Waukesha Expo last Sunday. True, this was in the heart of Republican Waukesha County, but not everyone of the 12,000+ was from Waukesha. I heard some in line talking about how they came from Wausau, Racine, and West Bend.

The place was packed. I was close enough to catch a glimpse of the candidates, and it was plain to see Mitt Romney truly admires Paul Ryan. I can only compare it to maybe a father proudly looking at his son.

The Ryan pick has boosted a cautiously hopeful Romney campaign to one that Republicans and Independents can be energized about. I saw a little bit of that energy even on election eve 4 years ago. Excerpts from It made me feel better: Palin 2012 Ryan, a past post will explain:

"On election eve, I quickly made this campaign button to illustrate my hopes for the 2012 ticket. I wore it to the Waukesha Republican Victory Party.

"Barely there 2 minutes, a few women from the Waukesha Republican Party and I started talking. ...Then they spotted my button, and their eyes lit up. Where did you get that? I said I made it. They definitely liked the idea. These ladies were not alone. In the course of the evening, my humble button received enthusiastic support.

"I know many blame Governor Sarah Palin for McCain's loss on Tuesday. But that sentiment shows how little those naysayers understand conservatives. It was very clear to me that fellow volunteers at the phone bank were there only because of Sarah, not McCain. Same with rally attendees.

"As Senator John McCain gave his concession speech that night, he took the full blame for his failure to win. Amongst the Waukesha Republican faithful watching on the big screen, there was no murmur in the audience to the contrary. When McCain thanked Governor Palin, the audience cheered. You would think BBC reporter Ali Reed was there in the room with us. ...he reported the same reaction:

'The sombre air at Senator John McCain's concession speech was momentarily pierced by cheer as Mr McCain spoke about Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.'

"The Wall Street Journal would like to see Congressman Paul Ryan become the House Minority Leader. (Ryan is not interested.) But they see Paul Ryan as many of us do, a rising star on the Republican horizon. Ryan for the Republicans, The party needs an economic spokesman:

'... the Republican Party faces a choice. It can put the loss down to the country's fatigue with the Bush Administration and the bad luck of running amid a financial panic and shrug it off. Or it can choose a new direction, with new leadership, and retake the high ground it once occupied, especially on the economy.
...Mr. Ryan's economic knowledge and youthful energy make him the best choice [for Minority Leader] to pull his party in a more promising direction.'

"Sad to say, persona matters in politics. Obama's youth and charisma made him more attractive than McCain's old, tired warhorse manner. It has been said that if radio were around in 1800, Thomas Jefferson would never have won the presidency. Jefferson was brilliant on paper but not a great orator.

"Conservatives, imagine a Palin/Ryan or Ryan/Palin ticket in 2012? With Ryan's grasp of economics and practical solutions and Palin being governor of the only state not in or headed toward recession, it could be a winning combination: A ticket with real conservative solutions AND articulate, attractive candidates. 
Sign me up!"

The Romney / Ryan 2012 ticket is a much stronger combination than my impromptu offering in 2008. Mitt Romney combines years of business experience, a governorship, and his love of country and liberties our Founders secured for us.

Romney and Ryan are drawing huge crowds wherever they go and are boldly addressing the issues that matter to Americans. It should be an exciting 3 months.

In the news:
Election 2012 Trial Heat: Obama vs. Romney Romney 47% to Obama's 45%
POLLAK: The Mantle of Leadership Has Shifted: Romney, Ryan Govern in All but Name  "In the first week since Paul Ryan joined Mitt Romney on the Republican ticket, something subtle yet fundamental has happened to the country–something not yet reflected in poll numbers or punditry: the mantle of leadership has shifted."Niall Ferguson: Obama's Gotta Go "Why does Paul Ryan scare the president so much? Because Obama has broken his promises, and it's clear that the GOP ticket's path to prosperity is our only hope."
Ryan could bring senior, female votes to GOP ticket despite Dem narrative "Though Democrats are hammering Paul Ryan as the bringer of Medicare's doom, the Republican vice presidential candidate is far more popular among seniors than he's given credit for. Same goes for women. And independents." Three Reasons Paul Ryan Makes the US a Better Investment   "Maybe U.S. financial markets have a chance after all. That's the message many of us take away from the news that Representative Paul Ryan will join Mitt Romney on the Republican presidential ticket."
Ryan at The Villages - Protect & Strengthen MEDICARE: Ryan: Medicare should not be a piggy bank for ObamaCare
Romney and Ryan's five-year courtship tracked evolution of GOP  "Days before the Republican presidential primary in Wisconsin in April, Ryan said he would back Romney, canceling a family vacation to campaign with him. (Romney held off a final challenge in Wisconsin from Rick Santorum and, from that point, cruised to securing the Republican nomination.)" 
*Top photo was taken just before our primary.

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

Last chance! Your 2-cents against Hoan bike path & Trolley could save millions

Most of you have heard about these 2 transportation projects, the addition of pedestrian / bike lanes to the I-794 Hoan Bridge reconstruction project and the Milwaukee Streetcar project, sometimes called the Milwaukee Trolley. (I often refer to it as Tom Barrett's Folly Trolley.)

The 2 projects have little in common except that they are both located in Milwaukee, both serve a very tiny percentage of the population, both add to traffic congestion, and both carry a whopping price-tag!

The public hearings on both projects have passed, but you may still submit your comments via email until Wednesday, November 30th for the I-794 Hoan Bridge Bike Path and until Friday, December 2nd, 5pm for the Milwaukee Streetcar project.

Since both of these projects are primarily Federally funded, you DO NOT HAVE TO LIVE IN MILWAUKEE to submit your comments!

The Hoan Bridge Bike Lane Project: Comments due by 5pm Wednesday, November 30th - Email carolynn.gellings@dot.wi.gov

Bicycles on the Interstate? Though I have seen bicycle's permitted signs on interstates in other parts of our nation, these usually were in very remote areas where there were NO other roads. Here in Milwaukee, that isn't the problem; there are other routes that would allow for bicycle traffic. (Click link and scroll half way down the page to see street level bike routes.)

Another problem with the Hoan bike path is the elevation rise and drop. Very few bikers are in the kind of shape necessary to make this route practical.

And then there is the wind and weather component. Having recently driven on the high bridges on I-43 in a SUV through Green Bay, we experienced the gusty winds off the lake. I cannot imagine what the Hoan would be like on a bicycle! And what about biking or walking in the rain or in winter?

How many riders would utilize this route? Costs for just adding the bike path range from an estimated $9.5 million to $95.5 million for a totally separate structure.

Wisconsin DOT I-794 Project reports
Sheriff Clarke and Senator Larson clash over proposed Hoan Bridge bike path

The Milwaukee Streetcar Project - Comments due by 5pm Friday, December 2nd - Email comments@themilwaukeestreetcar.com

Does the price-tag of about $30 million per mile ($65 M total) seem a worthy expenditure to you for a streetcar in Milwaukee you will probably never use? How about an additional $32 million per mile to move the existing utility lines? So the initial route cost estimates add up to $135 million for that 2.1 mile route: $65 million for the trolleys and track, $70 million to move utilities. Plus, don't forget an additional $2.7 million a year to operate the thing.

And oh, if that were the only cost! For that cost only reflects the first 2.1 mile leg of the route, the anchor baby of the project, so to speak. Because if you look at the proposed route map, you see this $65 million original leg is only a tiny portion of the spider shaped route map (Scroll down the page to see 2nd map.) Keep in mind each mile of tracks laid carry the exorbitant expense of moving utilities, take up a traffic lane, and/or eliminate street parking along the route.

Why do we need this when a bus route would accomplish the same? I rode the Milwaukee Transit buses for years to work. It is beyond me why this expensive street-car is being proposed. A bus line would offer more flexibility in routing. Buses can be rerouted or eliminated to reflect demand. Plus, unlike Portland and Phoenix, Wisconsin has winter. Buses can run in slushy, icy, snowy conditions. Can streetcars on embedded light-rail tracks?

Giving back the high-speed rail "free pony" anchor baby
Milwaukee Streetcar Route and future routes
Streetcar Comparison: Milwaukee vs. Portland

So this is one of the few times your input, your 2-cents, could save millions of dollars--billions when you include the additional routes and other areas bike lanes would be added to Interstates.

Say NO now to this kind of spending--we can't afford it.

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation