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 <><

Greenfield & Moorland Walmart Public Hearing, 6 pm Monday, Jan. 7, 2013

Brookfield District 7 Aldermen Lisa Mellone and Renee Lowerr sent out this email to alert Brookfield residents of New Berlin's proposed Walmart store Public Hearing:

"This email serves to inform you of a Public Hearing that is scheduled for Monday, January 7, 2013 at 6 p.m. at New Berlin City Hall, 3805 S. Casper Dr. for the newly proposed Walmart development which will replace the Charcoal Grill currently located near the southeast corner of Moorland and Greenfield roads. Please note, this is a NEW BERLIN proposal not Brookfield, and only New Berlin officials have authority on whether this project moves forward. However, any citizen is able to attend any municipal public hearing and you do not have to be a New Berlin resident. If you would like to find out more about this proposal then I encourage you to attend. No action will be taken by the New Berlin Plan Commission until February 4, 2013."

Thank you Lisa and Renee.

Let me repeat, this is NOT a City of Brookfield proposal; it is a City of New Berlin proposal, so do not contact your Brookfield officials or representatives about this. Only New Berlin has the authority to move this project forward or stop it.

The proposed Walmart would be on the south side of Greenfield Avenue, west of Highland Memorial Cemetery (I guess those neighbors won't complain), which makes it IN New Berlin, not Brookfield. It will be on the site the Charcoal Grill currently occupies. There is one homeowner on the edge of the proposed store property, marked as R-5 on the maps, the one east or right of the other R-5, which is a house owned and rented out by the cemetery, according to New Berlin Now. Other than the east R-5 there are no other privately owned and occupied homes near the store frontage.

This Walmart proposal would be for a 24 hour store with pharmacy and groceries. Should the proposed Walmart be approved, the current Walmart, on National and Moorland, which is the closest store to our area, would be closed.

Walmart

Contact Information Developer
Jim Frayn
Manhard Consulting Ltd.
Vernon Hills, IL 60061
Ph: (630) 925-1206


New Berlin City Staff
Nikki Jones
Community Development Department - Planning
Ph: (262) 786-8610 ext 2503
Email: njones@newberlin.org

New Berlin City Hall's address is 3805 S. Casper Drive. Casper tees into National Ave., west of S. Moorland Road. (City Hall then is north of New Berlin's Fire and Police Departments which face National Ave.)

More Reading:
New Berlin Now: Woman's quiet New Berlin home could be surrounded by Walmart
JSOnline: Walmart proposes supermarket, discount store for New Berlin
City of New Berlin Development Project Page

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 <><

Ryan/Biden 'debate': What in the world was that?

Joe Biden and Paul Ryan faced off in their only debate for the 2012 campaign last night. Calling it a debate is a bit of a stretch though, because Biden was combative, rude, arrogant, dismissive, inappropriate, condescending ...you pick your adjective.

Biden interrupted Paul Ryan some 80+ times and the moderator, Martha Raddatz, who did little to moderate, and in fact often helped Biden by cutting Ryan short as he was making a point, did nothing to structure the conversation. It was a very one sided free for all (Biden and Raddatz, that is). The whole thing disgusted me.

Ben Shapiro summarized it this way, "Biden interrupted Ryan repeatedly. He would not allow Ryan to finish an answer; where he stopped interrupting for even a few moments, his moderator ally, Martha Raddatz, jumped in to help him cut Ryan short."

Paul Ryan kept a cool head and stuck to the facts.

Most disturbing to me was Biden's smirks, and almost laughter, while Ryan was talking about serious issues such as Iran getting nuclear weapons or the embassy deaths. It was bizarre. What? he thinks a nuclear Iran is funny?

Biden was totally inappropriate in his responses and in his demeanor, hardly Vice Presidential, not to mention Presidential, should the need ever arise. All I could think of was this was the man Barack Obama picked as his running mate, to give his ticket some gravitas--especially on foreign policy. (Biden still insisted they weren't aware that more security was needed in Libya.)

Maybe the debate should have begun with the familiar campaign ad intro: I am Barack Obama, and I approve this Vice President.




CNN Poll: Ryan 48%, Biden 44%

Chris Wallace: I've never seen a candidate as disrespectful as Biden...
Borger: Biden Came Off As Condescending...
Hume: Biden Came Off As Rude And A 'Cranky Old Man'...
Noonan: Confusing Strength With Aggression
AP: Body Language:..it was all Joe 'Laugh, chuckle, grimace, grin, smirk, goofy face'...
CNN: Who won? Martha Raddatz...

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 <><

Senate mining bill on life support, call Senators to save!

Sixteen Democrats and one Republican in Wisconsin's State Senate put a stake in the heart of the mining industry in our state on Tuesday, when the Senate version compromise bill was narrowly defeated by 1 vote. If Republican Dale Shultz or even just one Democrat would have voted in favor of this bill, Gogebic Taconite, G-Tac, wouldn't be leaving for more mining friendly, and also iron rich, Minnesota and Michigan.

It seemed any hope of streamlining the mining approval process with a mining reform bill was dead, because the Senate session ends on March 15th. But yesterday and today it seems there just might be a glimmer of hope to revive this job-rich bill.

DNR Secretary Cathy Stepp spoke on both the Mark Belling Show yesterday and Vicki McKenna's radio program today. She emphasized how the Senate Mining Bill did not circumvent DNR rules as opponents said; it just set a timeline, a shorter deadline, for a mine's approval process. Each specific mine proposal would still have to meet DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, etc. requirements.

So what wasn't to like? The failed Senate mining bill added improved wet land creation in its language over present legislation, it was backed by 9 private sector unions, and G-Tac assured 95% of the jobs created would be union jobs.

Vicki also emphasized today that iron mining is NOT strip mining, but pit mining. We are familiar with pit mining in almost every area of Wisconsin because it is the same type of mining that rock quarries use. The G-Tac mine pit would be 15 acres in size, about the size of the square block I live on. Once all the iron ore was extracted, it would be restored. In fact, beautiful Lake Wazee, the deepest inland lake in Wisconsin, is a good example of the aftermath of a former taconite quarry or pit mine.

If Democrat Senators like Tim Carpenter (608) 266-8535 or Chris Larson (608) 266-7505 will rethink their votes, since their districts could benefit from the increase in jobs at mine equipment builders Caterpillar or Joy Global in Milwaukee, the mining bill and the mining industry in Wisconsin could be saved. If not, we have just secured our place in the race to the bottom for the most unfriendly mine locations in the world.

So it is up to the residents of this state to make one last plea to their Senator to change their mind on voting for mining in Wisconsin. Hopefully, they will reconsider. If just one Senator does, the mining bill could make a miraculous recovery and all of Wisconsin will benefit.

Find your State Senator here. Be polite; you are making an appeal.

More Reading:
Gogebic drops plans for iron ore mine
And now we know
Hurley residents decry 'devastating' collapse of Wisconsin mining bill
Wisconsin Tea Party Reaction to Mining Debacle

Past Post: Wisconsin Senate mining bill took wrong turn, now better

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

Wisconsin Tea Party Reaction to Mining Debacle

I received this press release in my inbox yesterday:

For Immediate Release: March 8, 2012
Contacts: Kim Simac, 715.479.8784
Annette Olson, 715.760.0665

Wisconsin Tea Party Leaders React to Mining Debacle

(Eagle River, WI) – Few examples illustrate as clearly as the GTac mining debacle why citizens across the state of Wisconsin now claim allegiance to the Tea Party Movement. So many of the problems with which we take profound issue have been on prominent display in recent days—not least, holding industry hostage to excessive taxation and over-burdensome regulations. The shameful and all too predictable outcome in this case has been yet another crippling of entrepreneurial spirit in our state.

Who really pays?

GTac is a large, proven employer with a good track record, whose executives honorably promised to bring good conservation practices and a great economy to a state starving for jobs. They can now find some other state in which to mine. Northern Wisconsin, however, remains in economic depression, under which it has already suffered for years. Hundreds of people across the state desperately want and need solid, good-paying jobs to help them survive a challenging economy remain. The GTac mine and the expansion it would have brought to related business and industry could have made a substantive difference. Never mind the valuable tax revenues this mining project would have brought to state and local tax bases.

As Tea Party organizers in Wisconsin, we have publicly maintained these past three years that opportunity, prosperity, and the individual right to pursue them have been grossly hindered by over-reaching and infringing state and federal governments. We have also consistently noted too great a willingness on the part of our elected officials to pander to special interests against the wise will of the people. We amplify that message today.

The mining bill is not the first victim of this marriage between special interests and big government. We can cite many others. The rich, renewable resources available in Wisconsin’s forests, for example, have long been placed beyond the reach of those who could benefit from them. Environmental groups, with the complicity of too many politicians and bureaucrats, have essentially hogtied Wisconsin logging, mills, and additional wood product businesses.

One must ask the question: How do environmental groups and the elected officials who pander to them propose that residents of Northern Wisconsin provide a living for themselves? With this mine now yanked out of reach, with the promise of economic success once again cruelly removed, how will people continue to inhabit these regions? Could it be that prosperity and a future for these citizens is not a priority for these special interest groups and their elected friends?

We put these questions to our Democratic state senators and their close ally Senator Dale Schultz, whose ―"Republican" alignment with radical environmental and other special interest agendas raises serious questions of its own.

This is a sad day for Wisconsin, and particularly for the children of our state, whose short- and long-term well being has been grossly overlooked. Radical outside interests, using obvious
influence to control the decisions of our legislators, have in fact assured that the children of northern Wisconsin in particular, now face a future of far less stability, opportunity, and prosperity.

We, the undersigned and our respective memberships, will not rest until this trend is reversed.

Kim Simac and Shirley Kufeldt, Northwoods Patriots
Annette Olson, Un-Infringed Liberty
Kirsten Lombard, The Wisconsin 9/12 Project
Dan Horvatin, Rock River Patriots
Joanne Terry, Ozaukee Patriots
Matt Strublic, Oshkosh TEA Party
Jim Kiser, Fond du Lac TEA Party
Jeff Horn, Prairie Patriots
Paul Lembrich, Rock County Voter Education Forum
Ed Perkins, Fox Valley Initiative
Ken Van Doren and Todd Welch, Campaign for Liberty
Dr. Sidney Johnson, Central Wisconsin Tea Party
Lora Halberstadt and Nancy Milholland, Racine TEA Party
Seth Cowan, Wolf River Area Patriots
Joe Delsman, Northeast Wisconsin Patriots
Steve Welcenbach, Conservative Insurgency
Dan Curran, Concerned Citizens of Iowa County

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

Pres. Obama, GOP not 'licking their chops', but we'll all be licking our wounds

Yesterday, the President referenced one newspaper's lead story, that gasoline prices were on the rise and Republicans were "licking their chops", in an effort to deflect any responsibility over gasoline's unprecedented price increases.

Then he went on to say, They [Republicans] are already dusting off their 3 point plan for $2 gas... Step 1 is to drill, and step 2 is to drill, and then step 3 is to keep drilling, something he has been thwarting every chance he gets.

Sadly, the President believes higher energy prices will encourage us to adopt his greener energy initiatives such as algae or whatever, though "the president admitted, no one actually knows how to turn algae (or a million other things) into motor fuel".

Obama also touted higher fuel standard regulations as a way to help us out of our gasoline shortage. Maybe he should urge the EPA and Congress to rescind the ethanol mandates? That would increase fuel efficiency by what, 10%? (He must have forgotten to mention proper tire inflation this time.)

He bragged that the U.S. was producing more domestic oil than ever, inferring that is why we need to turn to green energy, but failed to mention that higher production level was from the Bakken Shield oil shale fields in North Dakota and other oil rich areas on private property. (In other words, no thanks to his oppressive oil policies.) No mention of how he has rejected approving Canada's Keystone oil pipeline, which would help us "build an energy-independent North America".

No, this is the same man who in January of 2008 said under my plan, under a cap and trade system, electricity prices would "necessarily skyrocket". Clearly, he doesn't mind higher energy prices.

High gasoline prices hurt the very people who can least afford them: the unemployed, the under-employed, large families, lower to middle class people, areas dependent on tourism, and businesses in general.

The one saving grace of this recession was at least gas prices were low. But now what little disposable income these people have will go into their gas tanks. Discretionary spending will go down. Vacation plans will be cut back.

We'll all be licking our wounds with high gas prices. True, there isn't much we can do about it right now, but what about in the next decade? Algae research will not help; Drill, Baby, Drill and Keystone would. Remember that when you cast your ballot in November.

More Reading:
Krauthammer MOCKS Obama's Algae Energy Plan
Barack 'All of the Above' Obama
Obama Vows to 'Double Down' on Green Investments Despite Solyndra and Volt Flop

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