We Must All Be Sentinels, Lest We Lose What’s Left Of Freedom

 

“Living history is more treacherous than merely witnessing it.”

As a somewhat impudent young man when I was in school, I didn’t really apply myself to history class. After all, history was about things that happened in the past, and I was contemptuously obsessed with “now” and what mysteries lay ahead.  But when a “D” on my report card in history caught my parents’ eyes, they knew it was time to make sure I appreciated the significance of understanding history and, more importantly, our place in it.

My mother’s contribution was the short but time-tested phrase, “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” I’ll get back to that in a moment. But my father chose to deliver his message in his own words, and those are the ones that ultimately haunt me to this day. He said, “We must all be sentinels to history, or else this fragile freedom we enjoy will be snatched away from us… and we won’t see it coming until it’s too late.”

CBO: GOP Health Care Proposal Saves Money!

Just out from House Minority Leader John Boehner, Congressional Budget Office confirmation that the Republican health plan will save consumers money and reduce the deficit. From the CBO’s letter:

According to CBO and JCT’s assessment, enacting the amendment would result in a net reduction in federal budget deficits of $68 billion over the 2010–2019 period.

This is fairly impressive. We’re not talking about spending here, we’re actually talking about saving money! Lowering costs and improving health care at the same time were initally staples of Obama’s repertoire. In fact, before President Obama out-sourced his healthcare aspirations to Congress, he actually wanted to reduce the cost of healthcare, not just make reform “revenue neutral”. In his non-state-of-the-union State of the Union speech last February, the President addressed the issue clearly:

President Barack Obama called surging health costs a drag on the economy, and said Congress needed to overhaul health care this year.

“The cost of our health care has weighed down our economy and the conscience of our nation long enough,” Obama told a joint session of the House and Senate in a speech yesterday.

Yes, he really wanted to reduce the costs that are weighing down the economy. So one would think that the President would embrace the announcement made by Boehner yesterday, which includes:

•    For the small group market (generally businesses with 2 to 50 employees), the GOP plan would reduce premiums in 2016 for example by up to 10 percent.
•    For the individual market, the GOP plan would reduce premiums in 2016 by up to eight percent.
•    For the large group market, the GOP plan would reduce premiums in 2016 by up to three percent.

That covers lots of individuals and lots of businesses and actually does save lots of money.

Will the President and members of Congress congratulate Rep. Boehner and the Republicans for a proposal that does exactly what the President initally wanted? Will they accept the proposal in the true spirit of the bi-partisanship they so desire and work together on it?

Time will tell.

Stoutcat

H/T: Sissy Willis via Twitter

Why Cash For Clunkers Will Hurt Economy More

Program Destined To Do More Harm To US Economy Than Good

I’ve read Stoutcat’s eye-opening rant Show Me The Money (below) on Cash For Clunkers. I ‘ve also read the article from the AP which she links to. In doing so, and checking additional government web sites, I’ve uncovered a few facts suggesting that the CFC program (actual guv’mint name: Car Allowance Rebate System, or CARS) ultimately delivers negative results under even the best of conditions.

Yet another massive failure of the Obama Administration and its “Hip-pocket Congress”. Consider the following.

From the above referenced AP article, the following numbers:

Through late Wednesday, 22,782 vehicles had been purchased through the program and nearly $96 million had been spent. But dealers raised concerns about large backlogs in the processing of the deals in the government system, prompting talk of a possible suspension.

Note that the number of completed vehicle purchases at this point are 22,782 which, with some qualifying for the $3,500 and some for the full $4,500 came to a total of some $96 million or nearly 10% of the allotted billion dollars. At this rate, only some 225,000 vehicles could be purchased under the program’s $1 billion funding.

Let’s follow some more numbers.  Complete transparency, right?

According to RITA (Research and Innovative Technology Administration), using 2006 stats (the latest complete stats available) there are in the US:

• Automobiles registered: 135.4 million
• Light trucks registered: 99.1 million

That’s a total of 234.5 million vehicles in this country. Under the best of circumstances, this program, as currently funded, would only replace about 1/10th of 1% of the vehicles on the road.

While this program may help the dealers sell cars (and people buy them), that’s a ridiculous waste of resources as far as cleaning the environment is concerned.  And that was the positive part of the program!  Now consider the remaining factors:

The Negatives

One tenth of one percent (0.1%) of the vehicles on the road in this country doesn’t even qualify as a drop in the bucket in terms of replacing gas guzzlers with fuel-efficient vehicles. While the Obama administration may want to tout that benefit, it’s all for show with little or no substance. Yet there are negatives that far outweigh the few positive factors here:

• The program requires that the trade-ins be destroyed. Why? Perfectly good used auto parts that could be re-used during repairs of similar cars is a whole lot more “green friendly” than having to manufacture more new parts which uses more energy (and spew more pollutants into the air in the process). Meanwhile, there will be fewer used car parts available for those of us who don’t qualify for a new car and need to continue repairing our existing ones, or would actually like to trade up to a better clunker.
• Then there’s the cost of delivery of those new replacement parts. Tsk Tsk. More energy used.
• Now let’s consider the amount of energy necessary to safely and ecologically destroy these hundreds of thousands of clunkers. And the pollution involved with that.
• Based on local news reports, the majority of the new vehicles being sold thus far are Hondas, Toyotas, and other foreign brands, as those have a larger array of fuel-efficient vehicles.  This means the majority of this money for this program is not even going to be kept in our own economy, but will ultimately wind up overseas. Clever huh? Just another way Obama is using his magnificent  community organizer skills to steer our economy over a cliff, which begs the question, “Is this intentional?” But that’s another rant for another time.

All of this to replace one tenth of one percent of the vehicles on the road. This is what happens when you have a Congress run by power-hungry morons in support of a President who has never even run so much as a lemonade stand, yet is now in charge of our national economy.

Be afraid, folks. Be very afraid.

Gerry Ashley

BREAKING: A Politician Tells the Truth!

 

Well, this is refreshing… in a pathetic sort of way.

If you a) don’t have time to read the bill and/or b) don’t have the comprehension skills to understand the bill that you’re reading, perhaps Congress is not the correct place for you, sir.

READ THE DAMN BILLS!

Stoutcat

Taxation Without Representation

Bills, bills, bills. No, not the kind we get and pay every month–we actually tend to read those.

I mean the bills that Congress votes on.  You know, the ones they don’t write and can’t be bothered to read. It’s not new behavior, but given the amounts of money Congress is playing with these days (billions and trillions of taxpayer dollars), it behooves us to think very carefully about how well our elected officials are serving those who elected them.

Consider the following: Democratic Leader Laughs at Idea That House Members Would Actually Read Health-Care Bill Before Voting On It

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Tuesday that the health-care reform bill now pending in Congress would garner very few votes if lawmakers actually had to read the entire bill before voting on it.

“If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn’t read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes,” Hoyer told CNSNews.com at his regular weekly news conference.

Hoyer was responding to a question from CNSNews.com on whether he supported a pledge that asks members of the Congress to read the entire bill before voting on it and also make the full text of the bill available to the public for 72 hours before a vote.

And this: Democratic Senator Predicts None of His Colleagues ‘Will Have the Chance’ to Read Final Stimulus Bill Before Vote

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted on Thursday that none of his Senate colleagues would ”have the chance” to read the entire final version of the $790-billion stimulus bill before the bill comes up for a final vote in Congress.

“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg told CNSNews.com.

As well as this:

And even this:

Also recall that we even have representatives who believe that the money used to fund the government is not actually our money at all:

Cavuto: “Where do we draw the line with our money? “

Knollenberg: “It is not your money.”

Our Congress is not doing the job it was elected to do. At best, the behavior is hubristic demagoguery; at worst, it is the very epitome of taxation without representation.

Didn’t we fight a war over that a few hundred years ago?

Stoutcat

Pelosi Investigation? No… Sosa? Yes.

 

Ever wonder what became of that little issue of either the Speaker of the House (two heart-beats away from the presidency) or the CIA being blatant liars? Forget about it. According to Glenn Beck, Congress is dropping that issue. Of far more importance in their minds is Sammy Sosa:

OK. Here is the hot list. These are some commonsense solutions to stories where the mainstream media is just not doing their job. This week, Congress has decided not to investigate Nancy Pelosi’s charge that the CIA misled her on the use of waterboarding on terror suspects.

I mean, why would we need to know who was telling the truth there? A congressional committee is investigating whether or not a baseball player, Sammy Sosa, misled Congress. He testified in 2005 that he never used performance-enhancing drugs. He reportedly tested positive in 2003.

Src: Pddnet

Kind of says it all doesn’t it. Welcome to the uber-powerful world of Pelosi, Boxer, Franks, Dodds, ACORN, unions, etc., etc., etc. Welcome to the most corrupt, petty, selfish, idealistic, agenda-driven, elitist government of our time.

Alan Speakman

Breaking on Cavuto… Congress is now discussing taxing health benefits on workers making $100,000 or more. Whatever happened to $250,000?

New Campaign: Buy a Dem a Dictionary

 

It’s not their fault, they just don’t understand what they’re saying. But you can help, and here’s how! 

First we had the original Conjugator-in-Chief, Bill Clinton, who attempted to weasel his way out of saying he lied under oath by trying to re-define the words he used.

“”It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the–if he–if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not–that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement…”

If he’d had a dictionary, he could have looked up the word “is”.

Then we have a whole host of Democrats who claim they didn’t actually understand they voted for authorization for the President (Bush, of course) to attack Iraq…

“…the next section authorizes the president “to use the armed forces of the U.S. as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the U.S. against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant UNSC resolutions regarding Iraq.”

“The third section says that if the president decides to exercise the authority granted in the previous section, he must report to Congress no later than 48 hours after exercising that authority.”

… and subsequently claimed that they didn’t realize that’s what they were actually voting for. What part of ‘authorizes the president “to use the armed forces of the U.S. as he determines to be necessary and appropriate’ did they mis-understand?

If they’d had dictionaries, they could have looked up the word “authorization”.

Later, we have another President (Obama, in this case) who doesn’t understand what he meant when he declared that “lobbyists won’t find a job in my White House.” Because, of course, it depends on what the word “lobbyist” means…

Ron Kirk has never been a registered federal lobbyist,” White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told ABC News….”How precisely is it a loophole when we never pledged to bar state lobbyists?” a Democratic official asks.

So, in ObamaLand, “lobbyist” doesn’t always mean “lobbyist“. Sometimes, “lobbyist” means “not a lobbyist at all–look over there at that unicorn!“

If Obama had a dictionary, he could have looked up the word “lobbyist”.

And now, we have the Speaker of the House, who adamantly refuses to admit that she understood that in enhanced interrogations, waterboarding is a technique that was available and could or would be used in certain cases. This in light of the documents recently released that clearly state that she and select others in Congress were briefed on harsh tactics to be used on Abu Zubaydah.

Nancy, there are some pretty good reference books in the Library of Congress…

Do you have friends who are Democrats? If so, please buy them a dictionary and teach them how to use it. It could save them untold embarrassment and perhaps prevent them from using words they don’t understand under oath, in legislation, in campaign promises, in security briefings.

Folks, have a heart. Buy a Dem a dictionary! Don’t wait; do it today. You won’t be sorry–and neither will your Deomcratic friends.

Stoutcat

Congress, AIG, et al, et al, et al…

Where to begin? You know what? I don’t even know where to begin. I’ll let Shepard Smith get us started…

Wow. Just wow. Between Congress, the President, the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, AIG, and the lobbyists… I don’t even know who’s to blame for the $170 million AIG debacle. (Or more accurately, I don’t even know who’s the most to blame for this disgrace.) But I think I’ll follow Shep on this one and blame Congress for the most part. Though “Flip Flop” Dodd specifically has a lot of ’splaining to do, and I don’t think “Geithner made me do it!” will cut the mustard either.

(Hey, “Turbo Tax” Tim… Do you hear a bus coming?)

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again… Conservatives should just shut up, sit back, and watch the show. Hopefully the Republic will survive, and when our culture finally comes to its senses, we’ll see what we can do with the smoldering ruins left behind by the liberals.

Alan Speakman

Save The Posturing, Mr. President: “Transparent Procurement For Dummies” Is Available NOW!

 

In my previous rant, I mentioned that President Obama wants to close the barn door of government spending, now that all his donkeys and other assorted asses are safely out and all their pork is accounted for.

Yesterday, on National Review’s blog “The Corner,” Roger Clegg noted Obama’s plan to re-design the process for awarding government contracts. Clegg’s main concern seemed to be the awarding of contracts to minority and gender specific companies, thus circumventing the “lowest bidder” format. While I share Roger’s concerns, I also see the issue of the $2,400 hammer based on an award to a company whose interests are represented by lobbyists.

Wouldn’t it be nice if there were an all-in-one solution? That’s what Obama claims as his goal. But, as is always the case with Obama, Style over Substanceis the issue. Case in point – Obama is once again posing and posturing as he seeks a solution that already exists; once again exposing his naivete. Consider (and if you really want to see your tax dollars spent wisely, I urge you to read the following carefully):

From the article in The Washington Post:  

‘President Obama ordered a government-wide review of federal contracting procedures yesterday,’ and continues with the administration’s desire, among other things, to save money and end fraud, waste, and abuse.”

Toward that end, PrObama has set a goal of having Director of the White House Office of Management and Budget Peter Orszag work with Cabinet and agency officials to redesign the process governing procurement to make it more difficult for contractors to bilk taxpayers and the playing ground more accessible to independent and mnority contractors.

Perhaps the biggest indication that this is another case of Obama’s “Style Over Substance” governing: William J. Lynn III, a former Raytheon lobbyistwho is now Obama’s Deputy Defense Secretary, will be responsible for overseeing procurement reform. Wait a minute… Wasn’t one of Obama’s campaign promises one in which he pledged that NO LOBBYISTS would be appointed to key political positions in an Obama administration? But I digress. 

The article went on to state:

Although he estimated that a more coherent system could save billions of dollars, several specialists in the field said that most of the financial benefits would not be realized for years and that other changes probably would cost money because they would involve adding employees to manage and monitor contracts.

Absolute Horse CRAP!  With all due respect Mr. President, why do you believe the only wheels that work are the ones invented by Team Obama?   In point of fact, the  job of setting up a tamper-proof procurement system that will guarantee significant savings  has already been done for you! It’s ready to go to work saving taxpayer’s money  TODAY!  It’s a virtually fool-proof system that:

• Assures saving money by revealing the lowest bid once the bidding has closed.
• Guarantees transparency and accountability through electronic monitoring throughout the process
• Prevents contracts from being given to favored lobbyist-backed vendors
• Evens the playing field for smaller and minority-owned businesses

This well-designed Internet-based On-Line Procurement System is made by a company named  Sicommnet. A quick check of the San Diego-based company’s web site shows that they offer a secure bidding system that is open to ALL qualified vendors from small  independent companies to large corporate icons like Halliburton. Minority-run companies also have an even playing field.

Each business that signs on to their system (for a reasonable fee) can be alerted to any or specific proposal requests or requests for bids in any one of hundreds of traditional categories and subcategories. At the end of bidding, the winning bid is made public (there’s your TRANSPARENCY, Mr. President) so the public can see the winning bid. This gives America’s taxpayers reassurance that the LOW bid is the winning bid and prevents NASA from spending $2,400 for a hammer as part of a pork-u-lous project given to some Senator’s high-school buddy. 

Full disclosure: I spent a year with Sicommnet doing technical writing back in 2000. I have personally seen the design work of the software developers as it has developed over the years. This is a sterling product, but I’m sure if the President’s team scans the Internet, they can find others to compare against. Maybe put THAT contract up for bids…

Gerry Ashley

Just Vote PRESENT

Well, it looks as if President Obama and the leaders of Congress are going to force a vote on this massive stimulus package this afternoon. The final version, complete with hand-written annotations, was released last night at 11pm, leaving an ample reading time of 1.79 pages per minute if you started instantly when it was released, and continued reading without stop until it was scheduled to be brought up for discussion at 9am this morning. No bathroom breaks, no snack breaks, no actual comprehension of what’s being said, no time to make your own annotations. Just read, read, read, then vote, vote, vote! (And that time would probably be better spent cooking up a good pork barbecue sauce…)

Even if Congressional leaders had allowed the promised 48 hours to review the “document’, or even the five-day public review process promised by the President, that would still leave precious little time for either the public or our elected representatives to read, comprehend, question, and re-draft any “discrepancies” before a vote.

So as a sign of protest at this unseemly, and frankly obscene rush to legislate, I have a suggestion for any Congress-people who are uncomfortable voting “YES” but don’t want to alienate their fellow Socialists by voting “NO”. Simply vote “PRESENT”. After all, it’s an honorable tactic used by our president time and time again.

Stoutcat