Sarah Palin’s Newsweek Cover


Obama Owns Health Care and the Media

Part I

Part II

Obama’s exact words were “I Own the health care bill.” What he forgot to announce to the public is that he owns the media too; well most of it anyway, which can, without doubt, be concluded after watching this 60 Minute interview given by CBS’s Steve Kroft.

In the interview, Kroft bowed before Obama in order to help him polish and shape his inflated icon, his health care plan. Though Kroft did ask Obama a few innocuous questions, for the most part Obama owned the interview and was allowed to speak freely without being challenged. The few questions that Kroft asked that might, or might not be considered provocative were circumnavigated by Obama’s well rehearsed silver tongue. Not once did Kroft try to redirect Obama’s comments back to his original question.

It is Obama’s belief that the only way he will be able to get a grip on federal spending is to do something about health care. Once again Obama announced that once corrected, the waste and inefficiencies of our current health care programs would be enough to cover the costs of his plan for health care. What he does not make evident is that if his statement is in fact true, why has he not already pursued those issues that are dragging the programs down and corrected them? And why didn’t Kroft challenge him on this point? Take note Kroft had a pamphlet of talking points in his hands. We can only wonder what it contained; for certain it didn’t contain any questions about the cost of Obamacare. It seems to me that if Obama wanted to garner support for his concept of health care reform, he would address the issue of the cost. Any good business plan starts with a cost analysis; if Obama had to go to a bank for a business loan, they would certainly ask for a business plan. Like anything we have to pay for, we want to know the cost up front. Yet Obama claims that his health care plan will pay for itself; I say, “Show me the money!”

On the subject of tort reform Obama was quick to dismiss the idea, stating that caps on law suits do not work. Yet, he admits something needs to be done concerning the practices of defensive medicine. The reality is that defensive medicine is a direct consequence of malpractice suits, and the cost of malpractice insurance is attributed to frivolous law suits. In order to protect themselves from lawsuits, doctors have no choice but to be over protective in their practices, by conducting expensive medical tests and exams, like CAT scans and MRI’s, they might not otherwise feel are necessary.

The whole concept of health care reform is based on the idea of lowering costs; so without reworking the insurance system and addressing these frivolous law suits the outcome of Obama’s plan will be ineffective. There are even a few democrats that disagree with Obama’s neglect of tort reform in his health care plan. Howard Dean, a doctor and a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, at a town hall meeting in Virginia stated that, “Tort reform is not in the bill because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers. And, that is the plain and simple truth.” Some say Obama is selling out doctors to pay off the amalgamation of trial lawyers who contributed substantially to his campaign.

Obama has politicized health care reform by adding a time line to the whole discussion. It is his objective to pass health care reform by October 15th. These days image is everything, and he knows his image is at stake as Obama admitted that his plans to stay in office for awhile depend on the success of health care reform. We can only hope that he has regard for whether it is a well thought out, and viable plan. Lest he forget, he owns the health care bill; he may find himself kicking a can down the road after the 2012 election.

Unfortunately, CBS, Steve Kroft, and other liberal media outlets and reporters have been giving Obama a free pass for air time, in order that he may sway the public with his charisma and charm. It’s an incessant circle that is dominated by the inequalities of special interest groups. Big money corporations in cahoots with media outlets, or in the case of General Electric who outright own NBC and MSNBC, donate to the Obama campaign. In return Obama, recognizing General Electric’s position to profit from green technology, pushes an agenda that helps those same corporations who granted him campaign cash and air time, by passing legislation that is beneficial to them. In doing so, they not only strip tax payers of their voice, they boost their profits at the public’s expense and discriminate against those that might otherwise benefit from government contracts. Hence, the only people that lose out are the citizens ponying up tax dollars that are abused by our so called political representatives, both democrat and republican. It is not only Obama that is abusing the system for his own personal gain; all one needs to do is read the 1000 page health care bill to see just how much pork is in it. Journalism has gone down the drain and may very well take our country with it.


Let the scrutinizing begin! It seems that the anti-right has been on an eight year tirade, invoked solely to slander and destroy the former president. Well now the official scrutiny of the Democratic Messiah can begin. No longer can he hide behind his words, now it is time for Barrack Hussein Obama to put up or shut up! Now is the time for Americans of any political affiliation to adopt the principles of those who live in the state of Missouri, that’s right Mr. President, “Show Me, Don’t Tell Me!”


Over the last several years, we have learned that it is more than acceptable to criticize our leader for even the slightest gaff or mispronunciation. I would certainly encourage anyone with the smarts to make a “chimpomatic” for Barak, just as Google had done for GWB. The chimpomatic, for those of you not in the know, was a computer generated program that Google allowed people to attach to their IGoogle page, and it unendingly displayed GWB’s gaffs.  Hmmm! I wonder if that would be politically correct. I’m sure the former head of the NAACP, the great Rev. Joseph Lowery, would frown upon the association of Obama and a chimp-omatic while he still exercises his rights to free speech with the likes of  his racial comment, “white would embrace the right,” during Obama’s divinization, i mean benediction, while being inaugurated. Nonetheless, his having to repeat his oath of office because he duffed it at the inauguration, would be a good place to start on an Obama chimpomatic.


Speaking of the inauguration, and returning to my original gibe at the new “POTUS ignoramus,” is it an omen of his presidency that he is already asking for a redo? I can’t speak for everyone, but it certainly appears that way in my eyes. I mean how big of a dumb ass do you have to be to fail to repeat the words that are spoken in front of you? Makes me wonder if he is truly married to Michelle, after all he did have to repeat some words there too. I guess he and the other great Reverend in his life, Reverend Wright, probably spoke some of the same Chicago style ebonics. Furthermore, I just like to state for clarification, when I say “ignoramus” I don’t mean it in the sense that G. Ruggle portrayed it in his play, “Ignoramus.”  No! No! No! I mean it in its original sense, ya know lawyerly like; rather than go on confusing you, I believe I shall just borrow the definition from Along with the contemporary form of usage, here are the others listed at their website:


[From New Latin ignōrāmus, a grand jury’s endorsement upon a bill of indictment when evidence is deemed insufficient to send the case to a trial jury, from Latin, we do not know, first person pl. present tense of ignōrāre, to be ignorant; see ignore.]


1577, Anglo-Fr. legal term, from L. ignoramus “we do not know,” first person present indicative of ignorare “not to know” (see ignorant). The legal term was one a grand jury could write on a bill when it considered the prosecution’s evidence insufficient. Sense of “ignorant person” came from the title role of George Ruggle’s 1615 play satirizing the ignorance of common lawyers.


(Law) We are ignorant; we ignore; — being the word formerly written on a bill of indictment by a grand jury when there was not sufficient evidence to warrant them in finding it a true bill. The phrase now used is, “No bill,” “No true bill,” or “Not found,” though in some jurisdictions “Ignored” is still used. –Wharton (Law Dict. ).


Even I am ferhoodled when I refer to Obama as, POTUS ignoramus,” after consulting the origins of the word, I find that there are actually three interpretations that are befitting. I’m certain someone else will find a different spin. Feel free to let me know.


Anyways, of the three, I must admit I like the reference to the Latin meaning, “we do not know,” the most. Simply stated, the man is like Wonder Woman, except he is a man . . . at least I think, as time will prove if he actually has any balls . . . or if he’ll straddle the fence for his entire presidency; anyway, I digress, but I know I’m in a state of wonderment about him, the guy hasn’t disclosed squat about himself, yet he holds the highest office in the land; therefore “we do not know.”


Moving on to the lawyerly analysis we can assert two separate meanings; although they are sort of entwined. First let us take a peek at the part of the definition that states, “we ignore; — being the word formerly written on a bill of indictment by a grand jury when there was not sufficient evidence to warrant them in finding it a true bill.”  Yea, I understand we are not exactly dealing with finances, however, the supreme court, when petitioned, failed to provide “sufficient evidence” that Obama is, in fact, a natural born citizen, so I’m going to go ahead and call it like a lot of people see it. Until there is some form of factual proof, I’m going to treat him as an Ignoramus, and do like the Wharton Law dictionary does, that’s right, I’m going to IGNORE his pseudo-presidency.


Lastly, and although partially associated with the aforementioned ideology, I’m going to incite the “no true bill” definition. However I must admit I see it slightly different; I see the empty suit as a “bill of goods.” In one hue, I view him as a guy who is not legitimately the president as he failed to produce valid documentation proving his status as a natural born citizen; hence, he sold us a ”bill of goods,” which is no true bill. Tinted in a slightly different shade, the same assertation can be depicted to illuminate the fact that he ran off at the mouth with a million and one promises of what he is going to do for the lower and middle class people, when those of us who have even the slightest clue know that he sold us a “bill of goods,” or no good bill, if you will! Nonetheless, I’ll be amazed if he honors ten percent of all his campaign promises. And for those who will argue the point thatr the economy is failing and he can’t honor his promises, keep in mind that the economy crashed in September, yet he still peddled his wares after the fact to keep the votes rolling his way.  Feel free to apply whichever version that suits your needs, but understand that twas I who dubbed him POTUS ignoramus.”


Getting over the natural born citizen thing is not an impossible feat; that depends on how he handles his administration. However, what is enraging is the precedent that his disrespect for the electoral process has brought about; and that is not so forgivable. If there aren’t some serious checks implement-ed in time for the next presidential election, there will undoubtedly be some serious implications.


Obama has a long row to hoe. It was his decision to throw his hat into the ring at such an early stage in life, even when he said he wouldn’t because of his lack of experience; the consequence is that now he will have to reap what he has sown. Experience dictates that things that are forced, things that are not meant to be, usually end up in chaos, and you can fully expect that is what will happen. One of life’s little lessons is that respect must be earned; you cannot just take it, as the end result is resentment. Old Tom Cochran may have sung about life being a highway, but it sure as hell isn’t the Chisholm Trail, and the majority of us can’t be prodded along like cattle by the whimsy of a politician.


One can expect that there are going to be a lot of cloudy days in the no so distant future; the POTUS ignoramus,” will certainly reap what he has sown. Undoubtedly, greatness can be projected, but talking about it and achieving it are two different things. The biblical logic of not worshipping false idols is actually a two way street, first and foremost, if one holds to much praise for someone else, they tend to not value their own potential, as they view themselves as not worthy. On the other hand, from the idols perspective, I think I’ll borrow a phrase from the Kansas song Carry On My Wayward Son;” the phrase being, if I claim to be a Wiseman, it surely means that I don’t know.”


I don’t claim to be a wise man, however I do know that people like to destroy their idols, and even more so do they like to decimate those who are self-proclaimed to be special. If I may spout one more quip, I’d just like to say “be careful what you wish for, you just might get it!”


Feel free to tune in for more witticism and banter, as I’ll be here all week, err … for the next four years, same Bat station, same Bat channel . . . “Its Official, the Obama Bashing Has begun . . . again!”

Colorado State Troopers Still Waiting On Overtime Pay from DNC

Article by McKenzie Martin


Dozens of cops from southern Colorado put in long hours of work at the Democratic National Convention in Denver in August. More than three months later, some Colorado State Patrol troopers are still waiting for their overtime pay.

The fifty-six Colorado Springs Police officers received their pay for the week right away, as did the six El Paso County Sheriff’s deputies who went north to help out.

A State Patrol spokesperson in Denver says more than 300 troopers from across the state are still waiting on their overtime pay from the DNC.

“I think that’s a question that people have been concerned about, the DNC was in August, here we are in December,” said Jeremy Gudday with the Troopers Association.

The troopers affected are from all across the state, those who worked more than 160 hours in 28 days.

“Every member of our organization that worked the event is going to be compensated either monetarily or they will be compensated with time,” said Sgt. John Hahn with the Colorado State Patrol.

He says the troopers won’t have a choice though as to which kind of compensation they get and he says the $151,000 that’s involved was paid for by federal funds.

“Obliviously we are in a tough economic times for everyone involved, our citizens, members of the organization and throughout our communities,” Hahn said.

Which is why some troopers just want their money, others say time is more important. The troopers association is working with the chief’s office to resolve the hold up. Hahn says there are several reasons as to why it’s taken so long. They are hoping to have it resolved in the next couple days.

Hahn says they’re also working to find the right balance of compensation so public safety isn’t in jeopardy.

Keep Your Hands Off OF My Cache!!!

Has Obama never heard the expression, “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, but if you teach him how to fish then he will eat for a lifetime?”  His ideology is part of what is wrong with our great nation, not the solution. How wrong is it that he wants to instill dependency on government handouts in our children’s character at a young age? Does anyone besides me find it ironic that Obama is divergent in regards to his hero, JFK, in view of his restating “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country?” Passing out handouts obtained from those better off, to those less fortunate is not an inspiration for the people of our nation to make our country economically sound. It is instead an action that will lead our nation’s citizens to rely on the government, and in effect ask what their country will do for them. Socialism has been proven not to work time and again. The idea that he wants to take from the rich and give to the poor is an outrage. It is bad enough that we already pay a third of our wage to taxes, social security, and to a lesser extent, Medicare. Maybe somewhere back in time, a man or woman came to America and was indentured into servitude for seven years, or worse yet, he or she was outright enslaved. Maybe after they served their time to pay the passage for their voyage, and maybe they still had enough time left in their lives to save a little money and pass it on to their children when they died. Maybe that cycle of working hard, saving their money, and passing it on continued for a few generations, until those benefactors bought their freedoms from the constraints of working for others. Society tends to forget that even if a person was born with a silver spoon, somewhere along their line of descendents, there is somebody that worked hard to achieve that wealth. We also tend to forget, that many European people came to America as “indentured servants;” many of whom were treated no better than slaves, yet they still pulled up their bootstraps and walked on. Factually, they sold their selves into slavery, so they could make a better life for their selves and their progeny. Owning a house, a car, and having 2.5 children isn’t the American dream, it is creating a life free from the bondage of others, it is realizing and attaining one’s full potential. The idea of what constitutes “American Pie” was sold to us in the 1940’s; it was ingrained in our subconsciouses that if we didn’t spend, spend, spend in order to help the economy, we were somehow Un-American. It’s the same concept that was used after 9/11/2001; and it is a concept that has made us all wastrels and spendthrifts, who have lost the humbleness associated with being frugal.

It is my belief that our tax dollars were meant to go to our nation’s infrastructure; to fund roads, water projects, the military, etc . . .  Social security was to pay for itself; instead it has led to a society equivalent to that of a welfare state, and therefore cannot ever be a viable entity. I do not mind sharing my money with those who CANNOT provide for themselves or with those who have worked hard all their lives and are no longer capable of providing for their selves; especially if they have contributed to the social security fund all their lives. However, I do mind sharing my candy with those who WILL NOT provide for themselves; and I do mind that the government leaves me no say as to how they plan to spend it, or who they intend to share it with. And I do mind that my contributions to the social security fund are being used to support those who are in our country illegally, including Obama’s aunt. There is a sensible reason for the expression, “God helps those who help themselves;” it is just like at Christmas when they say “it is better to give than to receive.” In helping yourself, you improve yourself; bettering ones self, betters those around you . . . is contagious, just as a cyclical welfare state is contagious. Not to mention, working hard and giving to charitable causes leaves a person feeling good, and it is a part of what makes people better people. On the other hand, constantly receiving help innately injures one’s pride if they have any self conscience. Hard work and a strong desire may brought on by self pride also allow a person to save enough money so they can move to a neighborhood that is safe for their kids to go trick or treating; if your constantly giving people what they need to survive, they have no desire to achieve more.  Conjoined by the desperation exhibited in their surroundings, the cycle of perpetual handouts only reaffirms the feelings that one is doomed to failure. In the end, even if there is no wealth passed on, instilling frugalality and a good work ethic helps a person’s descendents self actualize and better provide for their selves. These are all ideas that are based upon the natural reactions of a person’s circumstance and their natural surroundings. As a 10th generation American, I must agree with the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said, “I hold these truths to be (sacred and undeniable . . . his original wording) self-evident that all men are created equal; to me that equality not only means that they are equal in the liberties they possess, but that they are also equally responsible for working hard to provide for their existence. At the same token, they and equally responsibility in keeping our country the great place it was meant to be, anything else is treasonous. I am still not certain, as I imagine no one is or can be, sure as to whether Obama actually intends to follow through with all of the promises he has made to America or if he has merely used the economy and the misfortune of his supporters as a ploy to abscond with their votes. It is my contention he has no intentions of following through with his proposals, as they are impractical and unobtainable in our current economic state. I suspect our deficit will be substantially increased under his presidency, should he be elected. For the record, if the IRS comes trying to collect my hard earned money without a justifiable reason; they will have to pry it from my cold dead fingers, along with a few other of my possessions. 

The Myth of Obamanomics

Barack Obama continues to state he will only tax incomes over $250,000 and that 95% of taxpayers will get a tax cut. Does it make sense to you that Obama will increase spending by more than a trillion dollars? Increase taxes on business? Will those ideas be good for the economy? If you think about it for just a minute you will agree that it does not pass the common sense, the smell test.

The following data comes from the IRS for the year 2003 and reveals the number of businesses with revenue over $ 250,000 in 2003. From IRS statistics in 2003:

Revenue Range

Number of businesses

$250,000 – $500,000


$500,000 – $1,000,000


$1,000,000 – $2,500,000


$2,500,000 -$5,000,000


$5,000,000 – $10,000,000


$10,000,000 – $50,000,000


$50,000,000 – Above



Many of you work for a company that falls into one of the above categories. Let’s take a little time to examine the practical consequences of Obama raising taxes on these companies: Obama states that he will raise taxes on incomes above $ 250,000. Now look at the number of businesses affected above. Now keep in mind that when businesses pay more taxes, they must make up for their losses somehow, traditionally they resort to one or more of the following ways of offsetting their losses:

·        Increase the price of their products or services, thus affecting consumers.

·        Cut other costs such as salaries, jobs or investment in new technologies such as energy.

·        Move to a country with less tax.

·        Some companies will go out of business due to profits declining, increased taxes and lower sales, when prices increase.

Corporations are primarily taxed three ways. They are taxed on corporate income, on dividends, and on the sale of stock. If you are a retiree and own stock, you will have less money because the corporation will have less profit and if you sell the stock you will pay more tax on the sale.

Government is extremely inefficient. $ 1,000 taken from a business will remove money that drives the economy, creates more jobs and ultimately brings more revenue for the government. That $ 1,000 will be wasted in government bureaucracy and overhead.

Obama is using this old lie to appeal to his core support that is promised everything by politicians that use them to win elections.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton took part in a debate several months ago hosted by Charlie Gibson. Gibson asked Obama about his plan to raise the capital gains tax. Then Gibson pointed out that studies have shown that lowering the capital gains tax increases government revenues and is good for the economy. Obama began stammering and stuttering and in one of the most revealing moments of the election, Obama’s lack of understanding of the economy and taxes was made clear. Obama was unable to rely on a canned teleprompter response.

Obama is just another modern day snake oil salesman. If you let him steal this election, Obama and the out of control Democrat congress, will ruin this economy and this country.

Does Obama scare you?

Democrats Dodge Fannie and Freddie Investigation

Why the Democrats don’t want to investigate Fannie and Freddie before the election . . .

One editorial headline at the Washington Times describes the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ordeal as being “whitewashed.” “. . . Democrats, spent much of their time dancing around the political decisions that created the subprime-mortgage-market collapse. This behavior should not come as much of a surprise. Both Mr. Greenspan and the liberal Democrats who control the committee have important reasons not to delve too deeply into the role of Congress in pushing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the brink of collapse . . .”


Headlines at read “Democrats insist “nothing wrong” at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac in 2004”


The facts are that the Bush Administration rang the alarm bell to fix Freddie and Fannie way back in 2003.


Unqualified home buyers were not the only ones who benefited from Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank’s efforts to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990s.


In these hearings you see congressional Republicans calling for better oversight and regulation of the two GSE’s, and you see Democrats beating back any regulation.