Obama: One-Term King of Hell
July 22, 2009 by Larry Correia
Filed under General
I’ve decided that Barack Obama is probably going to be a one term president. Oh, that’s not just wishful thinking on my part, by watching him lately; I think he knows it too.
He’s pushed way too far, way too fast. He’s done more to advance FDR’s progressive agenda in 6 months than FDR managed in his first term. Obama knows he has no time to lose. This will be his greatest, and only opportunity to reshape the US into his utopian vision.
I think he also realizes that he doesn’t even really have 4 years. By pushing this hard, there will be an inevitable backlash, and the stupid party will pick up seats from the evil party in the 2010 elections. How many seats remains to be seen, but it might be enough to thwart the total revamping of America into Big Dumb Canada.
If you look at the actions of our government over the last six months, all they have done is passed or pushed legislation designed to accomplish the opposite of what they’ve said they wanted to accomplish.
We need to save the economy, so we’re going to yank a bunch of money out of it, tax it, and stick it into places that won’t stimulate jack squat except for Democrat political allies, and ruin the value of the dollar forever in the process.
We need to save the environment, so we’re going to tax America into oblivion, knowing full well that it will only drive the last of our manufacturing jobs overseas to countries who don’t care about the environment.
Healthcare is inefficient and costs too much, so we’re going to raise the costs by a trillion dollars, make it as efficient as everything else in the government, and in the process, we’ll also make it so that you’re more likely to die, live sicker, have less freedom, and end medical research forever.
The banks (goaded on by government regulation), were out of control, so we’re going to put more government regulation on them, hell, never mind, we’ll just take them over outright, and then force them to follow more of the same government policies that caused the problem in the first place.
The auto industry is in crisis, (while the non-union companies are doing okay) so we’re going to take that over too, throw more money at it, and then let the union run it.
So in six months, the government has grabbed the US economy by the spine, taken over the auto industry, the insurance industry, the finance industry, and is poised to pass the largest tax increase in history, and take over the medical industry. FDR was a piker in comparison.
So, what do every single one of these things have in common (besides not solving the problem they were floated to solve?). Every single one increases the stranglehold the federal government has on our lives.
Everything they’ve done has made America weaker, and the weaker and poorer we become, the more they hope we will come to depend on the government. The progressives would rather have total control over a pathetic shell of a nation than just be a small part of a great one. It is like that old adage, would you rather be a slave in heaven, or a king in hell?
Unfortunately, I think we took the king of hell and elected him president.
To read more from this author, please visit http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/
Obamacare: Seeking Greater Inefficiencies
July 20, 2009 by Steven Ting
Filed under General, Health Care
Normally, when the government gets involved with business, we see poor performance. We see greater inefficiencies but we’re not surprised. What does surprise us is when the politicians admit it. In a speech given by Obama at the Childrens National Medical Center in Washington, he said the following.
“The reforms we seek would bring greater competition, choice, savings and inefficiencies to our health care system”
Obama wants to bail out homeowners
July 15, 2009 by Steven Ting
Filed under Economy, General
Obama is being dumb again. This time it’s even more asinine and mind blowing. According to the new plan, those that have fallen behind on their mortgage would be able to stay in their homes and pay rent instead. This means that the bank will repossess the home but the people get to continue living there. This part isn’t so bad.
Under one idea being discussed, delinquent homeowners would surrender ownership of their homes but would continue to live in the property for several years, the sources told Reuters.
One thing I don’t understand is why they would want to still live in the same home. Generally, rent for a home is more than the mortgage payment. If they can’t make a mortgage payment, what makes the government think they can make the rent payment? The only way this would work is if the government is charging rent that is less than market value. But the following is what really blows my mind.
Officials are also considering whether the government should make mortgage payments on behalf of borrowers who cannot keep up with their home loans, tapping an unused portion of a $50 billion housing aid kitty.
As part of this plan, jobless borrowers might receive a housing stipend along with regular unemployment benefits, the sources said.
So now the government wants to start paying the mortgage, too? That just doesn’t make sense. That continues to compound the problem. That’s the same as giving free money to those that are not responsible. While we don’t know the details, it probably means that the irresponsible get free equity in their home. They get to continue to free-ride on society.
And then, those that lose their jobs will also get a housing stipend? What? I knew we had welfare for those that really needed it, but this is pushing it too far.
In summary, according to this plan, if I’m behind on my mortgage and then I lose my job, the government is going to pay my mortgage and then also pay me a stipend for all of my troubles. There’s a big freakin’ problem here. If the government is going to bail us out every time we have a problem, where’s the incentive to work hard and succeed? Combine this with the 5.4% proposed surtax on wealthy individuals.
Obama’s administration is really starting to turn into an Obamanation. Obama needs to learn about economics a grow a brain. This plan to bail out homeowners is just plain dumb.
TOTUS takes a fall
July 14, 2009 by Steven Ting
Filed under General
In what must have been a very tragic moment for President Obama, the TOTUS took a nasty fall. While in the middle of his speech, the TOTUS hit the ground, passing out from the the constant scrutiny of Obama. The Obama stink-eye can strike fear into those receiving it. In this case, R.I.P TOTUS.
Obama now wants to add Long Term Care
July 8, 2009 by Steven Ting
Filed under Business, General, Health Care
Obama, once again, is trying to expand the role of government. The article states it best.
Moving to broaden the scope of the proposed healthcare overhaul, President Obama threw his support yesterday behind the creation of a program to help families struggling with long-term care costs.
The voluntary insurance program, sponsored by Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, would pay a modest daily cash benefit of at least $50 that people could use for a range of in-home services or nursing home expenses.
If you do the math, this could cost tax-payers $18250 per person per year. Once we offer a benefit like this, we won’t be able to take it away. Now how much do you suppose the government is going to charge for such a benefit? A measely $780 per year. And I bet there’s a provision in there that if you can’t afford to pay that, you won’t have to pay anything at all.
Obama is expanding the welfare society. I always thought that social security was supposed to take care of these types of things. Most retirees collect about $18000 to $24000 a year from social security. The purpose of social security was to be social insurance to protect people from financial hardship. Why do we need another bill that does the exact same thing? If you’re disabled, you get disability from Social Security.
How viable is this plan? It’s not viable at all. Look at the example we have in Social Security. It’s completely underfunded. If Obama pushes for this Long Term Care proposal, it will also be underfunded. Like all politicians, Obama over promises and will under deliver.
Since the government version would only cost $780 per year per person, it is much less than private insurance which is currently around $2000 to $5000 per person per year. What else does that tell us? It means that the government is not collecting enough to cover the costs. The only reason they give us the low price tag is for all of the sheeple to say, “Oh, there is an affordable solution.” The problem is that it’s just not sustainable.
Obama continues to weaken the economy. He’s taking a very micro-economic approach. He needs to look at the macro aspect. He is hurting business, and in turn, hurting individual people. He may think he knows all, but he’s just dumb.
