Even his own see the farce he has perpetuated on both this country and his own - folks who believed in him, but no more.

Remember that unemployment shocker from last month - a drop of .3% to 6.7% ? Well, Gallup begs to differ and tells the world the truth: its closer to . . . . .

Its the bottom line on the chart that is the most important for the sake of this post.  

Updated: Townhall.com rates the top 25 most influential conservatives and Gov Palin, after all this time, a "commoner" among professionals, still out ranks all except Rush and the owner of the #1 news portal in America, Matt Drudge.

1) Rush Limbaugh: He's the biggest right wing talk radio host in America, a generation of conservatives grew up listening to him, and he's capable of making news, killing legislation, and selling tens of thousands of books any time he opens his mouth. 
2) Matt Drudge:The Drudge Report isn't just an important news site; it's an agenda-setter. If Drudge decides it's a big story, it shows up EVERYWHERE.
3) Sarah Palin: The former VP candidate has a fanatical following, regularly makes news for her attacks on the Obama Administration, and did more to get women elected in 2010 than any one human being ever has before in a single election cycle. Palin has enormous juice, but the key question is always, “What is she going to do with it? Run for office? Get other Republicans elected? Become the conservative Oprah?” Time will tell.
(Blog editor's updated notes:  Think about this - Gov Palin was fired from Fox,  a year ago in January.  The Left celebrated her "demise" like the grade school collective of intellectuals they are.  Today,  this woman is back in the good graces of Fox  (rehired,  I believe,  because Ailes simply could not ignore her popularity and rhetorical accomplishments) and is every bit as important to the conservative cause as Reagan (probably more consistent in that effort).  She certainly has proven that she is no quitter AND look who she "out ranks."  If this was an honorarium list,  I would be "happy for her,"  but it is a ranking of Influentials.  One does not get on this list without having earned their place.  These folks are all successful in their conservative performance and Sarah Palin is at the top of the list.  When you can run ahead of the likes of Karl Rove and a Supreme Court justice,  you know you wield a great deal of political power.  Good for her   . . . . . . . . . . .   good for the country . . . . . .  and good for the conservative movement!)  
4) Karl Rove: He's not the most popular guy with the grassroots right now after the grassroots concluded that he intends to try to strangle Tea Party candidates in the crib to clear the way for establishment politicians in primaries, but no one can deny how much power he wields. Rove may have made his bones as a strategist and a commentator, but the massive fundraising done by American Crossroads makes him a huge player when election time rolls around.
5) John Boehner: You may like Boehner or you may not, but as the leader of the only branch of government that the Republican Party controls, he has his hand on the faucet of government and can practically turn it on or off at will.
6) Sean Hannity: At this point, we still don't know what's going to happen with Sean Hannity's highly rated show on Fox that's being booted in favor of Megyn Kelly, but given that it has excellent ratings, Hannity is highly likely to land on his feet. Beyond that, he still has the 2nd largest conservative radio audience out there with 13 million listeners.
7) John Roberts: Many conservatives have justifiably soured on John Roberts after he twisted the Constitution into a pretzel to find a way to make Obamacare legal, but as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, he wields enormous influence and has generally used it to help guide the court to the Right.  Editor's note:  Roberts has taken a lot of heat for his decision on ObamaCare,  many forgetting that it was his decision to exclude the Medicare state mandated exchanges that has been primarily responsible for all the logistic issues of ObamaCare.  34 states opted out of these mandatory exchanges because of the Roberts decision,  and the rest is history.   
8) The Koch Brothers: In a movement where all the grassroots activists seem to be starved for cash, big donors like the Koch Brothers wield an enormous amount of influence. The level of hatred directed at them by the Left is a reflection of how much power they have, mostly behind the scenes, on the Right.
9) Ted Cruz: Cruz has been perfectly in tune with the grassroots, has worked relentlessly to move Republicans in the Senate to the Right, and has done a brilliant job of getting his name out there. So far, he's probably done the best job of carrying on Jim DeMint's legacy in the Senate.
10) Glenn Beck: Anyone who thought Beck was finished after he left Fox underestimated the size of his vision. He has 7.5 million listeners to his radio show, his website The Blaze is the 4th largest conservative news site, and The Blaze TV is incredibly ambitious. Beck might not have the biggest audience, but he has some of the most passionate fans out there.
After notes:
Note:  all comments are Townhall's except for my editorial notes.
The full list can be found here, at townhall.com

Sarah Palin has every reason to criticize Peggy Noonan for being late, coming to the party.

From a brief article by Dylan Byers at Politico.  

Former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin issued a backhanded compliment to Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan on Friday, commending her most recent column while at the same time faulting her for taking so long to come around.
Peggy Noonan - she does like to
hear the sound of her own voice. 

"Great article, Peggy, but where the heck were you when I and other commonsense conservatives were sounding the warning bell in '08?" Palin wrote. "You joined the 'cool kids' in mocking and condescendingly criticizing -- ultimately demanding that we 'sit down and shut up.' Better late than never, though, Peggy and your ilk, because, meanwhile back in America..."
Palin was presumably referring to Noonan's remarks in a series of interviews last fall, during which she accused tea party conservatives of trying to "topple" the GOP and said they needed to stop name-calling and work out their differences with establishment Republicans.

In Friday's column, titled "Meanwhile, Back in America...", Noonan called President Obama's State of the Union address "a spectacle of delusion and self-congratulation" that failed to address the true concerns of most Americans. According to Noonan, those concerns include the fate of the school voucher program, the IRS's targeting of conservatives and the plight of nuns who "have, quite cruelly, been told they must comply with the ObamaCare mandate that all insurance coverage include contraceptives, sterilization procedures, morning-after pills."

Our first Imperial President, where "imperial" has to do with ruling a population beyond what is authorized by our Constitution.

Picking up with the closing remarks of his article,  an economics prof from John Hopkins has this to say as a word of warning to all that Obama is and hopes to accomplish in his last three years: 

. . . . . . . .   Mr. Obama is moving our government away from its traditional system of checks and balances and toward the one-man-rule that dominates third world countries. He has said that he wants a fair country—implying that, as it stands, the United States is not a fair country—an unprecedented calumny committed against a country by its own leader.
What country does he think is more fair than the United States? He has three long years left in which to turn us into a fair country. Where does he intend to take us?
Mr. Obama got his conception of a fair country from his teachers. A fair country is an unfree country because it is regimented to prevent anyone from rising too high. Their ideal is egalitarianism, the notion that no one should be any better, higher, or richer than anyone else. Combined with a dollop of totalitarianism, egalitarianism has replaced communism as the dominant ideal in our most prestigious universities. Mr. Obama and his colleagues are the product of those universities, and they have their marching orders.
The most important point is that Mr. Obama does not consider himself bound by the Constitution. He could not have made that more clear. He has drawn a line in the concrete and we cannot ignore it.
Those who currently hold political office, and who want to keep our system of government, need to act now. Surely, rejection of the Constitution is grounds for impeachment and charges should be filed. In addition, there are many other actions that Congressmen can and should take—actions that will tell Mr. Obama that we have seen where he is going and we will not let our country go without a fight.
At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Benjamin Franklin was asked what form of government had been created. “A republic,” he replied, “if you can keep it.”
We are losing it. If Mr. Obama’s reach for unprecedented power is not stopped, that will be the end. Everyone who values his life and liberty should find some way to say “No!” “Not now!” “Not yet!” “Not ever!”

M. Northrup Buechner is Associate Professor of Economics at St. John’s University, New York.

Editor;s notes:  I would only add this Michelle Obama description of her husbands intentions:  

May of 2008,  MICHELLE OBAMA, speaking Puerto Rico: "Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."

Here is the House publication detailing the GOP's stance on immigration. It starts with a secure border and builds on that.

Editor's notes:  When thoughtful conservatives read this statement,  it is  hoped they will see little with which to be concerned,  from a conservative point of view.  The highlighted (in read) comments should set the conservative mind at ease.    (the highlights are mine - blog editor).  With all this talk about "amnesty,"  read the highlighted comments over and over,  and remember that border security remains critically important to House Leadership.  What is being called "amnesty" by members of my side of the aisle,  is actually "legal status" for those who have admitted their illegal presence in this country, and have complied with specific remedies.  For Leadership,  the "path to citizenship" includes the demand that these folks go to the back of the line,  and wait their turn for citizenship.  While they wait,  they have legal status.  This is not an "amnesty" that is equivalent to "citizenship."   But that is,  often,  how this term is used by those who believe these illegals,  and they are here illegally,  must be rounded up in mass,  and sent back to Mexico.   

Update to the above:  I must add this: what I do not understand about this debate, has to do with why politicians on both sides of the equation do not talk about the fact that we already have an immigration system.  All of the House Principles detailed below,  are compatible with stream-lining the current system,  solving the border security problem and using using the new and improved,  streamlined immigration system,  as the answer to all of this noise about "comprehensive immigration."  

Standards for Immigration Reform

Our nation’s immigration system is broken and our laws are not being enforced. Washington’s failure to fix them is hurting our economy and jeopardizing our national security. The overriding purpose of our immigration system is to promote and further America’s national interests and that is not the case today. The serious problems in our immigration system must be solved, and we are committed to working in a bipartisan manner to solve them. But they cannot be solved with a single, massive piece of legislation that few have read and even fewer understand, and therefore, we will not go to a conference with the Senate’s immigration bill. The problems in our immigration system must be solved through a step-by-step, common-sense approach that starts with securing our country’s borders, enforcing our laws, and implementing robust enforcement measures. These are the principals guiding us in that effort.

Border Security and Interior Enforcement Must Come First
It is the fundamental duty of any government to secure its borders, and the United States is failing in this mission. We must secure our borders now and verify that they are secure. In addition, we must ensure now that when immigration reform is enacted, there will be a zero tolerance policy for those who cross the border illegally or overstay their visas in the future. Faced with a consistent pattern of administrations of both parties only selectively enforcing our nation’s immigration laws, we must enact reform that ensures that a President cannot unilaterally stop immigration enforcement.

Implement Entry-Exit Visa Tracking System
A fully functioning Entry-Exit system has been mandated by eight separate statutes over the last 17 years. At least three of these laws call for this system to be biometric, using technology to verify identity and prevent fraud. We must implement this system so we can identify and track down visitors who abuse our laws.

Employment Verification and Workplace Enforcement
In the 21st century it is unacceptable that the majority of employees have their work eligibility verified through a paper based system wrought with fraud. It is past time for this country to fully implement a workable electronic employment verification system.

Reforms to the Legal Immigration System
For far too long, the United States has emphasized extended family members and pure luck over employment-based immigration. This is inconsistent with nearly every other developed country. Every year thousands of foreign nationals pursue degrees at America’s colleges and universities, particularly in high skilled fields. Many of them want to use their expertise in U.S. industries that will spur economic growth and create jobs for Americans. When visas aren’t available, we end up exporting this labor and ingenuity to other countries. Visa and green card allocations need to reflect the needs of employers and the desire for these exceptional individuals to help grow our economy.
The goal of any temporary worker program should be to address the economic needs of the country and to strengthen our national security by allowing for realistic, enforceable, usable, legal paths for entry into the United States. Of particular concern are the needs of the agricultural industry, among others. It is imperative that these temporary workers are able to meet the economic needs of the country and do not displace or disadvantage American workers.

One of the great founding principles of our country was that children would not be punished for the mistakes of their parents. It is time to provide an opportunity for legal residence and citizenship for those who were brought to this country as children through no fault of their own, those who know no other place as home. For those who meet certain eligibility standards, and serve honorably in our military or attain a college degree, we will do just that.

Individuals Living Outside the Rule of Law

Our national and economic security depend on requiring people who are living and working here illegally to come forward and get right with the law. There will be no special path to citizenship for individuals who broke our nation’s immigration laws – that would be unfair to those immigrants who have played by the rules and harmful to promoting the rule of law. Rather, these persons could live legally and without fear in the U.S., but only if they were willing to admit their culpability, pass rigorous background checks, pay significant fines and back taxes, develop proficiency in English and American civics, and be able to support themselves and their families (without access to public benefits). Criminal aliens, gang members, and sex offenders and those who do not meet the above requirements will not be eligible for this program. Finally, none of this can happen before specific enforcement triggers have been implemented to fulfill our promise to the American people that from here on, our immigration laws will indeed be enforced.

Dems can kiss off "taking back the House." We knew they were in trouble the moment Pelosi predicted they would do just that. She also predicted 400,000 jobs "almost immediately" after ObamaCare became law.

To date,  11 Democrat House Representatives have decided to retire,  rather than seek re-election in 2014.  Two of them,  McIntyre from North Carolina and Matheson from Utah,  are in states won by Romney  (in Utah by 40 points and in N Carolina by 19).  The Dems are in the minority by 17 seats.  With this news,  it appears that the party must now turn or “flip” 19 seats to gain “majority” status.  As I see it,  the Baucus seat may be in danger of turning red,  as well. 

Sen. Max Baucus (MT)
Sen. Tom Harkin (IA)
Sen. Carl Levin (MI)
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (WV)

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (NY)
Rep. George Miller (CA)
Rep. Jim Moran (VA)
Rep. Jim Matheson (UT)
Rep. Mike McIntyre (NC)
Rep. Bill Owens (NY)
Rep. Henry Waxman (CA)

According to Mother Jones,  a far Left service but not entirely unobjective, Democrat incumbent approval ratings have gone down 11 points (from a plus 8 to a minus 3),   compared to a 4 point slide for Republican incumbents  -  a set of numbers most see as "big trouble" for the New Progressive Socialist Party.  

From Ethics and Public Policy Center,  the news gets worse:  

recent survey by the Pew Research Center is filled with bleak news for Democrats and the cause of liberalism. “By almost every conceivable measure Americans are less positive and more critical of government these days,” according to an overview of the Pew survey. It finds “a perfect storm of conditions associated with distrust of government — a dismal economy, an unhappy public, bitter partisan-based backlash, and epic discontent with Congress and elected officials.”

Its official: Democrats are running away from Obama. He is no longer the iconic fantasy of the Left and the Entitlement population.

From the lips of Julie Roginsky, a Democratic strategist and former aide to New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg:  

Its been four years. If the Dems cannot change this dynamic, the midterms are going to look a lot like 2010.

It is time for the GOP and its conservative wing, to partner with one of the largest traditionally religious populations in the nation.

<<<<  Who says they are "automatic" Dems?  Their religious and family values best align with conservatives and their work ethic really takes them away from the entitlement community.  I say,  "Let's bring them in"  and send a shock wave through the godless and liberal community.  

The House leadership released their "principles" for immigrants.  It allows them to stay in the US,  legally,  but without citizenship or the specific benefits of citizenship.  I have decided that this is a reasonable compromise.  Will the Dems try to abuse this law?  Of course,  but I doubt this will ever get to a vote.  Why?  Because the first principle is one that demands the border first be secured.   

We must all agree on this: THEY ARE ALREADY HERE AND HAVE BEEN HERE FOR DECADES.  They are our neighbors,  friends,  and their children,  are fellow citizens of this country.  

At some point,  we all have to try to do something about this ridiculous problem.  Nothing is written in stone,  and the "solution" we all come up with,  can be changed.  If we are afraid the Dems will grab their votes, well,  why?  If the GOP sets installs self help business programs,  job training,  and includes this population in our politic,  why will they not vote with us,  as we stand with them on traditional values.  The Hispanic population is largely Catholic.  Their religiosity is real,  and in no wise compatible with the godless Marxist Left that is currently ruining this country.  

I say,  "Let's bring them in out of the shadows,  and onto a path to citizenship."  

I wasn't wrong about Christie, but this catches my complaint.


Why I Was Wrong About Chris Christie

He wasn't so smart or post-partisan, and may pay the price as a presidential hopeful.

She has her daughter lie for her; pretends to be a fiscally responsible babe and, in every way, campaigns as a typical, unprincipled lib. Is this the best Texas Democrats can do?

From Watchdog.org - Texas Bureau
HOUSTON – An ethics complaint filed against Democratic gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis this week argues that Davis has failed to disclose all of her sources of income and ties to lobbyists, as required by state law.
According to the complaint, Davis failed to disclose more than $25,000 in interest and dividends she earned from 2010 to 2012 on the personal financialstatements she filed those years. Davis also failed to disclose that she was paid by the employer of a lobbyist — namely, the law firm ofCantey Hanger, LLP.
Cantey Hanger lists Davis as “of counsel” to the firm. It also employed two lobbyists for 2012, according to its lobby registration list on file with the Texas Ethics Commission. These were Marcy Weldin Foster and Gov. Rick Perry‘s former chief of staff, Brian C. Newby, who also happens to be Davis’ partner in the firm of Newby Davis, PLLC. . . . .

Governor Palin comments on Obama's State of the Union speech.

If you skipped huddling around the TV last night for the State of the Union address because you’ve heard it all before, plus you were just busy with life, well… so did I. Putting the real world on hold to watch the fantasy declaration of “utopia’s-on-its-way” just isn’t efficient.

My truck radio was tuned in though. And driving kids to and from ball games with me negotiating control of the dial allowed me to hear what I’d forebodingly anticipated. Later, reading the President’s remarks on my cell phone made sitting on sticky steel bleachers (that exacerbate parents’ sore backs) that much more uncomfortable. It was all confirmation that we HAVE heard it all before – how more government is supposedly the answer. But the extreme hubris and naïveté that emanated from that speech was something new and alarming.

Ronald Reagan said the nine most frightening words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Well, last night’s promise to grow even more unaffordable, unsustainable bureaucracy confirms we need rescuing from government like never before.

Consider all the “help” a bloated bankrupt federal government has given us…

In an attempt to “fix” our health care system, government has taken away our health insurance and forced us to buy worse plans we don’t want and can’t afford.

To “stimulate” the economy, government blew a trillion dollars on a failed stimulus scheme that sunk us deeper into such a pile of debt that our great-great-great grandchildren won’t be able to pay it off. And our government still wants to blow more money we don’t have on “investments” that will incur more deficits year after year.

To “lead” us to energy independence, government throws billions at bankrupt boondoggle green energy gimmicks that conveniently reward campaign donors. Meanwhile, the President stymies development of conventional resources that we actually use and he kills a pipeline that’s guaranteed to provide jobs and reliable energy.

To “create” jobs, government has created more burdensome regulations and requirements and sat back to watch as a record number of Americans simply quit the workforce and gave up trying to find jobs that government can never create.

Speaking of which, while claiming to be concerned with job creation for American workers, our government is trying to ram through amnesty, which will result in a flood of foreign workers competing with Americans for the few jobs there are.

These examples prove that growing government isn’t the answer; rather, it’s the problem. It’s tempting to tune out rhetoric like last night’s naive promises that this time will be different, but we must not ignore it! Between the hubris of an executive branch governing by fiat, to the arrogance of believing it can spy on citizens’ communications and unleash the IRS to harass people who happen to disagree with the President, it’s now more important than ever for us to press in and pay attention.

Why? Because we’re obviously on a dangerous path, but “We the People” don’t have to be “We the Sheeple” and just get shepherded towards a fundamental transformation that’s against America’s will. There’s another way! This nation can shine again with the elbow grease we as individuals can provide! But we mustn’t let a statist-leaning government dull our dedicated efforts. So pay attention. Get involved. Understand the way words are manipulated by politicians who practice to deceive, so that we can DO something about it. For instance, proving he’s immune to irony, the President used the phrase “fairness and equality under the law” at the end of last night’s address. This is the same President who has been arbitrarily amending his signature legislation, Obamacare, practically every other day to give breaks to his cronies and leave the rest of us without “connections” out in the cold. I guess some of us are less fair and equal under Obama’s laws.

The last thing we need right now is more “help” from big government. In this mid-term year, we need to send new leadership to D.C. to get government back on our side and off our aching backs.

Thankfully, November is just around the corner.

- Sarah Palin

Palin has a "bad rap" only because of the national media. Not a surprise to this editor that Palin is still #1 among GOP primary voters. She is well spoken, a popular author and speaker, and right on all the issues AND she has an open invite to debate Obama "any time, any where."

The best liked person we tested on this poll with Republican primary voters is actually Sarah Palin who has a 70/20 favorability rating. She's followed by Huckabee at 64/18,

Ryan at 58/18, Paul at 58/21, Bush at 56/18, Cruz at 45/20, and Christie at 40/38. Most of those numbers are similar to what they were a month ago but Christie's seen a substantial drop from +18 at 47/29 a month ago to his new +2 net favorability.

Let's be clear about one political potentiality: Joe Biden has as much a chance of being our next president as does Louis Farrakhan . . . . . . period.

He has spent the past 5 years doing exactly what?  And during that same period of time,  he has supported the most extreme presidency in our history while betraying the fact that he has become little more than a national joke.  

"In my heart, I'm confident that I could make a good president." -@Biden tells @

The Left leaning academics at the NY Times do what they can to influence society in favor of a World Without Boundaries and the notion that we all should be equally poor. Here is an example.

 Thomas B. Edsall / New York Times:
Capitalism vs. Democracy  —  Thomas Piketty's new book, “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” described by one French newspaper as a “a political and theoretical bulldozer,” defies left and right orthodoxy by arguing that worsening inequality is an inevitable outcome of free market capitalism.

Editor's notes:  in this rather sad display of the abuse of higher education,  a French economist pits "democracy' against "capitalism"  as if the two are somehow morally and systemically opposed to the other,   while implying that democracy and Central Government are perfectly compatible.  

The fact of the matter is this:  capitalism and Marxism are more economic theories, while democracy,  socialism,  representative democracy,  and dictatorships of various political persuasions,  are social orders and domestic theories.  

Understand that regardless of the weaknesses of capitalism,  it is the single most "popular" social/economic dynamic in the world.  China,  for example,  is successful financially to the degree that it has embraced and rewarded individual effort and ingenuity.  

Financial equality has not be achieved when the time comes that we are all equally poor,  but,  that is the direction this country has taken, more during the past 5 years than at any other time in our history.  

Thomas Piketty knows nothing about the practicalities of capitalism because he has never lived that life.  He is only a theorist,  as is Obama and his Harvard crowd of no-nothings.  When folks like me make the point that "Obama has never so much as run a lemonade    stand,"  we are saying that he is socialist theorist and nothing more.  He has not lived the life, but,  instead,  has taken from society.  

The fact that the Times ran this story is proof of the socialist/Marxist influence at that "news" source. Thomas Edsall, who posted this story,  has done nothing in his life but write and report for Left leaning propaganda sources.  Before the NY Times, he spent time at the Huffington Post and the New Republic, both of which screams of his One World,  Marxist philosophy.  He is a rank socialist liberal,  not a traditional Democrat,  and all that he says is in defense or supportive of his social theories. 

Men make more than women? Maybe not and the Left helps tell the truth.

Hanna Rosin / Slate:    You know that “women make 77 cents to every man's dollar” line you've heard a hundred times?  It's not true.  —  How many times have you heard that “women are paid 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men”?  Barack Obama said it during his last campaign.

Editor's notes:  another Left leaning publication has broken ranks with Der Slickster and tells the truth about wage disparity between men and women.  What gets over looked, in this discussion,  is the fact that if we take out the union population,  the remaining working male population does not earn as much as women.   

Besides,  I thought the Lilly Ledbetter law of 2009 solved all these problems.  That is what the Dems were telling us at the time.  Turns out,  even THAT was a lie.

A whopping 69% of the American people DO NOT want Obama to circumvent congress.

<<<<    Gallup agrees with Rasmussen's conclusions:  Only 26% of Democrats support Obama's "circumvention" policy while no one in the GOP or with Independents are supportive  -  and you cannot win an election with such numbers.  

Rasmussen has surveyed this conclusion.  While most of the prominent Democrat leadership and all of the Marxist loving Congressional Black Congress support Obama's "imperialism,"  the fact of the matter is this:  the American voter does not.  

Conclusion:  part of the 2014 and 2016 election year strategies needs to include tying Obama's imperialism to the Democrat Party, as a whole.  This bunch of academic Marxists needs to sent packing.  

Ratings for Obama's State of the Union: how does it compare to Clinton and Bush? Obama comes in dead last.

Nielsen’s totals, based on viewership for CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX, Azteca, Fox Business, Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Al Jazeera America, Galavision and Mun2.,  had the Obama State of the Union for 2014 at 33.2 million viewers,  the second lowest number since Bill Clinton's last State of the Union.  
While we understand the "why" for the low number regarding Clinton's speech - it was his last "Union" speech as President, and,  the full-on beginning of his "lame duck" season,  the is Obama's first State of the Union in his second term.  
What most reports will not tell you,  is that Obama's  2012 State of the Union,  was the third lowest in modern times,  coming in at 33.4 million.  These low numbers are for his 3rd and 4th "Union" speeches,  and,  is indicative of his lack relevancy.  Turns out that Obama may be in his lame duck season,  one that began with January of 2012 !!!  
By contrast,  GW Bush's speech numbers never dipped below 37 million and averaged more viewers per speech than Bill Clinton.  

How many years have folks like me told their readers about the false prosperity of the stock market? Well, the "easy money" era is over. A draw down on free money has begun, and the market is in "free fall." I told you so !!! Here is what you need to know - from financial experts. You're welcome.

This defines "Quantitative Easing"  - 

Quantitative easing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quantitative easing (QE) is an unconventional monetary policy used by central banks to stimulate the economy when standard monetary policy has become ..

  1. Quantitative Easing Definition | Investopedia

    Quantitative easing is considered when short-term interest rates are at or approaching zero, and does not involve the printing of new banknotes.

Now,  read this:  

Summary: After years of quantitative easing, with the Fed starting to slow the third ... 4 January 2014 “The problem with QE is that it works in practice but it doesn’t work in theory.” … Regardless of my objections …

QE 3 As Wrong As QEs 1 and 2 The Fed pursued two previous ... is the opposite of the transparency that Bernanke espouses. What’s the Harm in Trying? Another round of quantitative easing will not help the economy appreciably, but what’s the harm?
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's approach to stopping the financial crisis by printing money is wrong... “The Monetary Theory of the Great Depression is incorrect, however. Consequently, the Fed’s QuantitativeEasing policy is more likely ...

You will not see much written on this subject for fear of making things worse.  How far will the market fall?  No one knows.  But,  it is certain that this has been the fear,  all along,  and it is certain that what is about to happen,  has been predicted.    The important question is this:  "What should I do now that QE is ending?  

The Dow Jones Industrial Average, up 155 points before FOMC Chairman Ben Bernanke said the Fed could soon begin to tap the brakes, ended ... we knew QE couldn't really last forever. So what should investors do?.. Here are three ways protect your …
An increase in the Bank of England's historically low base rate could have an impact on your mortgage, savings and other debt so it is important ... ‘When interest rates rise, the capital value of these investments typically falls. This is because ...

What is the truth regarding the nation's unemployment picture? Brace yourselves. The answer is not good.

The U-6 unemployment rate includes all who are looking for work,  whether receiving benefits or not.  (When they no longer receive benefits and have given up looking for work,  they are no longer counted).  The "U-3" is the 7%  -  6.7% unemployment number that makes the headlines,  each week.  Of course,  the U-6 number is the real unemployment number,  and that is charted,  here,  at 13% with 11 million folks not counted at all,  and "not counted" because they have decided to retire,  move back in with their parents,  or are in the underground labor force.  (I am 68 and can earn as much as I want,  without penalty  . . . .  and I am still working).      

You have to go back to the Clinton days (1994) before you see numbers at 11.8% on this U-6 chart.  Keep in mind,  however,  that millions more were being counted, back then.  During the Obama era,  5 million of the 11 million I mentioned above,  are able bodied and able to work outside the "underground" labor force.  In other words,  this is the worst time for employment since the 1930's. and we have Obama to thank for this prolonged mess.   

The truth about the state of our Union.

Why are unemployment benefits endless, under the Obama administration?  Why are there 20 million more on food stamps,  five years into an Obama “Recovery?”  Why is the workforce at a 35 year low,  in terms participation.  Why are we averaging less than 2 points,  as a Gross National Product when that rate should be 4 points or higher, in a “recovery” that is as old as this one?  Why are there 3 million fewer job positions than before Obama’s “recovery” began.   Why are there 11 million more Americans no longer looking for work than before the “recovery” began?   Why are more blacks out of work than before Obama?    

The single “unifying factor” in all of the above is the fact that all this is about the Democrats and Obama.  Blaming Bush no longer works unless you are a primate working at MSNBC.   

If you have been given a poor view of the teaparty, you might read this speech and judge for yourself.

Note: the formatting and highlighting is mine.  The text, except for two parenthetical comments,  are solely those of Senator Lee's


"Good evening.

I'm Senator Mike Lee, from Utah.  (This speech was billed as the "teaparty's response to the Obama speech").  

In the few minutes I have tonight - I'd like to speak especially to those Americans who may feel they have been forgotten by both political parties:
Those individuals and families who work hard, play by the rules, balance their budgets, honor the Golden Rule ... and don't understand why their government in Washington can't do the same.

You are probably as frustrated as I am about an ever-growing government that somehow thinks it is okay to lie to, spy on and even target its own citizens. Many hard-working Americans are discouraged and wondering what, if anything, can be done.

I believe we need to do what Americans have always done - come together and press for positive change. Protesting against dysfunctional government is a great American tradition, going back to the original Tea Party in Boston, about 240 years ago. Americans have a natural instinct to stand up and speak out when they know something is wrong.

In 1773, Americans had simply had it with a London-based national government that had become too big, too expensive and far too intrusive.
It is important to note, however, that had the founding generation stopped at just protesting against the kind of government Americans did not want, the Boston Tea Party would have been little more than a footnote in history. At most, it would have been remembered as just one more futile protest against an abusive national government.

Fortunately for all of us, those early patriots moved on from Boston and moved past their protest against the government they didn't want. They marched forward on a road toward the kind of government they did want.
It took them 14 long years to get from Boston to Philadelphia, where they created, with our Constitution, the kind of government they did want.

In America, the test of any political movement is not what that movement is against, but what it is for. The founders made a point at Boston Harbor, but they made history in Philadelphia's Independence Hall.
Unfortunately, in recent years, we have had no choice but to engage in a number of protests against our current president's Washington-centered agenda.

As Americans we must always be willing to fight the Boston-type battles -- boldly calling out bad policy whenever we see it - but we must do so with an eye toward Philadelphia, maintaining a positive focus on the kind of nation we want to be and become.

Today, Americans know in their hearts that something is wrong. Much of what is wrong relates to the sense that the "American Dream" is falling out of reach for far too many of us. We are facing an inequality crisis - one to which the President has paid lip-service, but seems uninterested in truly confronting or correcting.

This inequality crisis presents itself in three principal forms:

immobility among the poor
, who are being trapped in poverty by big-government programs; 

insecurity in the middle class, where families are struggling just to get by and can't seem to get ahead; and 

cronyist privilege at the top, where political and economic insiders twist the immense power of the federal government to profit at the expense of everyone else.

To be fair, President Obama and his party did not create all of these problems. The Republican Establishment in Washington can be just as out-of-touch as the Democratic Establishment.

However, tonight, as on numerous occasions of late, the President's lofty rhetoric ignored the fact that his administration continues to leave poor and middle-class families further behind, while he and his allies insist that the real problem is "inequality" itself.

But where does this new inequality come from? From government - every time it takes rights and opportunities away from the American people and gives them instead to politicians, bureaucrats, and special interests.
Inequality - real inequality - is trapping poor children in failing schools to benefit bureaucrats and union bosses. It's penalizing low-income parents for getting married, or getting better jobs.

It's guaranteeing insurance companies taxpayer bailouts if Obamacare cuts into their profits.

Inequality is blocking thousands of middle-class jobs in the energy industry as a favor to partisan donors and radical environmental activists.

Inequality is denying viable, unborn children any protection under the law, while exempting unsanitary, late-term abortion clinics from basic safety standards.

It's denying citizens their right to define marriage in their states as traditionally or as broadly as their diverse values dictate.

It's the federal government hurting rural communities, especially in the west, by controlling and mismanaging public lands.

It's changing laws without congressional approval, and spying on American citizens without constitutional authority.

And of course, Obamacare - all by itself - is an inequality Godzilla that has robbed working families of their insurance, their doctors, their wages and their jobs. Many Americans are now seeing why some of us fought so hard to stop this train-wreck over the last four years.

Government-driven inequality is the reason why, as hard-working families across the country struggle to make ends meet, six of the ten wealthiest counties in America are now suburbs of Washington, D.C. 
Throughout the last five years, President Obama has promised an economy for the middle class; but all he's delivered is an economy for the middle-men.
And tonight his party cheered as he asked for more of the same, as if the solution to inequality were ... well ... more inequality.

Critics might push back and argue that my own party has been part of the problem, too often joining the Democrats to rig our economy to benefit the well-connected at the expense of the disconnected.
I know, because I'm one of those critics.
But I'm speaking to you tonight because I think maybe - just maybe - that's finally starting to change.

As a nation we are, once again, at a critical turning point.
Now, as in 1773, Americans have had it with our out-of-touch national government. But if all we do is protest, our Boston Tea Party moment will occupy little more than a footnote in our history.

Hopefully our leaders, reformers and citizens will join the journey from Boston to Philadelphia - from protest to progress. Together we can march forward and take the road that leads to the kind of government we do want.
We have a new generation of leaders in Washington with positive, innovative ideas - thoughtful policy reforms to, as my friend Senator Ted Cruz says -"Make D.C. listen." Reforms to help poor families work their way into the middle class, to help middle-class families start to get ahead, and to level the playing field and put corporate and political insiders back to work for the rest of us.

(Senator Lee names several "conservative reformers" within the GOP):
Conservative reformers like Senator Marco Rubio, Congressman Paul Ryan and Congressman Jim Jordan are working on new welfare-reform ideas to help underprivileged families escape poverty.
Senator Rand Paul and I are working with some of the most liberal Democrats in Congress to reform the federal criminal-justice system - to help keep violent predators behind bars while creating opportunities for reformed, non-violent offenders to return to the families and neighborhoods that so desperately need them.
Senator John Cornyn has legislation that would empower states to improve K-12 education across the country.
Senator Tim Scott has reforms to improve our job-training programs. And I've introduced a bill to modernize higher education, making it more accessible and affordable for lower-income and non-traditional students.
Congressman Tom Graves has a transportation-reform bill to ensure our infrastructure dollars are invested in roads and bridges, and not wasted on bureaucrats and special interests.
Congressman Mike Pompeo introduced a bill to end all federal subsidies for the energy industry. And others are working on proposals to do the same for every industry - so that business profits are won from customers, not through political connections. After all, if we're going to reform welfare, we really should start with corporate welfare.

One proposal that should directly help you and your family is a bill I have introduced to simplify our tax code, and provide relief from the hidden double-tax Washington currently imposes on working parents, especially moms and dads in the middle class.
When it comes to healthcare, we know the best way to repeal Obamacare is to deliver better solutions.
We can't just return to the old system. Healthcare policy used to give too much power to insurance companies; Obamacare now gives far too much power to government. We know that real reform will put healthcare dollars and decisions where they belong, in the hands of patients and families and their doctors and nurses.
So reformers in both the House and the Senate are hard at work developing new, patient-centered reforms to control healthcare costs, ensure access to affordable coverage for all Americans, and provide extra help for the poor and the sick.
All of these proposals within this new conservative reform agenda, along with many more to come, mark the road to Philadelphia. These principles and these policies will work - and will put Americans back to work.
Not just by cutting big government, but by fixing broken government. Not just by making government smaller but by promoting bigger citizens, stronger families and more heroic communities. Our goal should be an America where everyone has a fair chance to pursue happiness - and find it. That's what it looks like when protest grows into reform.
So if you're one of those Americans that big government is leaving behind... if you work hard, play by the rules and teach your kids to do the same, I want you to know that your family will not be forgotten anymore.

This new generation of reformers still has a long way to go to win over our Party in Washington, and even further to go to earn your trust.

I am confident that our best days as a nation are ahead of us - not because of government, but because within America's diverse society of individuals and families, neighborhoods and churches, businesses and communities, freedom doesn't mean you're on your own. Freedom means we're all in this together.
I invite you to join us on the road to a more prosperous America - together we can create the kind of government we do want and the kind of nation our children and grandchildren deserve.

Thank you very much for your time. Good night, and God bless.