Anyone see the hypocricy ??

In 33 seconds, a Democrat Senator explains why her party is not qualified to lead on the spending issue. (see the video).

In this video clip,  the Senator argues that “discretionary spending” is not “out of control.”  Geeeeesh.  We now borrow 42 cents of every single dollar we spend,  each year,  and the Democrat leadership limits its denial to “discretionary spending.”   Can anyone say,  “Straw dog ?”  

Apparently,  Democrats do not understand that our spending crisis is not limited to discretionary spending.  Structural  over-spending is part of the problem,  as well,  and, no one but a blind sheik would deny this fact.  

Lets say that our current rate of interest, paid on the money we have borrowed,  rises from a current interest rate of 3.5 percent to 7 percent,  overnight,  upon news of a second and more serious downgrade from S&P and or Moody’s.  It is estimated that we will spend $750 billion on interest,  alone,  by the year 2020,  assuming interest rates for that debt,  remain the same.  If our scenario,  above,  happens,  the interest rate would rise to 1.5 trillion dollars per year  --  a bill that absolutely has to be paid,  a little higher than what we over-spend,  each year.  At that point,  the most harsh cuts in American history,  would have to go into effect,  immediately.  There would not be enough tax revenues available to make a difference.  And the Dems see no problem. 

Source:  Diane Black House,gov.

Obama defends giving jet fighters to those who are our avoid enemy. Why?

Can you believe this bit of literary tripe.  Besides being written on an 8^th grade level,  Hussein O. tries to justify his sale of 20 F-16 top of the line jet fighters  and more than 200 Abram tanks to the Muslim Brotherhood, with this letter.  He does not deal with the question as to “Why now?” 

Look,  the Egyptian military was a “friend” of the US back in the day before Hussein O. backstabbed Mubarak.  Today,  it is being reported that Morsi,  the Isreali/Western hating Muslim Brotherhood president of Egypt,  has replaced the top military leadership of his country.  Will Morsi move “to the center,” and honor the Camp David treatfy,  signed during the Carter years?  No one knows,  and that is the point:  “NO ONE KNOWS.” 

So why now?  It is not that the Egyptian air force needs these planes.  Heck,  they already have 220 fighter grade air craft.  They are not about to run out of money.  Heck,  we give them 1.5 billion a year,  money that can be used to buy these planes  --  the US effectively buying these planes for a military that might decide to go after the destruction of Israel. 

And, so,  the question remains:  Why now?  No one on the Left has an answer to this question.  Logic-minded misfits,  all. 

Obama begins his 2nd term with as partisan a statement as can be made by a sitting president. He is the first sitting president to identify the opposing party - to the exclusion of his own party -- and half the nation it represents, as guilty of petty politics in its opposition of his ungodly socialist efforts . . . . the first.

 New Republic interviewee:   When you talk about Washington, oftentimes you use it as a way to describe this type of dysfunction. But it's a very broad brush. It can seem as if you're apportioning blame not just to one party, but to both parties—

Obama responds:  Well, no, let me be clear. There's not a—there's no equivalence there. In fact, that's one of the biggest problems we've got in how folks report about Washington right now, because I think journalists rightly value the appearance of impartiality and objectivity. And so the default position for reporting is to say, "A plague on both their houses." On almost every issue, it's, "Well, Democrats and Republicans can't agree"—as opposed to looking at why is it that they can't agree. Who exactly is preventing us from agreeing?

And I want to be very clear here that Democrats, we've got a lot of warts, and some of the bad habits here in Washington when it comes to lobbyists and money and access really goes to the political system generally. It's not unique to one party. But when it comes to certain positions on issues, when it comes to trying to do what's best for the country, when it comes to really trying to make decisions based on fact as opposed to ideology, when it comes to being willing to compromise, the Democrats, not just here in this White House, but I would say in Congress also, have shown themselves consistently to be willing to do tough things even when it's not convenient, because it's the right thing to do. And we haven't seen that same kind of attitude on the other side.

Until Republicans feel that there's a real price to pay for them just saying no and being obstructionist, you'll probably see at least a number of them arguing that we should keep on doing it. It worked for them in the 2010 election cycle, and I think there are those who believe that it can work again. I disagree with them, and I think the cost to the country has been enormous.   

Editor’s notes:  and there you have it:  according to Hussein O.,  the GOP is partisan driven and the Democrats are not. The Democrats want to get along,  the Republicans do not.  The Democrats want what is best for the nation,  and the GOP is only concerned for its own special interests.   And that is the opinion of the man who claims to be King of all the people. 

What is lost in all this,  is the fact that during Bush,  the Democrats were the obstructionist . . . . . . . in spades.

Bush wanted to fix immigration, but the socialist labor unions of America,  rejected his efforts,  and the Dems shot down that legislative effort. 

Bush wanted to forestall the financial collapse and fix Social Security.  The Dems turned him into a baby killer and the enemy of senior citizens and that effort failed. 

Bush wanted his tax cuts to be permanent,  but the Dems rejected this effort until this year,  and refused to make permanent,  tax cuts for the middle class. 

He reduced the nuclear arsenal without getting any credit,  for doing so.  He captured and destroy WMD's out of Libyan,  receiving Gadaffi's entire nuclear arsenal,  moving it out of the region and destroying it,  yet most folks are not even aware of the monumental accomplishment because of a failed American press.  

Bush appointed gay leadership to his staff without notice and did more to fight AIDs in Africa than any Administration in history, again,  all without note in the media.  

His education bill,  "no child left behind,"  criticized by the Progressive Anarchists,  was the result of a bipartisan effort that included the efforts of the drunk,  Ted Kennedy.  The Dems want you to forget about that fact.  

I could go on and on, but,  in short,   that is the way of politics. 

“Obstructionism”  is a tool in the purse of any political party in a multi-party system.  Tired of the political battles,  vote for a dictator.  That is your only choice.    There is no alternative,  and Obama has capitalized on this fact,  and is trying to turn our constitutional process against itself in an effort to win a permanent victory for the one-world elitists. 

For Obama to demonize the GOP for doing what he and his party did for 8 stinking years, during the Bush Administration,  is as cheap a political stunt as there is.  He and his Democrat buds are fond of saying,  “Elections have consequences,  and we won the last election.”  Never mind the 2010 elections,  or the two Bush elections,  or the 1994 midterms,  or the Reagan election.  The Democrats simply do not mean what they say,  when it applies to them.  And, now,  we know that they could not care less for a two party system if they are the party in power.  

Will Obama attempt to co-op yesterday's bipartisan immigration announcement? We will know, soon enough.

Update:  understand that Obama is not going to make his immigration announcement outside the WH.  Not at all.  This phony has to fly to Nevada to make his announcement,  costing the taxpayer 1.6 million dollars for no good reason at all. 

******

Today,  B Obama intends to co-op the bipartisan effort of yesterday,  with his own plan,  a plan that will not include border enforcement while,  at the same time,  include the gay community,  in some way. 

Marco Rubio told Fox News,  this morning,  that he does not intend on entering a bidding war with the White House.  He reminded Bill Hemmer (of Fox) it is congress who writes legislation,  not the White House.  “I think we have forgotten that,  around here.”  

An update is definitely following this post.  

Marco Rubio's comprehensive immigration reform formula.

Understand that when he speaks of the “will of the people” or words to that affect,  he is just kidding.  The will of the people had nothing,  absolutely nothing,  to do with the passage of ObamaCare and,  every survey since that debate was framed,  has expressed a deep disappointment in what Obama calls “health care reform.”  That negative attitude will only increase with the passage of time.  The reason?  The bill is full of taxes at all levels, including a heavy dose directed at the middle class.  But before the taxes kick in,  sometime during 2014 and before the coming midterms,  there is the fact of rising healthcare costs.  Since this bill’s passage,  healthcare costs for those not on Medicare,  have risen $2,500 per year,  for a family of four.  He promised a decrease of that exact amount,  but that failing was not a central issue in the 2012 election cycle.  Why?  No one knows. 

The will of the people have nothing to do with his fetish for spending,  and the number of concerned citizens on this score,  is around 70%.  Yet,  nothing of substance from this man who would be King. 

Because this is his second term,  he will have more time to get things done,  since he will not have the excuse of running a campaign.  And,  if the Socialist/One Worlders, win back the House,  he just might get more accomplished. 

Its  just that since he failed to get all that much accomplished,  in this first two years,  when the Republicans could not stop anything he thought to do,   one wonders how much will be accomplished with or without a takeover of the House by the Dems. 

Editorial notes:  understand that Marco Rubio came up with a "dream act" to deal with so-called "illegals,"  during the 2012 campaign cycle.  B Hussein stole that idea, a week later,  and put it into effect via an executive order.  His campaign was full of co-oped ideas,  cover -ups and dozens of promises initially made during his 2008 campaign. 

 

News Update:  a group of Senators including Senator Rubio,  will hold a joint press conference on immigration reform,  today  (Jan 28th) at 11:30,  pt.  Some of Rubio's ideas,  expressed below,  may be a part of what comes from this bipartisan effort. 

By MARCO RUBIO SPECIAL TO THE LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

Posted: Jan. 27, 2013 | 2:11 a.m.
Updated: Jan. 27, 2013 | 9:35 p.m.

As a nation of immigrants, Americans know how important immigration has been throughout our history. It's an indispensable part of our future.

Sadly, our immigration system is broken, and our dysfunctional Congress has been unable to put in place a new legal immigration system that honors our heritage as both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. To do this, we need to address three key areas.

I

First, we need a modern legal immigration system with an application  and compliance system that relies on new technology to simplify the process of coming and staying here legally.

We need an agricultural workers program that allows us to bring in seasonal and long-term laborers to provide our agricultural industries with the workers they need.

We need visa programs to attract and keep more entrepreneurs, investors and highly skilled workers in science, technology, engineering and math fields.

None of this should lead us to abandon or undermine family-based immigration. That is how my parents came to America legally, and how a great many new Americans join our society every year. Family unification should remain a high priority alongside the nation's economic interests.

II

A second key area is improving our law enforcement. Every nation has a right to protect its sovereignty by enforcing its immigration laws. We must attain operational control of our borders, create an effective workplace enforcement mechanism, and make sure that visitors to our nation leave our country when they're supposed to.

III

The third key area: addressing the undocumented immigrants already here. Those who have committed serious crimes in the United States should be found, arrested and deported.

Most of those who are undocumented are not dangerous criminals. But most are also not victims. They knowingly broke our immigration laws and do not have a legal right to remain here. But they are also human beings who made those choices in pursuit of a dream we recognize as the American dream.  [ Understand that coming to this country,  “illegally,”  is not a criminal offence,  according to our courts.  It’s restrictions are part of our civil code,  not our criminal code.  -  editor ]

The best thing for our country is to deal with this issue in a humane but responsible way that ensures this never happens again - not because anyone has a "right" to reside here illegally, but because, with or without documents, most of them are here to stay.

We can't round up millions of people and deport them. But we also can't fix our broken immigration system if we provide incentives for people to come here illegally - precisely the signal a blanket amnesty would send.

What to do with the millions of “illegal’s” in our country, now.

1)       Instead, the first step should be to require those who have not committed any felonies and are assimilated into America, to have the opportunity to apply for temporary non-immigrant status. To receive this status, they will have to come forward, admit wrongdoing, undergo a background check and pay back taxes and a meaningful fine for violating our laws.

To keep this status, they must maintain clean criminal records.   And they will not be able to receive welfare, student aid or any other federal public assistance.

2)   It's not a good idea to have millions of people permanently trapped in an immigration status that keeps them forever at a distance from our society. Therefore, once our new enforcement measures are certifiably in place, they should be allowed to apply for permanent status - not through a special pathway, but through the new and modernized legal immigration process we envision. They will have to wait behind everyone who applied before them legally. And when their turn comes up, they will have to meet the conditions of the visa they apply for.

3)   In the past, efforts to accommodate the undocumented have failed because the enforcement measures were never implemented. That's why this option to apply for a green card and get in the back of the line should not be made available until it is certified that significant progress has been made on enforcement of our immigration laws.

Both sides should want this kind of common-sense reform. To those concerned about illegal immigration, what we have now is de facto amnesty. To those looking to help the undocumented, families will continue being separated by deportations as long as politicians keep bickering and trying to outdo each other.

I've been encouraged by the support for these ideas I've found across the political spectrum, and my hope is President Obama will use his voice and influence to further this approach. However, if what he offers is a process for the undocumented that is more lenient, faster and unfair to those waiting to come legally, it won't bode well for reform.

I hope he proves that he is as serious about solving the problem as I and many colleagues are.

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is a former Las Vegas resident and the son of Cuban immigrants.