timely quote

Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president.

Theodore Roosevelt

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

I was all prepared to open RINO season

And not a single Republican in the House voted for Obama's spending bill.

From ABC News:
The $819 billion stimulus bill passed the House 244 to 188, but not a single Republican voted for it. Eleven Democrats broke with their party and voted against the stimulus.

"I am grateful to the House of Representatives for moving the American Recovery and Reinvestment plan forward today," Obama said in a written statement released after the vote.

His statement didn't mention the failure to win Republican votes, but added, "What we can't do is drag our feet or allow the same partisan differences to get in our way. We must move swiftly and boldly to put Americans back to work, and that is exactly what this plan begins to do."

But it's not going to do that. It will pour money into things like ACORN and pay more of my money to those who don't pay taxes. It's spending huge amounts on state projects like public works and school construction, neither of which are bad things, but they're not federal responsibilities.

Obama did invite some Republicans over to the White House for drinks...I guess he was trying to get them drunk enough to vote for this Soviet-style, steal from the hard working, socialist travesty. As for the Democrats that broke ranks, good on them. It's good to see that not everyone has been drinking the kool-aid recently. Of course now, the Senate bill is even larger. It's approaching $900 billion or pork, payouts and handouts.
"The president was clear that he was going to continue to reach out to us, continue to listen to our ideas and I think we have to remember we're at the beginning of this process," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, told "Good Morning America" today.

Those comments marked a softer tone from Tuesday morning, when Boehner and other Republican leaders tried to head off Obama's lobbying efforts by calling on Republicans to oppose the stimulus plan even before the president had met with them.

But Republicans came out of their meeting with Obama full of praise for his willingness to listen to them. And in the evening, Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel invited a group of Republican congressmen to a White House sit-down.

In addition, Obama leaned on Democratic leaders to withdraw two elements of the stimulus bill that had been ridiculed by Republicans -- an expansion of family planning funds for poor families and $200 million to resod the National Mall in Washington.

Those gestures haven't translated into votes by House Republicans, who applaud the bill's $300 billion in tax cuts, but object to much of the $500 billion meant to be spent on public works projects.

"What we're concerned about, some of the spending in this bill has nothing to do with creating jobs or preserving jobs," Boehner told "GMA."

"The bill that'll be on the floor today is a bill that has too much wasteful spending ... and buries our kids and grandkids under a mountain of debt," he said.

While I am glad there were no Republican votes for this thing in the House, the tone that Boehner is setting is a little disturbing. Kind of like a kid who REALLY want's his dad to pay attention and is excited at any little chance of it. House Republicans stood up, and that is exactly what we need in the face of this kind of legislation. Now let's see how the Senators do.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Obama's "stimulus" package could give billions to ACORN

From Fox News and Salon.com:

The $825 billion "stimulus" package that Obama and congressional democrats are trying to force down our throats seems to be more of a line item list of the things that they couldn't get done under Bush. This is according to Sen. David Vitter and Rep. John Boehner.

Republican lawmakers are raising concerns that ACORN, the low-income advocacy group under investigation for voter registration fraud, could be eligible for billions in aid from the economic stimulus proposal working its way through the House.

House Republican Leader John Boehner issued a statement over the weekend noting that the stimulus bill wending its way through Congress provides $4.19 billion for "neighborhood stabilization activities."

He said the money was previously limited to state and local governments, but that Democrats now want part of it to be available to non-profit entities. That means groups like ACORN would be eligible for a portion of the funds.

The thing is, Obama has made house dems drop some bits like contraceptive services because they didn't meet the need for job creation. But I haven't been able to find a list of what's actually in the bill.

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., told FOX News Tuesday that the money could be seen as "payoff" for groups' political activities in the last election. ACORN generally supports Democratic candidates and actively backed President Obama last year.

But he said the funding is just one example of frivolous spending items in the $825 billion package.

"It's just a long list of spending items. Not a real economic stimulus job creation bill," Vitter said. "It's line after line after line of favorite liberal spending programs, and it amounts to a big government bill -- not a job creation bill."

Obama plans to meet with Republican leaders on Capitol Hill Tuesday to hear some their input on the package. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Obama is open to suggestions.

"If there are good ideas -- and I think he assumes there will be -- we will look at those ideas," he said Monday.

That meeting did happen this afternoon and Obama called it a "wonderful exchange of ideas." My Representative was on the radio this evening and said that it was more of an agreement that there are definite differences in ideas between Obama and republicans.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a televised interview that Obama was having problems with Democrats, whom he said favor spending over tax cuts as a remedy for the economic crisis.

"We think the country needs a stimulus," he said on NBC's "Today" show. But he also said that he believes most people do not believe it will be accomplished through projects like "fixing up the mall," a reference to fundings to repair the National Mall in Washington. He said Republicans want a bill that devotes 40 percent of its cost to tax cuts.

The White House-backed legislation includes roughly $550 billion in spending as well as $275 billion in tax cuts.

Most of the spending is on items such as health care, jobless benefits, food stamps and other programs that benefit victims of the recession.

House Republicans have drafted an alternative. Except for an extension of unemployment benefits, it consists exclusively of tax cuts.

Wouldn't that be nice. I believe we've had enough stimuli, though. If any Republicans actually vote for this $825 billion spending bill, they need to be voted out of office.

h/t: Gunslinger's Journal: Zero's latest Outrage

Sunday, January 25, 2009

Straight from the comments section

I was beginning a discussion with an Anonymous commenter on this post, and it occurred to me that this deserves it's own post. Anonymous, welcome to the front page.

He (?) had picked a quote from my post about the Obama flag: "This flag shows the misunderstanding, contempt, disrespect and hatred they have for all this country really is." His comments were as follows.

For all YOU BELIEVE this country really is.

Please don't confuse facts and opinions, it is a common mistake that has caused a lot of hate, anger and suffering in this world.

Respect is the keyword here, and that goes to all commenters here.
So I asked him about his opinions about what this country is and he responded, in part:
I don't have an opinion about what the American country is, since I live in Holland.

I stumbled upon this blog (and blogs related to this one), and was surprised by how much hate and contempt some of these posts and comments contain.

And unreasonable things too, even I can tell that Obama changing certain laws in order to stay president is not going to happen. How can you seriously discuss Obama becoming the next Castro?
My first response was that since he was not here and seeing what we consider to be the breakdown in the fabric of society like we have, that perhaps he didn't have the experience to judge our opinions so harshly. But rethinking it, I decided that this was a better response.

First, this is a blog. It's pretty much the internet's comment section. Anything that isn't directly referenced (and a lot of what is) you can assume to be opinion. But we thrive on opinion. The is our place to place our opinions. Just as you have placed yours.

While I do my best to avoid confusing facts and opinions, the internet is certainly one place where that can happen, without malice. However, I am only one voice out of many. When I started reading more and more after Obama's election, I found that I am not the only one who was as concerned about the things he said and the people he associated with.

Second, what many people here and around the world don't understand (although, being in Holland, you may have the better experience) is that there is a slow migrationary invasion going on. Our free societies are allowing people to enter that have the desire to destroy what we have created. In to democracies around the world have come millions of Muslims believing the Wahhabist teachings and attempting to Islamicize their new homes. They want to turn them from the established society they were in to a new, Muslim society where mideval laws apply and non-Muslims are secondary citizens.

Example: Russia. Saudi Arabia wants to build yet another mosque in Moscow, but Russia turned the table on them. Needless to say, there will be no new mosque because there will never be an Orthodox church in Mecca. And we are told that we have to respect their religion or we are intolerant. But they have no respect for ours, and in their societies, other religions are openly persecuted, but that's not intolerance, somehow. This is fact.

Example: France. France has been under attack for years. There are places in France that aren't French anymore.

Third, there has been a long struggle in this country between people that believe that the founders did a pretty good job when the wrote the rules that we should run our country by and people that believe that there are a lot of "rights" that were missed and that the "pursuit of happiness" isn't enough.

Timely example: Mortgages. Several years ago, there was a push by Democrats to expand mortgage availability under the guise of racism. Now businesses understand that business is business, but because the majority of people that could afford mortgages were white that it was said that the mortgage industry was inherently racist. The end result was to change the way credit reports were read, and create the sub-prime mortgage program. People who couldn't afford mortgages were given them (in opposition to reasonable business practices) and the government (through Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae) guaranteed them.

Since loaning money to people who can't afford to pay it back is generally a guarantee of loss, millions of new "homeowners" are now facing bankruptcy and the American economy is suffering. Banks are facing massive losses and, in some cases, are freezing new loans. And the same democrats who created the problem in the first place are lauded for creating yet another entitlement and bailing out the banks. And somehow, these democrats aren't to blame. This is fact.

Fourth, there has been a push for two things. The first is a new Constitutional Congress, where anything is possible, and the second is for an amendment to remove the two term limit on the office of President. When you hear people speak of Obama being "president for life," that is due to an actual possibility that it could happen.

Many of Obama's planned policies will cement him as the most socialist president in the history of this country. He wants to create many new entitlements, grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens and he believes that it is the government's job to redistribute wealth. If he is able to implement these policies, he will be able to guarantee himself a huge, non-taxpaying voting bloc. Add a lack of term limits and you have president for life. Probable? Maybe. Possible? Absolutely. This is fact.

There are several opinions that have been incorrectly advertised as facts recently, though.

Global Warming is a hoax. The earth is in a geological cooling trend and scientists back that up.

The Government doesn't need to fix the economy. Umm...the first bailout did such a good job, I can't wait for the second one. Ronald Reagan fixed the economy in the 80's by giving the money back to the people who spend it in the form of tax cuts. That works. Economists will tell you that it works. Creating trillions of dollars in new governement spending and taxing the most productive among us will cause a decrease in overall consumer spending, cause inflation and further destabilize the economy.

As for my comment about the desecration of the flag, well, there are laws in place that restrict what can be done with an American flag. US Code 36, Chapter 10, §176. Respect for flag:
(g) The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature.
For those who believe that the law only affects them when they want it to, having Obama's picture on it seems to be ok.

Also, it doesn't take long to go from one of these to the other.

So, Anonymous, I understand that from the outside, Obama's election may seem like a good thing, but to those of us who have watched our liberties get eroded one little thing (think of the children) at a time, this is not a good time. And this is a fact.