Archive for Obama

Obama to Kyl: Won’t secure the border

Posted in Immigration, Politics with tags , , , , , on June 20, 2010 by raingeg

Arizona Senator Jon Kyl reveals President Obamas border plan at Tempe town hall.

Red State:

On June 18, 2010, Arizona Republican Senator Jon Kyl told the audience at a North Tempe Tea Party town hall meeting that during a private, one-on-one meeting with President Obama in the Oval Office, the President told him, regarding securing the southern border with Mexico, “The problem is, . . . if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’” [Audible gasps were heard throughout the audience.] Sen. Kyl continued, “In other words, they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’”

Sen. Kyl also said he reminded President Obama that the President and the Congress have an obligation, a duty, to secure the border.

And here’s the video from the town hall meeting.

HT: Red State and Memeorandum

First Oval Office Speech for Obama, Hmmm?

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on June 15, 2010 by raingeg

I don’t know what to write about this speech. While watching I took a step back and looked at myself and realized that I was looking at the television like a dog looks at an annoying noise, with my head cocked 4 inches to the left, needless to say, I was a bit perplexed. Not by the big words of the amazing president, but rather the base and overused rhetoric, in a speech that I feel like I’ve heard before.

When I started writing this I was watching the Celtics take on the Lakers, and I could have no more helped the Celtics beat the Lakers than the president can stop the oil from leaking out of that hole. So while this is supposed to comfort me and put me at ease, it accomplishes none of that. He dropped some names, told us who was supposed to aid in the process and let us know that BP was going to get it. But I have a feeling we’re going to be waiting for this relief well to be dug before it stops.

When we are faced with big problems it takes big people to say that they working on the problem and doing their best to fix it without pushing the blame on to someone else, until all the facts are in. Something the President did twice tonight, first by blaming BP and secondly by blaming the Bush administration for this problem. When, from what I know, we really don’t have all of the facts.

The warlike talk and cliché “we can put a man on the moon” stuff just gets to be a bit annoying and repetitive. Oil is not an enemy, oil does not have a mind of its own and oil is not plotting to destruct the shores of this country. Can anyone honestly say that BP wanted this to happen? But of course we all know that every corporation really wants to kill 11 people, endanger The Gulf of Mexico and have to pay for the clean up, oh, and don’t forget ruining their brand. I mean, I’ll say flat out that corporations care about money, and the last thing they want to do is lose any it. But if it turns out that they were corrupt and they are responsible for this disaster the so be it, take them down. But if it turns out that it was just a freak accident then how can you hold someone accountable for that?

The real question I have to ask myself is whether or not the claim that more government regulation would have prevented this from happening is true or false. The President doesn’t even know. And to be completely honest, I don’t know right now, so I take no position. Here’s to hoping that in the coming months we will know more about this, but right now the good old American way of “innocent til proven guilty” should prevail, but its not. The Obama administration has already tried and convicted BP. I’d like to know the Presidents solution to the problem of the corrupt self regulating oil companies that showered regulators with gifts. Is the solution to have the federal government now play a larger role in regulating these oil rigs, because we know that no politician or government bureaucrat has ever been bought and sold or showered with gifts, just ask Joe Sestak.

Pres. Obama Kicks Butt, Pelosi is heckled and 1 Million are w/o Insurance for 3 Years

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , on June 9, 2010 by raingeg

I remember about a year ago, I was at work and I had just read a news story about University of Arizona students protesting cuts in education. I realized that these people were not protesting, they were begging and pleading with the government to keep their programs alive and to keep their benefits coming. And that’s no place to be.

Today Nancy Pelosi was heckled during a town hall meeting, from people on the left.

This is a problem for the Obama administration and lefties in congress. They came into office with expectations so unrealistically high and people looking for so much, that when these expectations are not met, and we do not have heaven on earth, they are upset. Its almost humorous these people actually think any of this is possible, they have their utopian visions of the world and they don’t like it when reality sets in and they realize that keeping the quality of health care great while driving down the cost and adding millions more to the system won’t work.

Politico.com had a story today that 1 million people have their low cost health care plans stripped and be without health insurance for three years, till 2014, because of this bad government regulation.

Part of the health care overhaul due to kick in this September could strip more than 1 million people of their insurance coverage, violating a key goal of President Barack Obama’s reforms.

Under the provision, insurance companies will no longer be able to apply broad annual caps on the amount of money they pay out on health policies. Employer groups say the ban could essentially wipe out a niche insurance market that many part-time workers and retail and restaurant employees have come to rely on.

This market’s limited-benefit plans, also called mini-med plans, are priced low because they can, among other things, restrict the number of covered doctor visits or impose a maximum on insurance payouts in a year. The plans are commonly offered by retail or restaurant companies to low-wage workers who cannot afford more expensive, comprehensive coverage.

The struggle over the provision highlights the importance of the new law’s implementation timetable and the way its parts interlock with one another. The legislation was front-loaded with consumer-friendly reforms, such as the ban on most annual limits, in hopes the law would become more popular. Polls show the legislation is supported by about half the public.

But many of the more comprehensive features of the overhaul, such as the insurance exchanges and tax credits that would help cover those who use limited-benefit plans, don’t come into play until 2014.

That means, for nearly three years, the effect of the ban on annual limits could be costly for the low-wage, seasonal or temporary workers who most often use limited-benefit plans. The full effect won’t be known until the administration releases regulations that detail how the provision will be implemented.

HT: Memeorandum

So much for all of the hurry to get the “comprehensive” health care reform passed so that everyone will have health insurance.

And finally if the presidents administration is not putting their boot heel on the neck of a corporation the president himself is on the look out for someone’s “ass to kick.” That’s at least what president Obama told NBC’s Matt Lauer, who said people are looking to see the president “kick some butt.”

And really, the honest answer is that there is no butt to kick right now, except maybe his own, because he does not want to leave the campaign trail, give up his meetings with Paul McCartney and stop selling his health care legislation to seniors. Right now I honestly don’t see any point to his being down in the Gulf. But I do see a point in stopping all of the side show politics and actually appearing presidential in the face of this crisis, and that is not the “ass” kicking, boot heel stomping, tapping into populist anger president that we need to see. The president says “this is not theater,” but he sure is doing a good job of turning it into theater, and right now he’s playing to the wrong crowd.

Eric Holder Hasn’t Read SB 1070

Posted in Immigration, Politics with tags , , , , , on May 13, 2010 by raingeg

Wow! What a shock, Attorney General Eric Holder hasn’t read Arizona’s SB 1070. Actually, this is not a shock at all. They don’t even read 2,000 page legislation that will take over a large portion of the economy and effect every citizen of the country, so why should they read a small bill out of Arizona?’

The Washington Times:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who has been critical of Arizona’s new immigration law, said Thursday he hasn’t yet read the law and is going by what he’s read in newspapers or seen on television.

He’s going by what the newspapers and television say? The bill is not that long, its 18 pages, about one one hundredth the size of the health insurance bill. In other words, you don’t need two days and two lawyers to see what it all means, as John Conyers famously stated.

This weekend Mr. Holder told NBC’s “Meet the Press” program that the Arizona law “has the possibility of leading to racial profiling.” He had earlier called the law’s passage “unfortunate,” and questioned whether the law was unconstitutional because it tried to assume powers that may be reserved for the federal government.

Rep. Ted Poe, who had questioned Mr. Holder about the law, wondered how he could have those opinions if he hadn’t yet read the legislation.

“It’s hard for me to understand how you would have concerns about something being unconstitutional if you haven’t even read the law,” the Texas Republican told the attorney general.

The Arizona law’s backers argue that it doesn’t go beyond what federal law already allows, and they say press reports have distorted the legislation. They point to provisions in the law that specifically rule out racial profiling as proof that it can be implemented without conflicting with civil rights.

But critics said giving police the power to stop those they suspect are in the country illegally is bound to lead to profiling.

Mr. Holder said he expects the Justice and Homeland Security departments will finish their review of the Arizona law soon.

This is the most important part of this post, so make sure you don’t miss it. The media is to blame for the problem that we have here. The critics backers that they mention in the article are right. When it comes to what the law really says and what the critics of the law say it says, the media does a bad job of presenting the facts in a way that rebuts what the critics are saying, or just straightens out what they are saying.

For example: “But critics said giving police the power to stop those they suspect are in the country illegally is bound to lead to profiling.”

Do you not understand, Washington Times, that police cannot, I repeat cannot, stop someone because they suspect that they are in the country illegally? Please help me understand why the following sentence wasn’t a direct quote from the bill that shows that police are required to have what is called a “lawful” encounter with the police, reference Article 8, Section B in the first sentence of SB 1070. The police can only ask the immigration status of a person that has already broken the law, not just anybody walking down the street. And if anyone would just take the time to do some investigative reporting and read HB 2162 they would find out that there is a whole list of types of identification that will suffice in the event that a person gets pulled over, one of which is a regular old Arizona drivers license.

The media is in the back pocket of the left and they are not going to give you a fair summary, or even a legitimate and accurate report of what the law really says. They are all pandering to the left on this one because they are all afraid of offending someone, even at the expense of looking stupid, they will do anything to be politically correct. In order to be politically correct it almost always means that one has to be intellectually dishonest and factually wrong when presenting the “facts.”

Hat tip: Memeorandum

C.S. Lewis on Subjectivism and Politicians, Dennis Prager on America

Posted in Education, Health Insurance, Humanity, Life, Politics with tags , , , , , , , on March 26, 2010 by raingeg

One could make the case that the United States is a few generations behind Europe when it comes to how far to the left we’ve moved. After two brutal wars during the first half of the 20th century it seems that Europe thought the best way to never again be in that situation was to pacify itself and embrace collectivism. In America, it was different, we were aiding the Europeans in the World Wars, and it wasn’t effecting us at home to the degree that it was effecting Europe. We didn’t have men blown to bits in our neighborhoods as did the Europeans.

America had her moments, in the latter half of the 20th Century, internationally we had to deal with the Cold War, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and both wars in the Middle East among other international conflicts. We also had our share of economic and political woes. That has had some of the same effects that the first half of the 20th Century had on Europe, and now we are finally realizing this. As Dennis Prager has said on his show earlier this week we are seeing the results of the seeds we have sewn, the chickens are coming home to roost.

C.S. Lewis had the opportunity to live in Europe during the first half of the 20th Century. And if one believes that we are becoming more European, as I do, then I think that it is appropriate to look at Lewis’ view of the world from time to time and apply it to ours here in America. I think you will find Lewis’ comments on the politician interesting.

The quote that I’d like to highlight comes from an essay entitled “The Poison of Subjectivism” which came from (I am assuming a magazine) Religion in Life Vol. XII which was released in the summer of 1943.

I’d like to preface the quote by giving you Lewis’ explanation of subjectivism and another excerpt from the essay.

“It does not believe that value judgments are really judgments at all. They are sentiments, or complexes, or attitudes, produced in a community by the pressure of its environment and its traditions, and differing from one community to another. To say that a thing is good is merely to express our feeling about it; and our feeling about it is the feeling we have been socially conditioned to have.”

Does that not sound like something that someone might be taught today by their first grade teacher, a professor, some parents or even some churches? Morality doesn’t exist, it is merely something that is a result of our society. They tell you that you need to find “your truth,” you need to find what you think is right and wrong.

“Many a popular ‘planner’ on a democratic platform, many a mild-eyed scientist in a democratic laboratory means, in the last resort, just what the Fascist means. He believes that ‘good’ means whatever men are conditioned to approve. He believes that it is the function of him and his kind to condition men; to create consciences by eugenics, psychological manipulation of infants, state education and mass propaganda. Because he is confused, he does not yet fully realize that those who create conscience cannot be subject to conscience themselves. But he must awake to the logic of his position sooner or later; and when he does, what barrier remains between us and the final division of the race into a few conditioners who stand themselves outside morality and the many conditioned in whom such morality as the experts choose is produced at the experts’ pleasure? If ‘good’ means only the local ideology, how can those who invent the local ideology be guided by any idea of good themselves? The very idea of freedom presupposes some objective moral law which over arches rulers and ruled alike. Subjectivism about values is eternally incompatible with democracy. We and our rulers are of one kind only so long as we are subject to one law. But if there is no Law of Nature, the ethos of any society is the creation of its rulers, educators and conditioners; and every creator stands above and outside his own creation.”

That is where America stands today. You have a congress and a president that arbitrarily decide what your “rights” are. They tell you that you have a “right” to “health care,” yet they prohibit you from freely exercising your “right,” and force you to accept something whether you want it or not, doesn’t sound like liberty to me. And the reason why they have the hubris to do such a thing is because they do not believe in an objective moral law, or a Law of Nature. They believe that your rights are given to you by the state. They believe themselves to be what Lewis calls the “conditioners.” They believe that they know better than you, that you cannot be trusted with your money or your freedom.

They throw money at state education, and science, and they believe themselves to be the ones that are to be looked to when there are problems in the country, and sadly they often are by people that think they actually have something to offer them. Why do you think that the administration didn’t address the jobs issue and create a job friendly environment over the last year? Think, if more people went to work more people would probably have health insurance, and if more people had health insurance through their employer they would have had a weaker case. So, they took advantage of the jobs crisis, and they put forth many types of legislation that do anything but create a job friendly environment. Cap and trade, nationalization of the student loan industry and the health care bill are all sure to be private sector job killers as opposed to private sector job creators, because they all burden the taxpayer and the people who are supposed to employ the taxpayers.

Now that you have some context, the next quote, the quote that really caught my eye, will make a lot more sense.

“While we believe that good is something to be invented, we demand of our rulers such qualities as ‘vision’, ‘dynamism’, ‘creativity’, and the like. If we returned to the objective view we should demand qualities much rarer, and much more beneficial – virtue, knowledge, diligence and skill. ‘Vision’ is for sale, or claims to be for sale, everywhere. But give me a man who will do a day’s work for a day’s pay, who will refuse bribes, who will not make up his facts, and who has learned his job.”

-C.S. Lewis

Sadly, many of our rulers lack virtue, knowledge, diligence and skill. They have not done a day’s work for a day’s pay in quite some time, they all take bribes and make up their facts. This is not a ridiculous call to vote everyone out of office, this is a call to vote people in that know why America is great, and that is as Dennis Prager put it in his latest column, because with a small state the “individual can be free and great.”

Paul Ryan Videos/Why Don’t we Have Beards in DC?

Posted in Economy, Health Insurance, Humor, Politics with tags , , , , , , , , on February 26, 2010 by raingeg

I am by no means turning into a Ryan zealot, but I think I’d like to see Paul Ryan run against the president in 2012. What do you think?

Video from Weekly Standard.

I’ve posted on Ryan before and I think he would make a pretty good competitor.

Also, I’d like to address the lack of beards, or any sort of facial hair in Washington, it bugs me. Do you think we could have a bipartisan summit on the topic of government and facial hair? Those of us who do sport facial hair feel very underrepresented. Please bring facial hair back to Washington!

As I pointed out in November, there were plenty of beards and mustaches in the White House and in Washington in the past. Can you think of one beard in Washington today? Just one? If you can please let me know so this person can be celebrated, I will make this a nonpartisan event.

The Joel Gaines Show 2-14-10

Posted in Economy, Health Insurance, Politics with tags , , , , , , , , on February 15, 2010 by raingeg

After a bit of a break from the blogging world, I am back and still suffering from writers block. As I work out my new sleep and exercise schedule, which to my blogging demise means I have to sleep more and be away from the computer more. That said, here’s yesterdays ep of The Joel Gaines Show the Valentines edition.

Click here to download the show.

What Joel is talking about this week:

Let’s take a look at the state of the American economy. I have some sobering news for you on this front.

As the health care takeover begins to crumble, congressional democrats are starting to point fingers – who do you think they are going to blame? We’ll discuss one of the scapegoats today.

Global Warming AKA Climate Change – another Obama initiative on the ropes – is in tatters world-wide as fewer drink the Kool-Aid.

I would like to take an opportunity to agree with George Will today – I’ve been at odds with him on a couple of topics, but let’s take a look at the DC School Choice initiative and compare their attitude towards that with their approach to health care reform. I think you will find this interesting. As we will expose the hypocritical nature of the American leftists.

Iran is claiming to be able to enrich uranium at 80% with an investment to make that higher in the near future