The latest news is dreadful for the Obama administration and wonderful for those of us who care about this country and the founding principles it was built upon.
Obama’s approval rating over the last couple of days is in free fall. Rasmussen reported yesterday that his approval rating had dropped a full percentage point (-5) – which is huge for one day and usually indicates a trend. Today’s report showed that Obama was at -8 making those who approve 51% and those opposed 48%. The writing is on the wall and I think that other leaders in the conservative movement may have read these signs in advance – making their decisions that much easier.
If Obama’s approval drops below 50% it will be incredibly difficult to get it over that point again – barring some miracle, economically speaking. The chances of economic improvement are minimal and his empty slogan of hope and change is ringing hollow on the masses. The economy does not look as though it will improve any time soon due to massive amounts of spending, a war waged against the middle class and small businesses, and the private sector, we will be in a massive downturn for a couple of years – inflation will be inevitable. The chances of him surviving another term if he enacts legislation that would drastically dismantle the foundation this country was built upon, are slim-to-none.
Two swing states that turned blue last year were also polled. The trend that is occurring at a national level is also occurring at the local level. Both Ohio’s and Virginia’s approval ratings for Obama are below 50%.
It will only be a matter of time before his personal approval rating comes down along with it! My guess: October; when unemployment is worse, the market has taken another massive nose-dive (and it will – it will go lower than it did the first quarter of this year), and inflation hits.
It’s important to remember that Massachusetts had a Republican governor at the helm, who proposed the same type of system that Obama is proposing. As much as those out there argue that the governor’s plan was taken to extremes by the next liberal administration – that still does not excuse the fact that a progressive politician (be it Republican or Democrat) set in motion a piece of legislation that harms more than it helps. The same could be said for Bush’s ‘No Child Left Behind Act.’ It was still Bush’s idea and he pushed for the legislation, even after it was made into something unintended.
A recent study released from Massachusetts showed that only 26% felt that the state’s universal health care program worked. Those who actually were the poorest and previously did not have health care, liked the program the least. Progressives want people to believe that billions of people are without health care, when that’s not the case, and the few million who don’t have it, are either here illegally, choose not to use one of the many programs in existence that offers health care, or are fine with going to the emergency rooms in hospitals.
Make no bones about it, Obama wants his way or it’s the highway. He WON remember? Get over it! He doesn’t want to compromise on the health care debate, and he made that point abundantly clear today, even from overseas. He told the moderate Democrats in Congress that he does not want a compromise with Republicans… He wants exactly what he proposed. Smoke and mirrors legislation that looks as though the program is competitive, but would eventually make it too expensive for small and medium sized business to carry insurance for their employees. The government cannot compete with the private sector – it always wins.
California, one of the most solvent states is of course good for their debts/sarc.
This really should have been expected – a state-run bank accepting an insolvent, soon-to-be-bailed-out-state. Seems like monopoly money to me! This is similar to a false economy, where government interference and regulation make free markets anything but FREE/REAL.
Ponzi scheme has become my favorite catch phrase. It effectively seems as though California is issuing it’s own fake currency called IOUs, although it is already insolvent, to pay back at a later date – of which, will never happen. Bank of America is already suffering and got into trouble the last time it bought a toxic company and toxic assets, as did many others – but here it is doing the same thing again. Insanity = Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.
Bank of America Corp. says it will accept warrants issued by California’s state government through July 10.
BofA says the state’s budget crisis prompted its decision.
“To support our customers, while giving the state legislature additional time to pass a budget, we will accept California state-registered warrants — or IOUs — from existing customers and clients,” Charlotte-based BofA (NYSE:BAC) says in a written statement.
It is always important to ask “Why” in these very odd and overwhelming times.
Why would Bank of America, who is already in financial trouble and dire straights, accept California IOUs, which it will probably never see? Why does this seem incredibly like the forced situation of Merrill Lynch? Is Bank of America doing this as a favor to the US government? Should I assume that Bank of America will get more bailout dollars if it accepts such a risky investment?
My biggest “beef” with this scenario: who is supporting Bank of America? The government! And where does the government get its money? The taxpayers! It’s not ok by me, that my money is being used to help bailout California due to its liberal/progressive policies that it enacted on the state.
“It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.” ~ Frédéric Bastiat 1801-1850 “The Law”
CBS’ Chip Reid and Helen Thomas double teamed Robert Gibbs today at the daily press briefing on the “tightly controlled” town hall meeting President Obama will hold on health care. Gibbs kept saying lets have this discussion AFTER the meeting. Helen Thomas accused the White House of “controlling the press.” She said almost all White House/Obama events are “prepackaged.” She accused the White House of not “having any answers.”
Does anybody recall when George Bush created the Patriot Act and began wire-tapping practices? Do you remember Democrats screaming about the right to privacy and how that wasn’t constitutional? Well, it wasn’t constitutional and it did give the government a lot of control into our lives. The Liberal rantings of “Big Brother is out to get me,” could be heard far and wide and the media certainly wouldn’t let us forget it. So where is the media now? They would be investigating… but they haven’t found time to clean their noses after being so close to Obama’s rear.
I didn’t mind the Patriot Act that much only because I was still in shock and appalled by the actions of radical Islamic terrorists on 9/11. I knew I had nothing to hide and had no problem if they in fact wanted to tap my phone. However, I now understand that this is not constitutional, and see why there was such a big deal made about this piece of legislation. So why aren’t the liberals out in full force now that Obama has expanded upon the Patriot Act and is also considering to let the United Nations become the new global IRS? We may be paying global taxes this time next year. Why are the liberals, given that several Democratic Senators were against extending the E-Verify program for illegals, all of the sudden supporting eye scans and biometrics to check for citizenship?
Eye scans and United Nations control seems more Big Brother-like to me than the Patriot Act. If you are going to be upset about the actions of one then be upset about the actions of another, if they are the same. Ann Coulter completely nailed her evaluation of liberals when she said: “If liberals didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.” You would think that there would be no surprise to any of this, but I guess I am just hoping that Democrats and Progressives alike, wake up and actually stand on principle for once – and call a spade a spade.
The Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact on Development that begins on Wednesday will consider adoption of a document calling for “new voluntary and innovative sources of financing initiatives to provide additional stable sources of development finance…” This is U.N.-speak for global taxes. They are anything but “voluntary” for the people forced to pay them.
The most “popular” proposals, which could generate tens of billions of dollars in revenue for global purposes, involve taxes on greenhouse gas emissions and financial transactions such as stock trades.
The document was agreed to at an informal meeting of expert “facilitators” and was made available on Monday afternoon at 3 p.m. It is doubtful that any changes will be made to it.
The conference was postponed from June 1-3 and will now take place June 24-26 at the U.N. in New York. While the “outcome document” has been watered downsomewhat from the previous version, it still reaffirms attainment of the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals, which would require the payment of $845 billion from U.S. taxpayers. A commitment to the MDGs was a stated objective of the Global Poverty Act, which Barack Obama had introduced as a U.S. senator. It requires the U.S. to devote 0.7 percent of Gross National Income to foreign aid.
Senate Democrats outlined plans yesterday to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws, including a requirement that all U.S. workers verify their identity through fingerprints or an eye scan.
Speaking on the eve of a White House summit with congressional leaders on immigration, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) said a national system to verify work documents is necessary because Congress has failed to crack down on unscrupulous employers and illegal immigrants with fake documents.
“I’m sure the civil libertarians will object to some kind of biometric card — although . . . there’ll be all kinds of protections — but we’re going to have to do it. It’s the only way,” Schumer said. “The American people will never accept immigration reform unless they truly believe their government is committed to ending future illegal immigration.”
By announcing his plans, Schumer, who chairs the Senate’s main immigration subcommittee, ushered in what President Obama has signaled will be his next major legislative campaign, after the economic stimulus plan, health care and energy.
I am utterly speechless - Is it just me or are we living in an Orwell novel?
