I had a revelation today...

I know most of you with think I'm being less than sincere when I say this, but I had a revelation today. I honestly feel sorry for obama.

It has to be extremely hard for a hard core liberal candidate to suddenly become president and discover that all the things you campaigned on were just naive bullshit. To discover that there are some very nasty people on this earth that want to do us serious harm. To find out that the things that Republicans do, like Gitmo and enhanced interrogations are necessary to provide the American people with safety and security.

But obama is lucky, he has an uncanny ability to claim the hard work and diligence of others as his own. He can do things like waffle on a decision to take out the most wanted scumbag on the planet and then take a victory lap at Ground Zero when the deed is done. He can criticize the actions of the CIA, even going as far as having the attorney general investigate them. Yet when the evidence they collected leads to a huge victory, he is sure to have his face in front of every TV camera he can find, taking the credit. He can bad mouth the Bush Administration non-stop, for two and a half years, and then accept the fruits of their labor as his own, without ever giving credit where credit is due.

It has to be exceptionally hard to find yourself in the real world, especially when you are an elitist douchebag who has spent your entire life avoiding taking a stand or making a decision that can be linked directly to you.

obama is a credit taking thug. The more I have thought about it, I don't feel sorry for him at all...

Laffer Curve...

Have you ever heard of the Laffer Curve? I hadn't until several months ago. It's a little like the Bell Curve for grading in school, but this is for determining the optimal tax rate in an economy.

The Laffer Curve basically says that at 0 percent taxation the government gets $0 dollars in revenue, and at 100 percent taxation the government gets $0 dollars in revenue. At 100 percent taxation there is no incentive for people to earn money. Instead bartering and other means of trade take the place of cash transactions.

Based on those assumptions, there has to be a tax rate in between that keeps the people happy while generating the revenue government needs to function.

When Ronald Reagan took over after jimmy carter almost drove our economy into the ground, he used the Laffer Curve, in part, as a basis for dropping the highest marginal tax rate from 70 percent to 31 percent. It resulted in a massive increase in revenue to the federal government. Of course, congress continued to spend every single nickle that came in, and then some, so no surplus was ever attained.

It's hard to believe that taxing people LESS brings in MORE money, but it works. That isn't always the case, but historically in this Country it is very effective.

obama and his gang of thugs think that taxation is the key to solving our financial crisis. It isn't. Cutting spending is the first step. Reducing the size and influence of government is also a good step. Businesses have to have some freedom in order to be innovative. Innovation leads businesses to employ more people, more people paying a lower tax rate increases revenue to the government.

obama also talks constantly about the evil rich people. They don't pay their fair share. There are three points I would like to make about that.
1. The top 1 percent of wage earners in this Country pay 40 percent of the tax burden. Compare that to the bottom 45 percent who pay no taxes at all. Who is actually carrying the burden?

2. Rich people in this Country employ millions of people. The small business is the backbone of this Country. We are losing small businesses every day to uncertainty with the economy, over regulation, over taxation and just a general hostile environment created by this administration.

3. Companies and corporations don't pay tax. Sure, they may send money to the federal government, but they offset that money by increasing prices on goods and services or being unable to afford raises and other benefits for their employees.

One last thing, it is not evil for a company to make a profit. Profits mean more research and development which results in better products. It means raises for employees. It means charitable donations. It means putting more money back in to our economy.

obama is bad for our Nation. He is anti-American in every sense of the word. His plot to turn us into a third world nation is dangerous. His underhanded and dirty tactics should not be tolerated. The press in this Country have given him a free pass from the moment he emerged from the chicago slime. Will the press be as forgiving when he comes for them?

For more information on the Laffer Curve, and other examples, visit this link...

You Paid For It: Sen. McCaskill’s Air Claire Hypocrisy

I don't know Ed Martin, but if I ever meet him I'll buy him a beer. This is some damn fine reporting and near and dear to my heart. I despise a hypocrite and mccaskill has proven she is that and more. Not only is she a hypocrite, she doesn't give a damn about the people of Missouri. She cares about claire mccaskill and what she can gain from her current position. It sure seems like she has gained a lot.

Read the rest of this article at the link below. The ties between mccaskill's private businesses and her votes as a politician. It sure seems as if there could be some conflict of interest going on, and with her record so far, I have to doubt that it was unintentional...

by Ed Martin - Guns & Patriots

All Americans should thank Senator Claire McCaskill for showing – yet again – how the liberal economic “jobs” plan works for politicians instead of people.

A few years ago after her election to the U.S. Senate, McCaskill and her husband bought an airplane to use as their own charter company. She then paid her own company using tax payer dollars from her Senate office budget to fly back and forth to Missouri for official and political events.

Liberals seem to love this kind of business: funded by tax payer dollars, with no bid contracts, entirely self-dealing, and with complete secrecy.

Is it just me, or does that also remind you of the so-called Stimulus bill McCaskill helped President Obama pass in 2009?

Flash forward to a few weeks ago when McCaskill was confronted about her sketchy business deal. McCaskill did what any good taxpayer-subsidized businessperson might do. She sold the plane and shut the scheme down.

After all, it’s tough to run an airplane charter business without taxpayer payments.

It gets worse for Air Claire. The public realized (even the press) that using taxpayer dollars to pay yourself is wrong. The pressure was unbearable and McCaskill whipped out her personal checkbook and re-paid the federal treasury with an $88,000 check. It’s shameful when you game the system to the point of being politically forced to pay back a taxpayer subsidy.

As I watched the Air Claire story develop – I started http://www.airclaire.com/ to help people stay informed – I knew there were more questions not being asked.

McCaskill had been keeping the plane in Delaware and Illinois, two states that do not impose personal property taxes. Well, Missouri does. So, was McCaskill, a committed liberal millionaire who advocates soaking the rich, actually dodging taxes?

Yes, Air Claire was trying to pay fewer taxes. Caught again and pressured by the public, McCaskill pulled out her checkbook and wrote a check for over $300,000 for back taxes on the plane.

Not only was McCaskill paying her own company taxpayer dollars to fund her travels, she avoided paying taxes to the state she supposedly serves.

This is a trend with liberal power-players. Remember how Tom Daschle and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner were exposed for skipping out on taxes? It’d be different if these politicians didn’t preach for higher taxes, but these hypocrites love higher taxes for their constitutes yet hate to pay up themselves.

Go read the rest at the link above...

EXCLUSIVE: Senator’s husband’s firm cashes in on crisis

I find it very difficult to believe that this was a mere coincidence. It's much more likely that feinstein is just another thug, criminal democrat.

She introduces legislation that is out of her area of involvment that just happens to benefit her and her husband to the tune of millions. Hmmm, I'm a bit skeptical about this deal. And these types of deals are against the rules, and probably illegal.

The list of crooked democrats gets longer by the day. dianne feinstein, maxine waters, charlie rangel, john kerry, obama, the list goes on and on. Sure, there are some crooked republicans too. But the funny thing is, there criminal activity lands them kicked out of polititcs or in jail. When democrats do it, it magically goes away, just like this will.

Thanks to Marc Cote for the link to this article, it pisses me off, but thanks none the less...

From Chuck Neubauer - The Washington Times

On the day the new Congress convened this year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to route $25 billion in taxpayer money to a government agency that had just awarded her husband’s real estate firm a lucrative contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.

Mrs. Feinstein’s intervention on behalf of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was unusual: the California Democrat isn’t a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs with jurisdiction over FDIC; and the agency is supposed to operate from money it raises from bank-paid insurance payments - not direct federal dollars.

Documents reviewed by The Washington Times show Mrs. Feinstein first offered Oct. 30 to help the FDIC secure money for its effort to stem the rise of home foreclosures. Her letter was sent just days before the agency determined that CB Richard Ellis Group (CBRE) - the commercial real estate firm that her husband Richard Blum heads as board chairman - had won the competitive bidding for a contract to sell foreclosed properties that FDIC had inherited from failed banks.

About the same time of the contract award, Mr. Blum’s private investment firm reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission that it and related affiliates had purchased more than 10 million new shares in CBRE. The shares were purchased for the going price of $3.77; CBRE’s stock closed Monday at $5.14.

Spokesmen for the FDIC, Mrs. Feinstein and Mr. Blum’s firm told The Times that there was no connection between the legislation and the contract signed Nov. 13, and that the couple didn’t even know about CBRE’s business with FDIC until after it was awarded.

Senate ethics rules state that members must avoid conflicts of interest as well as “even the appearance of a conflict of interest.” Some ethics analysts question whether Mrs. Feinstein ran afoul of the latter provision, creating the appearance that she was rewarding the agency that had just hired her husband’s firm.

“This clearly gives the appearance of a conflict of interest,” said Kent Cooper, a former federal regulator who specializes in government ethics and disclosures. “To maintain the people’s trust in government, it is incumbent on a legislator to take the extra steps necessary to ensure that when she introduces any legislation that it does not cause people to question her motives or the business activities of her spouse.”

Mrs. Feinstein and Mr. Blum, a wealthy investment banker, are a power couple in both Washington and California who sat behind President Obama during his inauguration in January. Mrs. Feinstein also is mentioned as a candidate for California governor.

The FDIC contract “highlights the problem of a senator with a spouse who has extensive business interests that intersect frequently with the federal government,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). “Even if there is no actual conflict of interest, it often has the appearance of a conflict.”

Read the rest at the links above...