https://www.usaa.com/inet/pages/advice-security-6onlinetricks?EID=corp_cc_2012_11_Over250-09
As a former member of the military I get some very informative articles from USAA Insurance company. Many of them are of general interest and I share them for informational purposes without advice or endorsement. But it is a very good read.
There is not much to say since my candidate lost and Barrack Hussein Obama won. However, just a few observations:
The Republican party is merely a foil to the dominant Democrat party. The Republicans do not make any difference at the national level, rather, in a weird twist, they are merely a legitimation of the Democrat dominance which unwittedly gives the illusion that there really is political choice in America when there is not.
The right pundits like Hannity, Rush, Levin, Riley and the like were failures because they are conservative purists who have a elite viewpoint of “true conservative.” This arrogant viewpoint was exclusionary and allowed them to withhold full support of Romney and Ryan until R/R met their elitist demands.
American Unions are merely the willing tools of the left and the Democrat party. The sadness here is that many Americans are forced to allow their weekly dues to be used to support a political party with which they disagree.
The Media of the USA are the willing accomplices of the Democrat party and especially of Barrack Hussein Obama and they are very willing to deliver the nation to him because they believe, as did many of the press in nazi Germany, that Barrack is the “Leader” who will lead us into a nirvana.
The Federal bureaucracy is a willing tool of the Democrat party and constantly seeks to increase it power over the sovereign States because this will ensure them life long jobs.
Our Academic community is a product of a liberal anti Christian and anti Conservative process that indoctrinated them and in turn is indoctrinating our children into the belief that the government is the source of all things instead of God, a deification the State over the individual person.
The solution: Give up! Yes, give up and give over. If the nation wants one party and only one party; If the nation wants a welfare state; If the nation is indicating by Barrack Hussein Obama’s election that he is the “Leader” we all should follow. Then so be it.
After all this is still America and at least for now, our federal election system is honest. However, the best bet for Republicans and for Independents is to abandon the system and take care of yourself first, always and only.
Sound cynical? It is. Sound angry? It is, Sound like a sore loser? No, just the voice of an older person, who has believed in America but is seeing that his America is no more. It is just the voice of a parent who wants the children to move out on their own and pay their own bills and set up their own institutions and do their own thing without any reference at all, to my house, my possession, my accomplishments, my institutions, my money and without any reliance on getting my inheritance because you know what (?) I am gonna spend it on myself and real fast because I fear that the youth who voted for Obama will want it and I ain’t gonna give it to them,
As we go to vote today, I ask you to vote for Mitt Romney. He is our best hope for an economic renewal to America. Our jobs and future success depend on him and Paul Ryan to get us through and out of our economic depression.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/romney-vows-us-renewal-obama-big-money-month-17414909?page=2 The truth is that Obama just does not tell the truth. He says he is for the little person but he spends all of his time with Hollywood rich people, ( Cloney and friends) Corporate Executives (Chairman of GE) the Wall Street Billionaires ( Warren Buffet) and the powerful (George Soros). It amazes me that so many people insist that Obama is a compassionate lover of the middle and lower classes. He is not. He came to the White House with 900 thousand and his rich friends have helped him to turn that into 12 million. Obama is a one percenter!!! Yet, it seems that especially middle-aged white women are always at his rallies with big broad smiles and lusty cheers as though he was the man of their dreams. Well, so much for sex appeal (Likeability?) in politics. Ok for you, if that’s your thing! But please do not confuse your libido fantasy with governing the USA. Obama uses our Air Force One plane at 178 thousand dollars each trip to go to Hollywood and have lunch with Movie stars, and dinner with Rock stars and raise millions of dollars while our military personnel are being killed daily in Afghanistan and our Ambassador and two Navy seals are murdered because Obama didn’t want to insult Muslim fanatics. And when they are murdered, the Obama administration takes out an advertisement in Libya apologizing for any hurt feelings that some crackpot film maker may have caused which the Obama people said justified the outrage that led to murders. Maybe that is why more males are for Romney, he stands up for America, he stands beside those he asks to serve in the military, and he does not blame others for his own failures. We need Romney for President and not the pick of rock stars, hollywood actors and enamored middle-aged white housewives.
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-obama-phantom-peace-dividend-033637499–election.html
The Democrat convention tried to shock, insult and frighten the voters with wildly false and baseless accusations. The fact remains that we have run up an additional five trillion in debt we owe to others. We have 23 million people out of work. College students are living at home because they have large loans and no jobs or prospect of jobs. We have Obama care which will take away Medicare Advantage by 2014 when the law is fully enacted. Those who hoped for change saw it in the social area with acceptance of the concept of government paid abortion, and government paid contraception. They saw it in the military with the acceptance of gay, transgender, lesbian personnel. It also showed in increased federal lawsuits against States like North Carolina and Arizona as they attempted to protect their States against fraudulent voters and illegal immigrants. It even revealed itself in the Presidential executive orders that went behind the back of Congress to carry out Obama’s will against the enacted law and against the 535 elected representatives of the people.
The main point is that the Obama administration has not been successful in stopping our economic decline nor has it created an environment for business owners of all sizes to create jobs. Obama’s speech intimated that with better times, hopefully to come, the government will be able to create jobs. Government jobs are always paid with tax dollars. And tax dollars come from successful business and working citizens.
Obama says he will build roads and bridges. We do that already and it doesn’t solve the need of our college graduates for jobs. Infrastructure is paid with tax dollars. He says we will have better education. We already have the best in the world for the most citizens. So, if the plan, is for the Obama to allow students not to pay back their student loans, well, that is more tax dollars spent. Remember taxes come from profit-making businesses and employed workers.
But people will tell me that when we are out of the War in Afghanistan then we will lots of money. The war is paid for by loans so any money saved by bringing the troops home, the so-called peace dividend, is a fantasy and not a fact. Bottom line? Obama’s speech indicates the same failed ideas that got us into the 16 trillion dollars of debt, namely, more and more government spending and more and more government control over our lives. Question? How will he pay for it.
At first more borrowing. Then he will print more money to inflate (cheapen) our dollar. Then as the clamor from our creditors and ourselves rises, he will tax all of us. Oh, yes, he will say he is taxing only the wealthy – an old class warfare trick of communists to divide and destroy the opposition forces. And when he taxes all of us, he will smilingly tell us that we demanded it and even mandated the new taxes because we re-elected him. He will say, “you wanted it and now, I am giving it to you.”
President Obama is very good at saying empty words that are carefully selected. The intent is to encourage us to fill his words with our own meaning. But his meaning for the words is not what we intend for ourselves but what he intends to do to us. The President, facing a re-election campaign, did not deliver on his promises in the first term, he will not deliver on his promises in the second. What could we do to him in the second? I shudder in remembering, his whispered words to the Russian Prime Minister, ” Tell Vladimir, that after I win election I will be free ….” Those are very frightening words that tell us that what he says and what he intends to do are not the same.
http://news.yahoo.com/arizona-governor-no-public-benefits-young-immigrants-023442934.html I heard a fellow tell me that the so called “illegals” are not that but people. I pondered that because his point was that labeling them “illegals” prejudices against them. However, these people are illegally here. They have broken our law and consistently evaded our legal system. Yet, we are told that they love America, that they will do anything to stay here, and that all they ask is to be left alone to earn a living and raise a family and be good Americans. But that is not logically true. They broke the law to come here, they continue to break the law, they are working but too many are off the books or paid in cash,(shame on their employers). So, if they love America and will do anything to stay here, then obey the law, pay taxes and become a citizen. But others say that since they are here illegally, they cannot become citizens. True, they can be deported, instead. But, although their presence here as illegal aliens presents us with a problem, it is not logical to pass off their status as our problem instead of theirs. Let’s be quick to note that our society is compassionate and it is our compassion that got us into this situation. Our compassion gave illegals health care services in our hospital emergency rooms and community clinics. It gave the mothers pre natal, delivery, and post partum care for the infants and emergency room care for the children. All free. It supplied food stamps, WIC vouchers and even welfare checks. And our compassion allowed their children who are born here to be immediately US citizens creating a real dilemna. It also provided free public schools and specialized language services, including on the ballot. All that time the people getting this were here illegally while millions languished in their countries of origin waiting patiently for up to ten years to enter the USA. They wait because their countries do not share a huge land border with the USA and because they want to be citizens not illegals. Maybe for some, Arizona’s rules are harsh. I suggest they are realistic and are an attempt to face the problem squarely and honestly with a regard for the people here legally as well as those waiting to come here legally.
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-clinton-claims-compromise-stretch-043255807–election.html The article cited speaks for itself. Congratulations. I hope to see corrections to Michelle Obama’s speech as well. After all, President Obama entered office with a net worth of a little under one million. Today, according to Internet sources, he is worth 11.35 million. You say, That is now, but Michelle talked about then. But the facts of her own Charter school for elite academic achievers and his private boarding school for privileged children belies the idea of his being just like the rest of us. Also, he went to Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard. Surely, these are not community colleges! And when she and he met they were employed at a law firm. Mrs. Obama has previously confessed that she went through college on Affirmative action. Because Barrack has litigated successfully to keep all his college records, including college applications and financial results sealed we do not know anything about the reality of his college education. But even more to the point, how did he manage a 200+ thousand dollar condo back then? And even more telling, how did he turn, let’s say, one million net worth into 12 million net worth in a mere four years? Wish I could do that and I love America and captialism. But I am always wondering if President Obama loves America, although his investment record shows that he loves captalism, at least for himself if not for the rest of us.
I am selecting the article below in order to put a personal face on the national debt. I think it is a fair article. However, the kind of fiscal responsibility and management skill needed to address the crisis is lacking in the Obama Administration. This is so not only for the President but the whole administration which thinks wrongly concerning the way to lower the deficit, create jobs and foster employment. Besides the 23 million unemployed, we are looking at businesses afraid of burdensome federal regulations and therefore they are willing to close USA workplaces in favor of opening in foreign countries. Is that patriotic? Probably not ! But patriotism works two ways. It is not patriotic to ask businesses and business people to achieve against a federal government that sues them while at the same time increasing their regulatory compliance burden and upping their taxes. The “Yes, we did build it” campaign of the Republicans does not discount a favorable government, that indeed has been there in SBA loan guarantees and Federal farm subsidies. But without the vision, the dedication and the innovation of the business founders and owners there would be no business. And the workers,(?) they contribute to making the vision of the owner a reality for which they receive a wage and benefits and the owner and stockholders a profit. But you cannot reverse the process. Gather 100 people together and tell them to get to work and make a profit. They will ask, doing what? producing what? and how do you want us to do it? The inventiveness and entrepeneur ship of the owner/founder is a prerequisite for jobs. I believe the Romney Ryan approach will accomplish what only good businessmen can do, and even Clinton acknowledges Mitt’s “sterling” business ability. We don’t need a lawyer in the WH, we need a businessman. Let the 500 lawyers in the Congress decide the law. Yes, I do know that there are 535 congress persons, but not all are lawyers.
By Gordon Gray, Director of Fiscal Policy at the American Action Forum
The Treasury Department has confirmed that the national debt exceeded $16 trillion at the end of August. This figure is so large as to be almost an abstraction, a figure divorced from any tangible context. However, under current fiscal policies, this unprecedented degree of national indebtedness is only expected to grow, both in absolute terms and as a share of the economy.
The national debt is the net effect of all past economic policies — the accumulated difference between all past revenues and outlays. Prospectively, a rising debt necessarily reflects a persistent excess of outlays relative to revenues, or put another way, a shortfall of revenues relative to outlays. Any policy approach that would close this gap must therefore reduce outlays in the form of government benefits or services, increase revenues in the form of higher taxes, or some combination of the two. Any policy choice to address the broader debt or future deficits will therefore ultimately be borne by taxpayers. The abstraction becomes personal.
By the Numbers
As of Friday, August 31st, the debt stood at $16.016 trillion. Since the president took office, that number has increased by $5.389 trillion. To the extent that this increase in debt burden under the president is ultimately borne by individuals, it is reasonable to apportion the national debt increase on a per capita basis. This amounts to $17,146 per person.
The United States must pay interest on its debt obligations. At present, the average interest rate paid on U.S. debt is 2.62 percent. This rate represents interest owed not only to U.S. creditors in the public, but also to non-marketable securities, such as federal trust funds. The relatively low rate reflects low interest rates set by the Federal Reserve and the global perception of Treasury securities as a virtually riskless investment, which keeps yields at bay. This rate compares quite favorably to consumer credit rates. For example, as of the end of August the average variable-rate credit card APR was 14.52 percent.
Is a Pay-Off Even Possible?
Thus any individualized analysis of the recent increase in federal indebtedness depends heavily on interest rate assumptions. Both the low-bound assumption (the current low average federal borrowing rate) and the high-bound assumption (the average credit card rate) reflect a sufficiently high increase in indebtedness under the current administration to require over a decade to fully pay off. Indeed, using the Federal Reserve’s pay-off calculator that includes standard assumptions about minimum payment requirements, assuming an individual debt balance of $17,146, and the low-bound interest assumption of 2.62 percent, it would take 18 years to fully repay the debt increase under President Obama, with an initial minimum payment of $343. This payment would diminish over time to reflect a lower principal balance. Under the high-bound interest assumption, it would take an individual 36 years to repay $17,146 in debt with an initial minimum payment of $343.
The bottom line is simple: if an American put $17,000 on her credit card, she would face over 35 years of the burden of repaying. In the past four years, the President has done exactly that.
Gordon Gray currently serves as the Director of Fiscal Policy at the American Action Forum (AAF). Prior to joining AAF, Gray served as senior policy advisor to Senator Rob Portman and as policy director on the Senator’s campaign. Gray has also worked for the Senate Budget Committee as professional staff and before that was deputy director of domestic and economic policy for Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign. Gray also spent several years with the American Enterprise Institute.
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-ryan-takes-factual-shortcuts-speech-070905927.html
The fact check is occasional but surprise that the occasion is Ryan. Next the article calls attention to slight nuances but misses the big picture by claiming Ryan fudged when the article itself is fudging, for instance, the fact that Ryan voted against the final report is not the same as Obama ignoring the whole report. The plant closing is a fact so let the fact stand by itself, the reported is arguing in favor of Obama and not just revealing the facts. Was the place outside the plant and did Obama say that quote or not? Having the reporter defend Obama while attacking Ryan isn’t reporting, it’s an editorial. Yes, Congressmen do ask for federal grants for their States businesses, that is their job. However, his letters were just that and not a promise to vote for something Obama wanted in return for money. I think Obama got Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, and others to give their vote to Obamacare in return for money- a nuance, yes, by a crucial one. Atually, the third oaragraph about facts concerning medicare is an opinion of the writer since Ryan says the cuts will benefit future seniors and the writer disagrees. Since it is the future, it is an opinion and the statement”…In addition, Ryan’s own plan to remake Medicare would squeeze the program’s spending even more than the changes Obama made, shifting future retirees into a system in which they would get a fixed payment to shop for coverage among private insurance plans. Critics charge that would expose the elderly to more out-of-pocket costs.” Is another editorial opt ed piece claiming to be fact checking but instead defending Obama. Nothing wrong with facts and fact checking but sadly all fact checking is done to promote Obama. Nothing new here since 61 percent of Americans polled see that the media is unabashedly Democrat and biased in favor of the administration.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/314025/how-did-harry-reid-get-rich-betsy-woodruff
I got this in my Email. I find it a thoughtful article because very few people write about Senator Harry Reid.
A fast take on this article in light of our politics today, how do our politicians make so much money while working? Do they not work hard enough? Maybe we need to insist that they attend the sessions of Congress which CSpan shows far too few attend.
Progressive Politics 