If I was a movie director I could not have directed a short film any better than what we witnessed last night. Take the main character, a guy that was ‘bullied’ and write him as ‘taking on the bully’, ‘finding his voice’ and depicting visually his ‘disgust’ of it all. (No, I do not believe he was bullied but that was the talking point of the left after the first debate). Charles Krauthammer said ‘it was like watching a boxing match’ and frankly, it was. It’s the comeback story of the month and gives the left their needed ‘hope’ that O is still the savior they deem him to be. One small problem with that ‘hope’ though….much of what he said was a lie or at best half truth (I’m feeling generous this morning). This guy summed it up best:
Example of those lies:
Obama: ‘We Got Back Every Dime’ of Bailout; CBO: Bailout Will Lose $24 Billion.
OBAMA: The day after last month’s attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, ‘‘I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened. That this was an act of terror and I also said that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime.’’
ROMNEY: ‘‘I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.’’
OBAMA: ‘‘Get the transcript.’’
Okay let’s get it: Via the WH: No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.
Hmm, interesting word choice. Now, if he had said ‘act of terrorism’ I’d give him the point but nope, he used a generic phrase. WORDS DO MATTER! As someone said last night (sorry I didn’t write down their name – just the phrase): The choice of words is not a trivial matter in White House parlance, and the word “terrorist act” has an historic and specific meaning. Nor did any of the official White House statements in the following two weeks refer to “terrorist act.” Nor did President Obama tonight refer to the attack as a “terrorist act.” We maintain that there was a meaningful distinction in the use of the word that could have easily been dispelled and/or clarified tonight…it was not. The takeaway friends is that it took almost a month before officials acknowledged that those pretend protests never occurred. And Romney was right in arguing that the administration has yet to explain why it took so long for that correction to be made or how it came to believe that the attack evolved from an angry demonstration.
Obama’s rant on women and pay nearly drove me off a cliff: According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000). So, President Obama, you’re going to travel around the country, accusing the GOP of waging some mythical “war on women,” when your own White House can’t even adhere to the standards it supposedly fights to uphold? Uggh it’s really too much sometimes!
Oil & Gas Drilling Permits ARE Down 60% Under Obama and just yesterday I believe it was we reported Obama’s Interior Department had just banned drilling on 11.5 million acres of petroleum reserve, but Crowley wan’t interesting in a bogus fact check of O’s whopper that they were up!
OBAMA: ‘‘Let’s take the money that we’ve been spending on war over the last decade to rebuild America, roads, bridges, schools. We do those things, not only is your future going to be bright, but America’s future is going to be bright as well.’’ Oh dear Lord! Here is what the unknowing NEED to KNOW: much of the money that has been paying for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was borrowed. In fact, the government borrows nearly 40 cents for every dollar it spends. Thus, using money that had been earmarked for wars to build schools and infrastructure would involve even more borrowing, adding to the federal deficit! DUH!!!
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said Obama “couldn’t defend the truth” on where the country is on two key issues – the economy and what happened in Libya last month that resulted in the killing of four Americans. “I think that’s the story,” and you know what – I 100% agree with him.
Lying aside one major point of contention for me was this:
“A few days later I was there greeting the caskets coming into Andrews Air Force base and grieving with the families,” Obama said, visibly irritated and turning to address Romney directly. “The idea that anybody on my team, the Secretary of State, the U.N. ambassador, would play politics or mislead when we lost four of our own is offensive … that’s not what I do as president, that’s not what I do as commander in chief.” I have to say I was appalled he used the ‘caskets’ story as his rebuttal.
I had 2 favorite lines from Romney last night:
- “Let’s look at the president’s policies, all right, as opposed to the rhetoric, because we’ve had four years of policies being played out,” Romney said. “But what we don’t need is to have the president keeping us from taking advantage of oil, coal and gas. This has not been Mr. Oil, or Mr. Gas or Mr. Coal. Talk to the people that are working in those industries. I was in coal country. People grabbed my arms and said, ‘Please save my job.’ “
- “Well of course they add up,” Romney said. “I was someone who ran businesses for 25 years, and balanced the budget. I ran the Olympics and balanced the budget. I ran the state of Massachusetts as a governor, to the extent any governor does, and balanced the budget all four years. When we’re talking about math that doesn’t add up, how about $4 trillion of deficits over the last four years, $5 trillion? That’s math that doesn’t add up. We have a president talking about someone’s plan in a way that’s completely foreign to what my real plan is.”
So, what are the news outlets saying this am….
CNN Poll: 58-40% Romney better on the economy, 49-46% on healthcare, 51- 44% on taxes, and 59-36% on the deficit! That doesn’t read like a ‘tie’ or ‘win’ for our president.
Actual speaking time: Obama 44:04 Romney 40:50 hmm
I tuned into MSNBC after the debate – I don’t know why – glutton for punishment maybe – but their distortions of the evening left me feeling sorry for anyone that watches that channel, although Joe Scarborough did say: ‘Obama Has Laid Out No Plan For The Next Four Years’. My daughter was in a Tweeting war herself with HS classmates (fighting the misinformed that obviously watch that channel). Honestly, how much they know, that is BLATANTLY FALSE, is beyond comprehension. As an example (according to these HS kids) Obama is PRO GUN. I mean really? Really??? Also, according to these young minds – Romney wants to raise taxes on those making UNDER 300k, while O wants to continue with the prior tax cuts (they apparently can’t say Bush). Seriously? Then the best – ‘Romney wants a say in my sexual habits – to that Conservative jerk I say go f*** yourself’ to which my daughter responded – ‘please tell me why I have to pay for your screwing around’. I’m starting to question just wth is being taught in this high school!
ALL of that aside – I ask that you read between the lines in this piece from the American Thinker. We MUST figure out WHO we can TRUST. I submit we cannot trust the current administration – on anything:
Everyone remembers Nancy Pelosi’s famous words about the Affordable Care Act (ACA): “We have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Since January 2010, when the ACA was signed into law, we have gradually discovered what’s in it. What we are finding is not what we want and certainly not what was advertised.
Every expansive promise made by the president for his signature legislation has been shown to be smoke and mirrors. Though touted as healthcare reform (change for the better), the ACA is more accurately described as Obama’s Act of Healthcare Exacerbation (change that makes things worse).
A new study by the Pioneer Policy Institute in Massachusetts adds number 10 to the list (below) of reasons why Americans hate the ACA.
1. First, there was the way ACA was rammed down our throats. Arm-twisting, phony statistics, bribery, for-show executive orders, deferred implementation, and outright lies were all used to get the ACA passed against the will of We The People, even with a Democrat-controlled Congress.
2. Then there is a mandate that absolutely wasn’t a tax until SCOTUS said it wasn’t commerce. Therefore, it had to be a tax — on the middle class, no less.
3. The ACA would cover all Americans who had no health insurance – i.e., 45 million…until the president discovered that 12-15 million of those uninsured Americans were illegal residents. Presto! Forty-five million instantly became 30 million.
4. Illegal residents weren’t covered, then maybe they were, and now they are exempt, for sure. Illegals are the leading users of ERs, where they receive mandated-but-uncompensated care: free to them but costing roughly $2,500 per year per tax-paying family.
5. The ACA will save money, promised Nancy Pelosi with a broad smile. In fact, the ACA will cost one to 2.7 trillion dollars. That is more than has been spent so far on the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan. That is money — dollars we don’t have — which the ACA will spend on bureaucracy, not on patient services.
6. “Health exchanges will save money through the use of free market forces.” Yet the government (ACA) controls both supply and demand, making the market in healthcare totally controlled — the opposite of “free.”
7. “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” promised President Obama over and over. Not true. Under the ACA, doctors cannot afford to care for Medicare- and Medicaid-covered patients. So even though your doctor wants to care for you, if you have government insurance coverage, your doctor cannot “keep” you.
8. Exemptions: if the ACA is good for us, why are there over 1,400 exemptions granted, including foro Congress and the White House, various unions and selected businesses, 40% of the uninsured (per J. Gruber of MIT), and Muslims? Why is one religious group exempt? Aren’t all Americans equal under the law regardless of “race, religion, or country of national origin”?
9. The IPAB (Independent Payment Advisory Board) is in fact the “death panel” that Sarah Palin was lampooned over. By establishing what it won’t pay for, the IPAB makes those treatments unavailable. If you need a therapy deemed “not cost-effective,” you die…by government decision.
10. Now we have an addition to this list: another disingenuously titled component of the ACA called the “Cadillac Tax,” which is a con, a scam in savior’s clothing.
The Cadillac Tax is an excise tax: one levied on the amount of business done. The ACA penalizes (taxes) insurance plans where health benefits exceed $10,200 for an individual and $27,500 for a family. If you think these are benefits needed only by billionaires and members of Congress, you haven’t seen hospital bills for having a baby or removing a gallbladder, much less for heart surgery.
The Cadillac Tax level of coverage applies to any profession that has robust healthcare benefits, like construction workers, teachers, police, and most public workers. Indeed, it is estimated that over half of all individuals having private, employer-provided insurance plans will be subject to this tax rather than only the “super, gold-plated Cadillac” top one percent, as asserted by the president.
The Pioneer Policy Institute has calculated the average cost of the excise tax on a middle school teacher ($2,081 per year), a police patrol officer ($5,391 per year), and a small business owner ($8,690 per employee per year). Nationally, business leaders say this last is a huge damper on economic growth. The ACA excise tax is quite clearly a middle-class tax, not “Cadillac” at all, and a job-killer to boot.
Dr. Seuss said, “The more that you read, the more things you will know.” The more we read and learn about the ACA — a bill that was supposed to “protect” us, that was advertised as “affordable,” and that absolutely wasn’t a tax — the more things we learn to hate. (That’s Dr. Seuss’ least favorite word in the English language.)
Deane Waldman, M.D., MBA is emeritus professor of pediatrics, pathology, and decision science; adjunct scholar a for New Mexico think-tank called the Rio Grande Foundation, and the author of Uproot US Healthcare as well as Not Right! (January 2013).
The Florida chapter of the AFL-CIO appears to be encouraging folks to break the law. In a message on the homepage of their website, the union writes, “There is a mantra that we –at the Florida AFL-CIO– like to live by, ‘Vote Early, Vote Often’.” The mantra of the Florida AFL-CIO encourages illegal activity. http://www.flaflcio.org/
A letter to the Editor:
Being a CPA, I am a bit of a junkie for numbers and financial reports. Being that we are in the heat of the political season I decided to take a look at the latest Federal Election Commission filings for both Congresswoman Nan Hayworth, and her challenger Sean Patrick Maloney. Both candidates recently filed their fundraising reports for the quarter ended September 30, and the reports reveal some very interesting facts when it comes to who is actually supporting these candidates. These reports are public information, so anyone can go online to the FEC website to verify what I am about to say.
If you take a look at the listing of individual contributors for the quarter, you will see that Nan Hayworth received monetary contributions from about 360 distinct individuals. Of these, by my count about 185 (more than 50%) reside within the district (doing my best to decipher the exact cutoff of the district’s boundaries). About another 70 reside just outside the district in places like Mount Kisco, Chappaqua, and Fairfield County, making the local area support about 70% of the contributors.
Sean Patrick Maloney’s contributors reveal a much different story. First of all, only 68 individuals contributed to his campaign (excluding his own contributions to his campaign). Of these 68, only 7 (that’s right, SEVEN!!!) reside within the Congressional district, barely 10% of his contributors. How is it that a Congressional candidate can only get seven people from within the district to contribute to his campaign in the last full quarter before the election? That should set off alarms to anyone who lives here.
So who is supporting Sean Patrick Maloney? Nearly 40% (26) of the individuals have NYC addresses. Another 24% (16) are from the Washington DC area. In fact, more individuals donated to Maloney’s campaign from the West Coast (9) than from within the district. The bottom line is that people who know the district, who live here, send their kids to school here, pay taxes here, are supporting Nan Hayworth. As should be expected in the case of a carpetbagger candidacy, nearly 90% of Sean Patrick Maloney’s individual supporters are outside the district and probably couldn’t locate Pound Ridge, Fishkill, or Goshen without help from Google Maps. Don’t let strangers who have no skin in the game have a hand in determining our fate. Re‐elect Nan Hayworth to Congress!
Joseph Zaino, Chairman
Pound Ridge Republican Town Committee