Monthly Archives: July 2012

Massachusetts 4th Congressional District

Posted on by

I just listened to the Talk1200 debate between Elizabeth Childs, Sean Bielat, and David Steinhof, the Republican primary candidates for the Massachusetts 4th District Congressional seat. My overall impression of the debate was that David Steinhof was the diplomat of the three and Elizabeth Childs was a bit snippy with Sean Bielat.

The thrust of Ms. Child’s answers was that she is a fiscal conservative and social liberal. She sees her ability to work across the aisle as the reason she should be elected. During the course of the debate, it was mentioned that her approval of federal funding for abortion does not really support her claim of being a fiscal conservative.

Sean Bielat cited his resume of military and business experience as the reason he should be elected. He supports basic Tea Party values–lower taxes and smaller government, and pointed out that government subsidies kill the free market dynamic and cost both consumers and producers money. He also pointed out that he supports the idea of a flat tax, but realizes that changing our tax program to a flat tax will not be instant, but needs to be done over a period of time.

David Steinhof is a Fall River dentist who is new to the political scene. He is a conservative who supports Tea Party values and is experienced in running a small business and dealing with government regulations. He was very diplomatic in the way he handled the back and forth between the other two candidates, and I actually think he would be able to reach across the aisle without compromising his principles.

Dr. Steinhof is the only candidate who has lived in the district his entire life and been a Republican all his life. He is also the least experienced of the candidates. That being said, he is a good candidate.

Any one of these candidates would wage a good campaign against Joe Kennedy, and any one of these candidates would be a good Congressman.

The Law Of The Sea Treaty Will Not Be Ratified

Posted on by

Townhall.com just posted an Associated Press story stating that because there are 34 Republicans who have stated that they will oppose the Law Of The Sea Treaty, it will not be ratified. The Constitution requires two-thirds of the Senate to ratify a treaty, or 67 votes. This is good news. On Saturday I posted an article (rightwinggranny.com) about two treaties which the Senate will be voting on in the near future. The Law Of the Sea Treaty was one of them; the U. N. Arms Treaty is the other. Both of these treaties need to be defeated. We are halfway there.

Foxboro Massachusetts July 21st

Posted on by

WHO IS MY NEIGHBOR?

International Celebration!

“Where the world comes together on your doorstep!”

Foxboro Common 

(Foxboro, Massachusetts)

Saturday, July 21 11 am to 8 pm

Assemble at 10:30 am for

Parade of Nations at 11 am

Admission $1 for adults  –  Children admitted free

clowns, puppets, bounce houses, face painting, balloon sculptures

cotton candy and games

International Food Hall

Craft and Community Service Booths

Please take part on the “Parade of Nations.” Come dressed in a national costume (prize for best dressed!) Assemble at 10:30 for the 11 am parade.

Live stages:

The “Haka” from New Zealand

Music from Latin America, the Middle East, England, Ireland, Indonesia, Africa, Canada and much more!

Stopping Non-Citizens From Voting

Posted on by

People who are not American citizens do not have the right to vote in American elections. Sounds pretty logical to me. Well, it isn’t logical to everyone.

Fox News reported Saturday that the Federal Government will allow Florida access to a federal database to prevent voter fraud. The Department of Homeland Security maintains a Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements database that would allow Florida to cross-check its voter registration in order to eliminate people who are not qualified to vote.

The article reports:

Voting rights groups, while acknowledging that non-citizens have no right to vote, have expressed alarm about using such data for a purpose not originally intended — purging voter lists of ineligible people. They also said voter purges less than four months before a presidential election might leave insufficient time to correct mistakes.

Democrats say that the government’s concession is less troubling than Texas and other GOP-run states pushing to require voters to show photo identification at polling places.

The Texas case was heard in federal court this week by a three-judge panel, and a decision is expected by the end of August.

Colorado and other states have asked for similar access to SAVE.

The article reports some of the history of this issue in Florida:

In June, the Justice Department sued the Scott administration on grounds that the state’s voter-purge efforts violated voting rights laws.

The suit against the state and Secretary of State Ken Detzner alleged Florida violated its obligations under the federal National Voter Registration Act by conducting a “systematic program to purge voters from its rolls within the 90-day quiet period before an election for federal office.”

The Obama Administration seems to make a habit of suing states that pass laws that the Administration does not like. It seems to me that purging voter rolls before an election is a good idea–there should be time to correct mistakes, but I suspect that, with access to a federal data base, those mistakes should be infrequent.
 

Signs Of A Backbone ???

Posted on by

I live in Massachusetts. I like Mitt Romney. He was not my choice in the Republican primary, but I will gladly vote for him. One of my gripes with Mitt Romney is that he has a tendency to be “too nice.” Sometimes nice is not the answer–“in your face” is appropriate at times.

CNS News reported some positive signs today, quoting a Mitt Romney appearance today on Fox New’s Fox & Friends:

“The Obama people keep on wanting more and more and more — more things to pick through, more things for their opposition research to try to make a mountain out of –and to distort — and to be dishonest about,” Romney replied.

“We’re going to put out two years of tax returns. We’ve put out one already. As soon as the most recent year is complete, we’ll put that out. It’s hundreds of pages of documents,” Romney said, noting that the law does not require candidates to release their tax returns.

He also recalled that Sen. John McCain released only two years of tax returns when he ran against Obama four years ago — and “somehow this wasn’t an issue.”

Notice–“John McCain released only two years of tax returns when he ran against Obama four years ago–and “somehow this wasn’t an issue.”” The obvious questions is, “Why is it an issue now?”

The article concludes:

Following Romney on “Fox and Friends,” Donald Trump — a Romney supporter — says Romney ought to be asking Obama to release his college records, something Obama has refused to do.

Sometimes Donald Trump hits the nail on the head!

Reading Between The Lines

Posted on by

I have written many articles since 2008 about Chicago politics coming to Washington. It’s getting old to keep writing about it, but all of us need to be aware when an attack is made on our rights as citizens. The latest attack on our rights as citizens comes masquerading as campaign finance reform and is called the “Disclosure Act.” It is the political left’s response to the fact that corporations can spend money on elections just as unions have done for years. Just as an aside, there probably is too much money in American elections, but there is no even-handed way to change that. Free speech is free speech (even when it is very expensive), and it is a mistake to begin to limit it. Once you have the camel’s nose under the side of the tent, it is only a matter of time before you have the entire camel in the tent!

Michelle Malkin’s website posted an article today about the Disclosure Act.

The article reports:

At a Rose Garden press conference on Monday, President Obama decried the influence of “shadow groups” on elections and urged the Senate to pass the “reform” sponsored by N.Y. Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer. But the loophole-ridden package exempts large nonprofits with 500,000 or more members. Behemoth labor unions get preferential treatment. Bradley Smith, former Federal Elections Commission chairman, noted that the law places radical speech-squelching restrictions on companies’ ability to run independent political ads: “(I)f you’re a company with a government contract of over $10 million (like more than half of the top 50 U.S. companies) or if you’re a company with more than 20 percent foreign shareholders, you can’t even mention a candidate in an ad for up to a full year before the election. … There are no similar prohibitions for unions representing government contractors or unions with foreign membership.”

This is the same Senate that can’t seem to get around to passing a federal budget.

The article concludes:

Related from former FEC chairman Bradley Smith: A proposed campaign-finance law attempts to scare and regulate opponents into silence.

More: McConnell vows a filibuster today. He talked to Mark Levin about disclosure theater here.

America needs to elect a Congress and President who will respect the Constitution. Remember this when you vote in November.

 

A Story With A Happy Ending

Posted on by

It’s Monday. It’s good to start the day with something happy before we have to deal with reality! Yesterday The Blaze reported that a man who had his sports car stolen from in front on his home in Philadelphia in 1970 has gotten his car back.

Robert Russell has been keeping his eyes open when driving and scouring the Internet for the 1967 Austin Healy since it was stolen. He recently recovered his car after seeing it advertised on EBay.

The article at The Blaze tells the story:

“Ever since eBay showed up, I’d check it periodically,” Russell said. “I checked it on Friday, May 11, and there it was.”

He immediately contacted the dealership, Beverly Hills Car Club, and informed them of the situation — bluntly too.

“I hate to sound indelicate,” Russell told the dealer, “but you’re selling a stolen car.”

Russell, who now lives in Texas, then contacted the department in May and Detective Carlos Ortega tracked down the car in East Los Angeles.

“Detective Ortega located the stolen Austin Healey at the dealership listed in the eBay ad, and confirmed that the car was the same vehicle reported stolen by Mr. Russell,” the department said.

After working with Philadelphia police to resolve vehicle identification issues, the department told Russell he could pick up his car.

Wow!

The article concludes:

While it is certainly a happy ending for Russell and his beloved car, the dealer who was duped into buying the stolen car is reportedly out $27,000 plus what it cost them to ship it to California.

It is wonderful that Mr. Russell got his car back. The Internet can be a very useful tool! Without the Internet, he would never have known that his car was for sale in California!

How’s That New Diplomacy Initiative Working For You ?

Posted on by

CNN is reporting today that protestors threw tomatoes at the motorcade carrying Hillary Clinton in Egypt. The protestors shouted, “Monica, Monica, Monica” as Mrs. Clinton left the U.S. Consulate in Alexandria. That’s just tacky. This is Hillary Clinton–not Bill. She wasn’t the one involved with Monica. I just think it is tacky and cruel to do that to a wife who has been treated badly by her husband. I am not a fan of Hillary Clinton, but I think that was over the top. Anyway, back to the story.

The article reports:

But after this year’s elections, the military council issued a decree stripping the presidency of much of its power. And more than two weeks after Morsy took office, the country remains in the throes of domestic political chaos. The president has no Cabinet and the country has no parliament.

Clinton met with Morsy on Saturday and urged him to assert the “full authority” of his office. She stressed that it is up to the Egyptian people to shape the country’s political future, but also said the United States would work “to support the military’s return to a purely national security role.”

Morsy, the new President of Egypt, resigned from the Muslim Brotherhood and its Freedom and Justice Party shortly after the results were announced, in an apparent effort to send a message that he will represent all Egyptians. Lifelong members of the Muslim Brotherhood don’t just resign. This would be like resigning the Mafia (or the CIA)–it really doesn’t happen. The goal of the Muslim Brotherhood is the establishment of the worldwide caliphate through social, political, and military action. The Muslim religion includes the practice of Taqiyya, generally described as lying for the sake of Islam–particularly toward infidels. We need to keep this in mind when dealing with Egypt.

Meanwhile, The Blaze reported yesterday that the Reverend Michel Louis and a 39-year-old Boston woman named Lisa Alphonse and a tour guide were kidnapped Friday when an Egyptian Bedouin stopped their bus on a road linking Cairo to Mount Sinai.

ABC News reports:

Jirmy Abu-Masuh, 32, of the Tarbeen tribe, said in an interview that he stopped their tour bus and also kidnapped their 28-year-old tour guide Haytham Ragab as well so he could translate.

Abu-Masuh told The Associated Press that the Americans are being treated well — they’ve been given tea and a traditional Bedouin meal of lamb — but they won’t be released until his uncle, who is in an Egyptian prison, is released as well. He also said that if his uncle is not released, he will abduct more people.

“If my uncle gets 50 years (in prison), they will stay with me for 50 years. If they release him, I will release them,” he told the AP. “Tomorrow I will kidnap other nationalities and their embassies will be notified for the whole world to know.”

Do you think this would be happening if America had a strong President? Does anyone remember Osama Bin Laden saying that when he planned the 9/11 attacks, he never dreamed that America would retaliate. When we vote in November, we really need to consider which candidate is actually willing to defend America and Americans.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Philosophy That Doesn’t Really Fit America

Posted on by

Today’s Washington Times posted a story and a video of a recent campaign speech by President Obama.

The statement:

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back.  They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own.  You didn’t get there on your own.  I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart.  There are a lot of smart people out there.  It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.  Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.  (Applause.)

 If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help.  There was a great teacher somewhere in your life.  Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive.  Somebody invested in roads and bridges.  If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that.  Somebody else made that happen.  The Internet didn’t get invented on its own.  Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.  There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own.  I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service.  That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires. 

Let’s look at that statement for a minute. Many successful people did get there on their own. In a classroom taught by a great teacher, there are no guarantees that any student is going to be successful. If a great teacher could make everyone in her class successful, we would have a lot more successful people. This unbelievable American system was not created collectively–it was created by individuals. Yes, we do things together, but we do things together as individuals–each contributing their own particular talent. Most of us have gotten over our envy of the rich–we understand that most wealthy people worked very hard to gain their wealth. The mindset in this speech is one of collectivism–not of free enterprise. This whole speech does not belong in an American Presidential campaign. It is an insult to the founding fathers of America.  

Enhanced by Zemanta

Two Treaties To Watch In The Senate

Posted on by

There are two treaties coming up for a vote in the Senate in the near future. The first is the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty. That treaty is expected to be finalized by July 27.

On Wednesday, an article in the Washington Times detailed some of the details of the treaty:

The criteria that arms should not be used to “prolong” or “aggravate” instability is troubling. China could use such a provision to label U.S. arms sales to Taiwan as a violation of international law. In 1941, such a treaty would have made illegal the U.S. lend-lease program to aid Britain before Pearl Harbor.

The implication is absurd: If giving arms to an ally fighting a tyrant prolongs the conflict, the only “legal” option for the ally is to surrender.

Another problem is the draft’s invocation of “international human rights law.” Unfortunately, liberal activists often claim that strict gun control is a “human right.” This reference, then, could be interpreted in ways that infringe on Americans’ constitutional right to bear arms.

Why should we care what some U.N. treaty says? Just ignore it, you say, because our Constitution trumps everything. Well, not if the U.S. signs and the Senate ratifies it. At that point, the treaty carries the weight of U.S. domestic law.

The second treaty coming to the Senate is the Law Of The Sea Treaty (appropriately called LOST). Forbes Magazine posted an article about both treaties on Tuesday.

In discussing the LOST treaty, the article states:

Then there’s the currently proposed, Obama-endorsed, Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) which would subordinate U.S. naval and drilling operations beyond 200 miles of our coast to a newly established U.N. bureaucracy. If ratified by Congress, it will grant a Kingston, Jamaica-based International Seabed Authority (ISA) the power to regulate deep-sea oil exploration, seabed mining, and fishing rights. As part of the deal, as much as 7% of U.S. government revenue collected from oil and gas companies operating off our coast will be forked over to ISA for redistribution to poorer, landlocked countries.

The U.S. would have one vote out of 160 regarding where the money would go, and be obligated to hand over offshore drilling technology to any nation that wants it… for free. And who are those lucky international recipients? They will most likely include such undemocratic, despotic and brutal governments as Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Sudan and Zimbabwe…all current voting members of LOST.

Does either one of these treaties represent the country you want your children to inherit? Is American sovereignty important to you? The Senate switchboard telephone number is 202-224-3121. If you believe in upholding the Second Amendment of the Constitution and if you believe America should be able to control its own offshore waters, please call your Senator and ask him to vote against both of these treaties.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Story That Needs To Be Shouted Until It Is Correctly Resolved

Posted on by

On July 8, the Jerusalem Post posted an update on the story of evangelical Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, who has been in prison in Iran on apostasy charges. July 8, 2012, marked the 1000th day of his time in prison. In Iran, it is a capital crime to convert from Islam to Christianity, and the Iranian government claims that Pastor Nadarkhani was once a Muslim. He has been sentenced to death.

Pastor Nadarkhani is scheduled to appear in an Iranian court again on September 8.

The article at the Jerusalem Post reports:

In an email to The Jerusalem Post on Friday, Jordan Sekulow, executive director of the American Center for Law & Justice, wrote, “We have confirmed that Pastor Youcef is scheduled to appear in court on September 8. We do not know the purpose of the appearance or the likelihood of new charges. We want to dispel any rumors that his current apostasy charge, for which he was sentenced to death, has been removed. Until the regime unconditionally exonerates and releases Pastor Youcef, his apostasy charge stands.”

The American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) has been the principle advocate of Pastor Nadarkhani’s release. Their hope is that by drawing attention to his imprisonment due to his Christianity, they can obtain his release. 

The article reports:

“…Our (AVLJ) global support to free Pastor Youcef continues to grow. Our Tweet for Youcef campaign now reaches more than 2.5 million people a day in more than 220 counties and territories,” Sekulow added.

Pastor Nadarkhani’s attorney, Muhammad Ali Dadkhah, has been sentenced to nine years in prison and barred from practicing law because of his work on behalf of religious liberty.

We need to remember that Iran is a Muslim country governed according to Sharia Law. The death sentence for Pastor Nadarkhani is considered appropriate under Sharia Law. Please remember also that there are those in our government who want to bring Sharia Law to America. At the state appellate court level there have been 50 cases in 23 states where judges admitted using Sharia Law. Our Constitution states that the Constitution is the law of the land. We need to keep that in mind when political leaders ask to interject laws from other countries into our court system at any level. Pastor Nadarkhani’s case is not unusual for any country practicing Sharia Law. We don’t want Sharia law to come to America.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Fight For The Integrity Of The Coming Election

Posted on by

This is article is based on two stories–one posted at PJ Media on Thursday and one posted in the New York Post on Friday. Both stories have to do with the Justice Department‘s (under Eric Holder) fight against verification of voter registration and voter identification laws.

The story at PJ Media deals with the Texas voter ID trial which wrapped up its closing arguments in federal court in Washington on Thursday. The case is headed to the Supreme Court.

The article at PJ Media reports:

The clown show saw another DOJ expert, paid thousands of dollars by you, the taxpayer, opine that vast numbers of Texans do not have photo identification.  On that list were President George Bush, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, and Phil Gramm.  These days that’s called an epic fail.

But the testimony got even more ridiculous.  San Antonio teenager Victoria Rodriguez travelled the whole way to Washington, D.C., for the clown show.  She testified that she did not have photo ID, even though she had the birth certificate to get a free one.  Her excuse?  She couldn’t find the time. Neither could her parents be bothered to drive her to get the ID.  One wonders if Victoria Rodriguez ever leaves the house, or when she does, if she has other priorities besides voting.  I’d suspect so.

One wonders how she got from Texas to Washington. If she flew, she needed a photo id to get on the plane!

The New York Post article quotes Attorney General Holder’s statement during his speech to the NAACP, “The arc of American history has always moved toward expanding the electorate.”

The article at the Post points out:

Yet that doesn’t mean it ought to include foreigners, felons or the deceased.

But how else to interpret the Justice Department’s war on in-state efforts to tighten voter-ID requirements and prevent ballot-box fraud?

Whether it’s trying to block Florida from purging its rolls of noncitizens or taking Texas to federal court over its new photo-ID requirement, Holder has signaled an unseemly coziness with potential fraud in pursuit of political advantage.

Voter fraud hurts everyone equally. It undermines the principle, “One man, one vote.” It dilutes the votes of the majority and all minorities. It destroys faith in the results of our elections. It is a disgrace to have an Attorney General who not only will not fight voter fraud, but whose actions seem to actually support it.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Behind The Funding Of Obamacare

Posted on by

Yesterday the Washington Free Beacon posted an article about the changes to the Medicare Advantage program that will occur under Obamacare.

Recently, the Obama Administration launched an $8.35 billion “demonstration project” to delay Obamacare cuts to the Medicare Advantage program until after the 2012 election. Because of this “demonstration project,” many senior citizens will not realize that their medicare has been cut until after the election. The money cut from Medicare is not to make Medicare more solvent–it is to fund the new entitlement programs included in Obamacare. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has asked that the “demonstration project” be cancelled because it does not conform to the principles of budget neutrality–meaning the money to fund the program is not offset by spending cuts and will have to be borrowed. 

The article concludes:

The Weekly Standard’s Jeffrey H. Anderson has written extensively about the controversial program here.

“This is a grossly underreported story—one aimed right at what is perhaps Obama’s most vulnerable point: his amazing decision to pay for Obamacare largely by looting from Medicare,” Anderson told the Washington Free Beacon in an email. “What’s more, it ties in the corruption and lawlessness of his administration and hearkens back to the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, and Gator Aid.”

It really is a shame that the Supreme Court did not declare all of Obamacare unconstitutional–they could have saved all of us a lot of aggravation! Meanwhile, we need to elect a Congress and a President who will repeal this awful bill and replace it with something consumer friendly and market friendly.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tonight In Wrentham Massachusetts

Posted on by

Tonight in Wrentham, Massachusetts, a group of patriots got together to wave flags in support of the people in Wrentham public housing who were recently denied their right to place flags outside their houses. (That decision has recently been overturned–see rightwinggranny.com for the background and details on the story). These are some pictures of the crowd.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Massachusetts 4th Congressional District

Posted on by

Dr. David Steinhof is running in the Republican Primary in the Massachusetts 4th Congressional District. His website is SteinhofForCongress. Dr. Steinhof is a dentist in Fall River.

Dr. Steinhof’s website states:

As the owner and operator of Steinhof Dental Clinic, a general dental practice established by his father in 1947, Dr. Steinhof knows all too well the challenges facing small businesses today.  As a healthcare provider, Dr. Steinhof sees first hand the devastating effect this economy and the lack of jobs have had on his patients and their families. If elected, Dr. Steinhof is committed to serving as a voice for businesses in Massachusetts and their families, with the goal of helping them to grow, create and obtain jobs and prosper.

Dr. Steinhof has deep roots in Fall River, he grew up there, attended school there, and now practices dentistry there. In addition to his dentistry degree, he holds a degree in Business Administration from Providence College.

I had the privilege of meeting Dr. Steinhof tonight in Wrentham, where a group of patriots had gathered to wave flags to show their support of the residents of the public housing in the town who were recently denied their right to fly the flag. Fortunately, when word got out of that decision, it was quickly reversed (see rightwinggranny.com).  He is a candidate I would be more than happy to support. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Does Chicago Thuggery Win National Elections ?

Posted on by

Does Chicago thuggery win elections? I am afraid we are about to find out. Paul Mirengoff posted a story at Power Line yesterday about the recent attacks on Mitt Romney regarding his time Bain Capital and when he left the firm.

Politico reported yesterday:

Deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter laid out the issue as the Obama team sees it: “Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony.”

The article at Power Line article explains what actually happened at Bain Capital:

The Romney campaign responds that their man gave up control over all investment decisions in 1999 because he would be taking charge of the Winter Olympics. His name remained on SEC filings because he was technically still the owner.

The article at Power Line further reports:

But, the SEC filings apparently don’t show involvement by Romney in Bain-related decisions after the 1999 date.

Sometimes when I read Democrat talking points, I wonder how some people sleep at night.

The article at Power Line concludes:

FactCheck goes on to demolish the other fragments of “evidence” cited by the Obama campaign. It concludes that Team Obama is “all wet” on this matter. That’s putting it kindly.

Please follow the link to the Power Line article to read the Fact Check information. The charges against Mitt Romney by Ms. Cutter are a new low in Presidential campaigning.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The End Of Welfare Reform

Posted on by

Yesterday the welfare reforms of the 1990’s ended. There was no note, there was no trumpet fanfare, and I haven’t seen it on the news. What happened? An executive order by President Obama cut out the heart of the welfare reform bill passed during the Clinton Administration.

The Corner at National Review reported:

The welfare reform law was very successful. In the four decades prior to welfare reform, the welfare caseload never experienced a significant decline. But, in the four years after welfare reform, the caseload dropped by nearly half. Employment surged and child poverty among blacks and single mothers plummeted to historic lows. What was the catalyst for these improvements? Rigorous new federal work requirements contained in TANF.

Contrary to some perceptions, the formula that made welfare reform a success was not giving state governments more flexibility in operating federally funded welfare programs. The active ingredient that made the difference was requiring state governments to implement those rigorous new federal work standards.

The article explains how the work requirement was changed:

…the Obama administration issued a dramatic new directive stating that the traditional TANF work requirements will be waived or overridden by a legal device called a section 1115 waiver authority under the Social Security law (42 U.S.C. 1315).

Section 1115 allows HHS to “waive compliance” with specified parts of various laws. But this is not an open-ended authority: All provisions of law that can be overridden under section 1115 must be listed in section 1115 itself.

The welfare reform bill was vetoed by Bill Clinton twice before he signed it.

The article concludes:

Obama’s new welfare decree guts sound anti-poverty policy. The administration tramples on the actual legislation passed by Congress and seeks to impose its own policy choices — a pattern that has become all too common in this administration.

The result is the end of welfare reform as we know it.

This is another example of executive overreach. All this does is create more government dependency, increase the size of government, and change a policy that was successful. It is time to elect a new President.

Enhanced by Zemanta

General Boykin In Stoughton

Posted on by

I had previously embedded the video of General Boykin’s presentation, but somehow it got switched. Here is the actual video. If the link does not work correctly, go to The United West and you can find the video on their website. This is the video of most of the presentation. The question and answer video is also available at The United West website. The question and answer video is about thirty minutes long and is well worth listening to.

 

Watch live streaming video from theunitedwestlive at livestream.com

It Costs What ???!!!

Posted on by

CBN News reported today that a Senate Budget Committee study says that Obamacare will cost $2.6 trillion in the first full decade of the new law. President Obama said it would cost around $900 billion. On Wednesday, the House of Representatives voted 244-185 to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Five Democrats voted with the Republicans for repeal. President Obama has stated that he will veto any attempt to repeal the bill.

Has there ever been a government program that did not end of costing more than it was predicted to cost?

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Isn’t Massachusetts Part Of The United States ?

Posted on by

Sometimes I wonder if Massachusetts is really part of America. The latest incident to cause me to question this occurred in Wrentham, Massachusetts, over the 4th of July holiday. I really enjoyed the 4th of July. I was in a parade with flags, marchers, patriotic music, and political candidates. There were a lot of flags around. Well, the Daily Caller reported today on a problem with residents of public housing in Massachusetts who decide to fly their American flags.

The article reports:

The Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development is claiming that a memo distributed to some public housing residents announcing a ban on public displays of the American flag was a mistake that is “being corrected.”

“Due to a tenant’s repeated complaints reported to the Department of Housing and Community Development over the July 4th holiday, Wrentham Housing Authority has been informed that the public display of the American flag in common areas is not permitted,” said the memo, which was posted on residents’ doors in the Garden Lane public housing complex.

The memo goes on to say that visible flags could be displayed within a resident’s home. Thanks a lot. Does the state now control how people decorate their homes?

Today I received teh following email:

The Wrentham Republican Town Committee is gathering at 6 pm on Friday July 13th on the common to protest the Patrick administrations original ruling that said American’s didn’t have a right to express their patriotism in public at public housing.  Please join us if you want to make sure this doesn’t happen again when no one is looking.

These are my kind of people!

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why The Internet Media Is Important

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Newsbusters posted a story about the mainstream media‘s recent praise for the successful government bailout of General Motors.

The article cited some of the facts given in the mainstream reports and the things that were not mentioned:

 Not mentioned was the auto bailout will lose us about $30 billion. 

General Motors (NYSE:GM) Cheers to Reports US Sales Surges 16%

General Motors (NYSE:GM) Beats Analysts Sales Forecasts

GM Sees Highest Sales Since September

Almost all of this $30 billion Taxpayer loss was in fact a gi-normous payoff of the Obama-Democrat stalwart United Autoworkers Union.

GM Races Higher on Sales Report

GM Sales Rise 16%

GM June US Sales Rose 16%

The Blaze is reporting today:

As it turns out, there’s a big reason GM experienced an increase in sales last month: “government purchases of GM vehicles rose a whopping 79% in June,” according to the National Legal and Policy Center’s Mark Modica.

The article at Newsbusters made a wonderful comparison:

That’s like you setting up a lemonade stand for your kids.  You buy them the lemons, sugar, cups and pitchers – and then buy most of the lemonade yourself.

Except you are President Obama.  Your kids are the United Autoworkers Union.  And the lemonade cost $50 billion.

At least you get to tax your neighbors for the $50 billion.

When you hear President Obama listing the saving of General Motors as one of his accomplishments, understand that you are still paying for that accomplishment, that senior citizens and others who held preferred stock in the company got the shaft, and that it really was not so much of an accomplishment.

Another reason I proudly drive my Ford Mustang!

Enhanced by Zemanta

I Love Irony

Posted on by

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line posted the following:

Please note that the media will not be allowed in to the NAACP Convention to hear Attorney General Eric Holder speak unless they present a “government-issued photo I.D.” (such as a driver’s license) as well as valid media credentials.

Ok, let me get this right–media credentials are not enough to get in to hear Attorney General Eric Holder speak–you also need a government-issued photo I.D. in addition to your credentials. All those of us who want honest elections are asking for is one form of I.D. in order to vote–not two–and Eric Holder is fighting that. Does anyone else see the irony?

Enhanced by Zemanta