The Voice of Reason: Another Brick in the Wall

We don't need no education
We don't need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teachers leave them kids alone
Hey teacher leave them kids alone
All in all it's just another brick in the wall
All in all you're just another brick in the wall

-- Pink Floyd's Another Brick in the Wall

I still remember the day I moved away from home.  Although I now had to pay my own utility bills, pay for my own food and my own car, I felt a sense of freedom -- as well as a little apprehension.  I realized that as long as I was living under my parents' roof, with my parents paying the bills, I would have to live by their rules.  For all of the "things" they bought for me came a tether of control that I would never escape, until I was able to set out on my own.

Our Constitution guarantees Americans certain rights, including the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom to bear arms, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to due process of law, the right to a speedy and public trial, and freedom from cruel and unusual punishments.  Many of these rights are considered to be unalienable and given to us not by man or government, but by our Creator. 

Day by day, year by year, these rights are slowing slipping away, and most Americans don't even realize it is happening.  In return for giving Americans "things," the government begins to assert its tether of control, seizing that control from citizens.
 

Most people aren't even aware of the school lunch debacle that is now occurring in our nation's schools.  The Obama Administration, through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which controls the school lunch program, has established strict guidelines that determine how much and what is being fed to our nation's children.  Does your child like 2% milk?  Too bad, the federal government has decided that only skim milk will be served in school lunchrooms.  What if your child likes chocolate milk?  Again, that's not even a choice.
 

How many calories should your child eat at lunch?  The federal government has decided that your child needs between 750-850 calories. That's it.  Even if he is an athlete.  Even if she has high metabolism.  Even if your child needs to gain weight after being sick. The federal government has decided what your child will eat and how much he or she will eat.
 

With 30 million American children now being served free or reduced-price lunches, the tether of control grows longer.  Most schools are also serving breakfast, and many schools are now serving dinner.  The tether grows stronger.

http://schoolsofthought.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/28/pictures-inspire-school-lunch-boycott/
 

Some overzealous schools have even gone so far as to check bag lunches packed at home to make sure they're healthy and to take them away if the Food Nazis determine them to be unhealthy.  Numerous news outlets have reported this, and I've also heard anecdotally from parents in a number of communities that this indeed has occurred.
 

There will be some who will read this blog and point out that America has an obesity problem.  They may believe that the federal government should step in because it costs us all if Americans are unhealthy.  But if one can make that argument about food, one can also make the argument that Americans are too violent (take away our firearms or censor our TV shows to remove any violence), Americans use too much gasoline that pollutes the atmosphere (determine that Americans can only buy and drive Chevy Volts), or determine what size of sugary drink an American can buy at his local 7-11. Wait a minute, that last example is happening right now in New York City.
 

It's a slippery slope; once one right and free choice is taken away, it becomes much easier for government to take away even more rights and choices for Americans.
 

One might think that this infringment on our rights is limited to something as seemingly innocuous as school lunches?  Think again.
 

The Obama Administration directed Catholic institutions to offer free birth control to their employees -- even though it is against their religious views to use birth control.  That's clearly an infringement on the freedom of religion for Catholics.  Through the guise of expanding health insurance, the federal government is now telling Catholic institutions how they can and can't practice their religion.
 

President Obama now has a kill list from which he decides which suspected terrorists live or die via a drone strike.  This list includes American citizens, who are guaranteed the right of due process of law in our Constitution.  But there is no judicial overview or the determination of guilt by a jury of one's peers for people on this kill list.  Like a Roman emporer, President Obama essentially gives a thumbs up or a thumbs down to determine the fate of the suspected terrorist, even if he is an American citizen.
 

The President also decided to ignore the separation of powers as outlined in our Constitution. He has directed immigration officials and border control agents to enforce only certain provisions of immigration laws passed by Congress and signed into law by a previous President. Although seemingly not in the same realm as other actions that have taken away our rights, this, too, is a slippery slope.  If a President can ignore laws that were passed by the Legislative Branch of our government, which is empowered to write laws, why can't a President also determine new laws without involving Congress?  At this point, the President would become the Executive and Legislative Branches of our government.
 

Once again, many Americans would be surprised to learn that this is already occurring.  Congress is empowered to pass environmental legislation, which is enforced by the Executive Branch of our government, mainly through the Environmental Protection Agency.  Since President Obama took office, though, the EPA has not only enforced laws and regulations passed by Congress, but it has also determined new regulations that have not been passed by our elected representatives in Congress.  Courts have recently slapped down the EPA at least four times in the past six months for not allowing due process to citizens and for expanding its powers beyond that which the Constitution allows. Once again, the separation of powers is being ignored.
  

As for our right to due process of law, I would guess that most Americans don't know that the Obama Administration has quadrupled the use of warrantless wiretaps?  Started under the Bush Administration after 9/11, the Executive Branch pushed for the right to listen in on conversations in order to stop suspected terrorists. The Obama Administration has taken a small infringement on our right to due process and unreasonable searches and seizures to an entirely new level, one which should frighten every American. Once again, the slippery slope has allowed our federal government to take even more control over our lives.   

http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=84479

http://nation.foxnews.com/wiretapping/2012/09/28/aclu-obama-has-quadrupled-warrantless-wiretaps
 

Those same drones that have been used to kill terrorists are now being used in U.S. airspace.  The Air Force has a policy that if a drone "incidentally" spies on an American citizen that the footage can be kept for 90 days. Most people also don't know that the EPA is currently using drones to spy on cattle ranches in order to enforce the Clean Water Act. If the federal government can wiretap our phone conversations without a warrant and drones flying ahead are able to spy on our every movement, we may be safer in America, but we have also lost any right to privacy that we had prior to the rapid expansion of this technology. 
http://www.infowars.com/epa-using-drones-to-spy-on-cattle-ranchers-in-nebraska-and-iowa/
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/15/should-drones-be-used-to-spy-on-americans/

 

Sadly, most Americans don't even realize that any of this is happening.  They go to work every day, may watch the evening news, but don't really take the time to search for news that isn't being reported by the mainstream news media.  (I did an internet search for "quadruple wiretaps" and found only one large media outlet, Fox News, reporting on this important issue.)
 

Most Americans don't know that our school lunches are now being dictated by the federal government, that the FBI or CIA may be listening in on your phone conversations, the EPA is establishing new regulations without input from your elected representatives, that your religious rights are slowing being taken away, that you may be spied on in your own backyard by a drone flying high overhead, or that a distant relative of yours traveling overseas with the wrong people may be the target of a drone strike with only the President determining whether he lives or dies.
 

The expansion of our federal government comes at a price, doesn't it?

     

 

   

The Voice of Reason: It's the Relationships, Stupid

One of the things you learn in business is that your success depends almost entirely on relationships, especially when times get tough.

Ask any salesperson what is the most important factor in success and he or she will tell you that the relationship with the person buying the product determines success more often than any other factor.  People don't buy from companies; people buy from people they like. 

The same can be said for politics, which essentially is nothing more than selling ideas and policies.  In order to be successful at politics, one must be a great relationship builder. Successful Presidents such as Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton knew they had to develop relationships with key members of Congress.  President Reagan developed a relationship with House Speaker Tip O'Neill, while President Clinton developed a rapport with House Speaker Newt Gingrich. These politicians from the opposite ends of the political spectrum were never great friends, but they respected one another and invested the time necessary to develop working relationships. As a result of these relationships, both Presidents were able to pass bi-partisan legislation that helped America prosper.

Many people say that bi-partisanship is dead today, that the political right and the left are so polarized that nothing meaningful can be accomplished in Congress.  The reality is that the efforts of our current President to develop relationships with key members of Congress have died, not the opportunity for bi-partisan cooperation.


President Barack Obama is a perfect example of how not to engage Congress in order to get meaningful legislation passed.  He spoke of Hope and Change during the 2008 campaign, but once he was elected he began ramming his landmark healthcare legislation through Congress without taking any of the Republicans' ideas.  He spent little energy soliciting their input, although passing a bi-partisan healthcare bill would have meant helping to mend a divided country.  As the months turned into years, President Obama has spent less time meeting with Republicans and even key members of his own party, according to a number of credible sources.  Instead of meeting regularly with Republicans in Congress, he has taken every opportunity to slam them, their party and their policies.  The President actually admitted recently that he spends little time schmoozing with Congress because he wants to spend more time with his family.  Yet, he blames the Republicans for not cooperating with him? With 23 million Americans out of work or underemployed, the President is apparently more focused on being home at dinner time with his daughters than meeting with Congress in order to create jobs for more Americans.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/02/politics/obama-fatherhood/index.html
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2012/09/09/give-obama-more-time-for-home-life.html
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/02/politics/obama-fatherhood/index.html

The recent book by Bob Woodward, "Price of Politics," details how few relationships the President had developed with Congress during the debt crisis of 2011. One example Woodward cites in his book is that no one in the White House had the cell phone number for House Speaker John Boehner, just as the country was on the brink of financial collapse. The nation's financial credibility and stability were heading off a cliff and the President did not have a number to reach Boehner?  Incredible. Woodward describes the President as an arrogant, aloof politician who actually threw a tantrum like a spoiled brat when he didn't get his way. To be fair, the respected journalist does not describe Boehner in flattering terms, either.  Boehner apparently took his time calling the President with his response after the President asked him to bring more tax revenue to the negotiating table.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/bob-woodwards-price-politics-inside-debt-crisis-17169408
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bob-woodward-gaps-president-obamas-leadership-contributed-debt/story?id=17183930
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/05/speed-read-juiciest-bits-from-bob-woodward-s-book-price-of-politics.html

Several weeks ago, while watching Fox News, one long-time political insider shared a story about talking with the leading Democratic member of one of the key Congressional committees.  The pundit had asked the Congressman about the type of relationship he had with the President.  The Congressman said that he had merely met him twice.  The political expert could not believe that this respected leader of Congress had hardly spent any time with the President. According to a number of credible sources, top fundraisers and bundlers for his campaign seemingly have almost unlimited access to the President, but a leading member of Congress from the President's own party has barely met him?  Unbelieveable.

The same lack of relationship-building expertise and effort that we have seen through the current Congressional stalemate can also be seen in  relationships with leaders of other governments. Relationships with allies such as Great Britain and Israel have often been strained under this President.  Instead of meeting with world leaders this past week when they were in New York for meetings at the U.N., our President met with the ladies of The View, who just happened to also be in New York.  According to a number of news reports, he did not meet with a single world leader while they were in New York, even though the prime minister of our strongest ally in the middle east specifically asked to meet with the President.  If he had developed strong relationships with these leaders, you would have to believe that he would make every attempt to meet with friends.  Instead, he decided to spend his time visiting The View and campaigning for reelection.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chuck-todd-questions-obama-not-meeting-with-world-leaders-doesnt-seem-like-a-defensible-position/
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/09/25/obama_advisor_if_he_met_with_one_leader_hed_have_to_meet_with_10

One of the best pieces of advice ever given to me was this:  The best way to get your next job is to do a good job at your current one.  Sadly, it appears that this is something  our President never quite learned.  He has spent the last four years campaigning for a second term or rushing home so he could have dinner with his daughters -- instead of putting forth the extra effort for Americans who elected him.

Based on his pathetic economic record and inability to develop strong relationships with our closest allies or even Congress, Americans should help the President do what he apparently sincerely wants to do -- spend more time with his family. 

We can all help the President achieve this goal by voting him out of office on November 6.  This is one achievement he truly deserves.




  

The Voice of Reason: Obama Displays Rare Combination of Laziness, Incompetence, Arrogance

In its 236-year history, America has elected Presidents who were lazy.  Calvin Coolidge once took a vacation lasting nearly three months and ordered the Secret Service to not install a telephone anywhere nearby. As a result, for nearly one quarter of a year, America essentially had no President.

We've also elected Presidents who were incompetent.  Jimmy Carter comes to mind immediately.  His policies burdened Americans with hyper-inflation and the word, "debacle," most closely describes his foreign policy decisions.

We've also had Presidents who were arrogant and thought they could do anything because they were the leader of the free world.   Richard Nixon was the epitome of arrogance, covering up a third-rate burgulary that eventually ended his Presidency.

But never before in our history have we elected a President like Barack Obama, who has displayed all three attributes -- laziness, incompetence and arrogance -- in such great abundance.

Talk about laziness. What other President has only attended a little more than one-third of his daily intelligence briefings during a year and a half period?  In 2011 and the first half of 2012, President attended slightly more than 38 percent of his daily intelligence briefings, compared to his predecessor, George W. Bush, who rarely missed these important meetings.  Although President Obama apparently doesn't find them important, these meetings help to ensure the security of the United States.  In the week before our Libyan ambassador and three other Americans were killed in an attack on our embassy, our President did not attend a single briefing.  The day after the attack, our President scheduled, then cancelled the daily intelligence briefing, opting instead to attend a fundraiser in Las Vegas.  The President has found time the last four years to play well over 100 rounds of golf and over 200 fundraisers.  Apparently, these activities are viewed by our President as much more important than daily intelligence briefings that help to protect America.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-bogus-defense-of-obamas-intelligence-briefing-record/2012/09/25/f5ae10de-071d-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_story.html 

As for incompetence, our President clearly does not understand how the American system of capitalism works. His anti-economic growth policies have created unemployment above 8% during his entire term in office, record poverty, and record increases in food stamps.  The most recent jobs report showed that for every American who found a job, four simply gave up looking for work because the prospects of finding a job were so bleak.  Yet, the President is pushing more of the same policies in a second term that he tried in his first term.  The definition of insanity -- or incompetence -- is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. 

What other President has arrogantly ignored laws passed by Congress and signed by a previous President?  Through an Executive Order, President Obama directed federal and state immigation officials to ignore laws designed to protect our borders.  What other President has had a kill list of suspected criminals (terrorists), that includes American citizens, from which the President, and the President alone, can determine if the suspected criminal lives or dies in a drone strike.  Much like a Roman emporer, President Obama can decide if a person lives or dies, even if that person is an American citizen.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 

Laziness.  Incompetence.  Arrogance.   These clearly are the triumvirate of a failed Obama Presidency.

The Voice of Reason: Hoodwinked by Hope and Change

We've all heard or read the story of President Barack Obama's life espoused by the mainstream news media, the Democratic Party and the President himself. 

It goes something like this. He grew up in impoverished Indonesia and later in Hawaii.  As a low-income student in Hawaii, he began abusing drugs and alcohol, before turning his life around.  Someway, somehow, he made it through high school and later on to college, eventually earning his way to Ivy League schools.  Later, as a professor, he was considered to be a "rock star" by his students, who were drawn to his magnetic personality.  He became an attorney and a community organizer, struggling to make it financially, much like the people he was trying to help.  As a legislator in Illinois and later as a U.S. Senator, he fought for those less fortunate, especially African-Americans.  He rose to national prominence to become America's first black President.

This is a very touching and inspiring story, isn't it?  It almost brings tears to one's eyes.  The only problem with this biography is that it's mostly fiction.

A 10-part article in the Washington Examiner exposes President Obama's biography for what it is --a fantasy.  Interviewing people who have known the President throughout his life, the Examiner did what others in the mainstream news media didn't do when he ran in 2008 and haven't done in the past four years. They actually checked to see if what they were told is the truth, a lie or something in between.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama#.UFsoFI0iZnM

Where should I start to bring a dose of reality to the awe-inspiring, but fictional story of Barack Obama?

First off, our President did not spend the majority of his childhood and teen years living in poverty.  When he lived in Jakarta, Indonesia, he lived much of the time in a very affluent section reserved for diplomats and economic elites. When he moved back to Hawaii, he lived with his grandmother, who was a bank vice president.  In both Indonesia and Hawaii, he attended elite private schools reserved for the upper class. While he may have lived in poverty for a short period during his childhood, the vast majority of his childhood was spent living much more affluently than we've been led to believe.

The truth about our President is that he started out as a popular guest lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.  He was one of the school's most popular lecturers his first two years, but his ratings began to decline to the point that in 1999 only 23 percent of students recommended his class.  In that same year, he was the third lowest rated lecturer.  Colleagues interviewed for the article in the Examiner said that he was disengaged. He never wrote scholarly papers and was rarely at the school.  In short, it appears he did the absolute minimum required for the job.

In this revealing article, numerous other facts about President Obama run contradictory to the story we've all been told.  A supposed champion of black people, he never lived in a community with a predominantly African-American population. Instead, he chose to live in one of the most affluent areas of Chicago, mostly inhabited by rich white people. He may have helped poor people in the ghetto through his job as a community organizer, but he certainly didn't live among them as we have been led to believe.  As an attorney, Obama may have taken on a couple of cases that championed people living in poverty, but he also defended slumlords who overcharged poor people for run-down apartments.

The truth is quite a different narrative, isn't it? But there's a lot more to this story.

President Obama's service to the people of Illinois, first as an Illinois legislator and later as a U.S. Senator can be described as barely "present."  He never championed significant legislation and never worked collaboratively with other lawmakers to write legislation of note.  He voted numerous times as "present," apparently not willing to take a stand that might offend, or maybe, once again, he was doing the absolute minimum for the job.

So how did Obama become our President?  An accurate bio will show that the only things he's done well that could possibly explain his ascension to President are that he's delivered two great speeches and he's used government funds to help his friends make millions.  Seriously.

He gave a stirring speech in Chicago in 1997 as a newly-elected state senator that allowed him to get noticed by that city's and Illinois' political elite, which then propelled him to become a U.S. Senator.  In 2004, he delivered another inspiring speech at the Democratic National Convention that elevated him to the national stage.  He parlayed that national recognition into a successful run for the White House in 2008.

While in Chicago, Obama surrounded himself with people who became millionaires through Chicago's $1.6 billion neighborhood demolition program known as the Plan for Transformation. At least 25,000 low-income apartments in Chicago were destroyed under the guise of urban renewal, which forced thousands of black families -- many of whom lived in Obama's state Senate district -- to move out of Chicago. Many saw the Plan for Transformation as a scam or con game, with those in charge acting like they were doing charitable work, but using public money to demolish and redevelop property or to get rid of all the tenants. The goal wasn't to help poor people; the goal was to use public money to make millions if not billions for Obama's closest allies, who directed the efforts.

As one can see now, the President's "investments" in companies like Solyndra, which coincidentally was headed by a staunch supporter, was simply a continuation of his practice of lining friends' pockets with money from public coffers.  The only difference is that the federal government has significantly more money to invest in schemes that make money for the President's allies.

It's evident after examining the President's more accurate biography provided by the Examiner that much of what we've learned about him from the news media, the Democratic Party and President Obama himself is a gross exaggeration at best, an outright lie at worst.  It's also evident that our President is largely a creation of the mainstream news media, who refuse to let Americans learn the truth about this man.

What I find ironic and quite sad is that Obama, who became our President largely on the basis of his public speaking prowess, began his political ascension in what is affectionately called the Windy City. 

How apropos.

The Voice of Reason: Don't Believe Everything You Read

My father, a construction worker, was a very smart man. 

He dropped out of high school in the eighth grade in order to support his family during the Great Depression.  Later, he was drafted into the Army during World War II.  He was seriously injured in a battle protecting the Remagen Bridge for transporting American troops and equipment as the Germans retreated back across the Rhine.  What he lacked in book knowledge, he made up in good, old American common sense.  I still remember one of the best pieces of advice he ever gave me:

They can put anything on paper.

I didn't understand what he was trying to tell me when I was a kid, but it started to make sense to me when I began studying journalism in college. When I started work as a public relations professional and saw how the news media would often lie or slant the news to sell newspapers, I began to fully comprehend what this man was trying to tell me.   My father was letting me know that once something is printed on paper, people tend to believe it, and what is printed may not be true.  While watching recent news coverage of Republican nominee Mitt Romney, I began to recall my father's words.

If you have taken the time to read, view and listen to the coverage of Romney published and broadcast by various mainstream news sources as I do every day, you may begin to think that he has lost the race. You watch as liberal commentators and liberal reporters slant the news in a way that makes it appear that President Barack Obama is pulling ahead. You read and watch the coverage of Romney's comment about how 47% of Americans are depending on entitlements, with the pundits predicting that this one comment has killed Romney's chances for a victory. You also watch as these same pundits cite polls showing President Obama leading in the battleground states, almost as if it's a foregone conclusion that he will win this election.

In short, they aren't reporting the news; they are projecting the news through coverage that includes their opinions and biases.

And despite their best efforts, the most respected polls show that this race is a dead heat.  The fact is that Republicans are much more likely and motivated to vote than their Democratic counterparts. Although there may be slightly more registered Democrats, Republicans will turn out in record numbers while Democrats will likely stay home in droves. Polls also show Romney winning over independent voters by as much as 14 points.

An astute observer can spot the shenanigans of the mainstream news media very easily. While most of the news media has focused on Romney's comments and polls taken immediately following the Democratic National Convention, we have also seen significant negative coverage that is chipping away at the approval ratings of the President, driving low numbers even lower.

Look at what's happened in the past week.

We've seen embassies all around the world being attacked.  We've also learned that our Libyan ambassador was killed, along with three other Americans.  For those of us who watch and read more than just NBC News, we've learned that while our ambassador was missing, our President was asleep, and the day after our ambassador was killed, our President attended a fundraiser in Las Vegas.  We've seen coverage of a scathing report about serious mistakes at our Justice Department that resulted in a border control agent being killed, and coverage about how our State Department and other agencies received warnings of the impending attacks at our embassies, but apparently did nothing to protect the Americans who were killed by those terrorists.  We've also seen coverage of the Administration apologizing for the video that supposedly initiated the violence, before backtracking and admitting that these were planned, coordinated attacks by terrorists. We've seen reports of increased weekly unemployment claims, with nearly 400,000 people applying for benefits for the first time this past week alone. We've also learned that President Obama could not find time to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but found time to meet with JayZ and Beyonce, and also to appear on the David Letterman show, where he couldn't even tell us how much debt this country had incurred when he took office. Just today, we learned that President Obama was grilled on Univision for deporting so many illegal immigrants, but not proposing a comprehensive immigration policy in four years. We learned from the same interview that the President doesn't believe that Washington can be changed from the inside.  Think about it. If he doesn't believe it can be changed from the inside, why the heck did America elect him on a platform of Hope and Change and why should they give him a second chance?

And in a development that received sparse national coverage but may hit the pocketbooks of Americans harder than all of the other news put together, the prestigious firm of Egan-Jones downgraded the rating on the world's largest economy to AA-, which is three steps below the coveted AAA rating America once enjoyed.     

And the news media report that Romney had a bad week?

Americans aren't stupid.  They read their newspapers and watch their evening news. Although the Romney story may have been the lead on the evening news for a couple of days, coverage of the other, more important issues that chip away at the President's approval ratings have also been on the same newscasts. The mainstream news media do their best to avoid linking this negative coverage to the President, but the American people know who is leading this country. They also know that our economy hasn't recovered and our foreign policy is falling apart.  All of this has occurred on his watch.

My advice to you is the same as what my father told me years ago:  They can put anything on paper.  In other words, don't buy what the biased mainstream news media are trying to sell you.  The Obama Administration is imploding, even if the news media won't report it.

The Voice of Reason: Top 10 Reasons NOT to Vote for Obama

While on Twitter earlier today, I posted several tweets providing reasons why one should not vote to reelect President Barack Obama.

Once I looked at these tweets in their entirety, it became very clear. Only a complete moron, or a staunch far-left liberal, would vote to reelect our current President based on his failed record, his broken promises and his lackadaisical attitude towards the job of leading our great nation.

Unfortunately, there are morons who don't pay attention or who watch only the mainstream news media. There are also far-left liberals who wouldn't vote for anybody but a Democrat even if that Democrat had been convicted of murder or rape.

For those people who are halfway reasonable and look at the facts, here are what I believe are the top 10 reasons why our current President does not deserve our vote.

1. He hasn't made the economy better; he's made it worse.
After over three and one-half years on the job, the latest jobs report was a telling barometer of this President's effectiveness. For every American who found a job in August, four Americans simply gave up looking for work because the prospects were so bleak. The facts are that one in every six Americans is now living in poverty and that the average American household has lost $4,000 in income since the Obama "recovery" started. All of these facts paint a picture of failed Presidency.

2. He has befriended our enemies and has forsaken our friends.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked to meet with our President, but the President apparently did not have enough time to meet with him -- although Netanyahu offered to travel to Washington in order to accomodate the President. But President Obama has found time to schedule a meeting with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, and has also pledged billions in aid to this country led by the Muslim Brotherhood, an anti-Israel party. Earlier this week, our President did have time to meet with JayZ and Beyonce, and also found a few minutes to appear on the David Letterman Show. While Israel is facing an Iran that will soon have nuclear weapons, our President has not found time to meet with the leader of one of our longest and staunchest allies.

3. He does not prioritize his duties in a way that's Presidential or even logical.
Although the President has found time to play well over 100 rounds of golf during the past three and one-half years and also to attend more fundraisers than his predecessors combined, he hasn't found time to lead such efforts as meeting with his Jobs Council or his Cabinet. According to some reports, he hasn't met with his Jobs Council since January, and he only met twice with his Cabinet from January to the July. While our Ambassador to Libya was missing, our President was sound asleep. The day after our Ambassador and three other Americans died in Libya, our President had to interrupt a fundraiser in Las Vegas in order to address the American people. According to numerous other reports, the President also has not found time to connect with key leaders of Congress in his own party in three and one-half years, or to meet regularly with the Republicans. With the Bush era tax cuts scheduled to expire at the end of the year for all Americans, the President has been busy campaigning instead of meeting with Congress. He has done nothing to prevent our economy from falling off what many are calling a fiscal cliff at the end of the year when the average American family will pay $4,000 more in taxes, unless the tax cuts are continued. Our President has also missed about two-thirds of recent intelligence briefings, probably because he's been too busy campaigning, fundraising and golfing.

4. He has developed no coherent energy policy.
President Obama likes to comment that fixing high gasoline prices can't be done overnight. So, what did he do three and one-half years ago to help prevent the doubling of gas prices we've seen since he took office? Nothing. He has not opened up federal lands or our shores for drilling, although this country has vast resources in those areas ready to tap. He also opposed the completion of the top half of the Keystone Pipeline, which would have brought millions of gallons of oil to American refineries in the Gulf of Mexico. He has done nothing to support natural gas drilling, or even the new development of vast new deposits of oil found in the Dakotas. President Obama's EPA appears to be doing its best to kill the coal industry, although America has hundreds of years of reserves and this energy source has supplied consumers with cheap, reliable electricity for decades. As the President said when he was campaigning in 2008, the cost of electricity would "necessarily skyrocket" because of the regulations he said he would impose on coal. This is one promise he intends to keep, and the increase in prices at the pump will soon be matched by increased in prices in electricity bills nationwide.

5. He's added $6 trillion to our debt.
To put this accomplishment in perspective, consider this. In 232 years, the United States of America incurred $10 trillion in debt. In three and one-half years, President Obama has added nearly $6 trillion to our national credit card bill. Early on, President Obama said that he would cut our debt in half by the end of his first term; instead, he's increased our debt by more than 50%.

6. He's wasted trillions of dollars.
Not only has President Obama added $6 trillion to our debt, he's wasted a lot of that money. He pushed for and received nearly $1 trillion for a stimulus when he was first elected, but we saw few jobs created. Later, the President said that "those shovel ready jobs weren't quite so shovel ready" and laughed about it. He also wasted billions on alternative energy projects like Solyndra, many of which were headed by people who coincidentally raised money for the President in 2008.

7. He's done nothing to address the impending insolvency of our entitlement programs.
Other than attacking Republican Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan for his proposals to slow down the growth in costs of programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicare, the President has rarely even talked about them. Unlike Congressman Ryan, President Obama certainly hasn't made any proposals to save them, although they are all heading towards bankruptcy, putting them in jeopardy for future generations of Americans.

8. His economic policies have devastated two groups that strongly supported him in 2008 -- blacks and young people.
His policies have destroyed economic opportunties for young people and blacks. Only about one-half of recent college graduates have actually found a job in their field, while the other half is relegated to not working or working at a job not in their field. As for blacks, the reported unemployment rate is nearly twice that of the total population. The reality is that the real unemployment rate for blacks, once you consider those who have given up looking for work, is probably closer to 30%. The chances of finding a job for young people who are black may be close to that of winning the lottery. It's that bleak.

9. He's taken no responsibility when things go wrong, but seemingly takes most of the credit when things go right.
Our President uses the word, "I," a lot when commenting about things that go as planned, such as the raid to kill Osama Bin Laden, but continues to blame his predecessor, George W. Bush, for the economy. Great Preidents such as Ronald Reagan and John F. Kennedy always credited others for success and also talked about success in terms of "we."

10. He has trampled on our Constitutional rights.
President Obama has ordered federal and state officials to not enforce immigration laws, ignoring laws passed by Congress and signed by a previous President. He has also attempted to force Catholic institutions to provide free birth control as part of their healthcare plans, ignoring the religious freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution. President Obama has also made recess appointments while Congress was still meeting, which is not Constitutional. His healthcare law was found Constitutional in what any reasonable person would consider to be quite a stretch, with Chief Justice John Roberts seemingly caving in to political pressure to find some way to allow the law to stand. Lastly, our President now has a "kill list" of suspected terrorist targets that he and he alone makes the final decision as to who lives and who dies. His list includes American citizens, who, until President Obama took office, had Constitutional rights ensuring the rights to a trial before being found guilty.


Once you put all of this together, you see an arrogant, egotistical President who has made our economy worse; trampled on our Constitutional rights; devastated economic opportunities afforded to those who supported him the strongest; added significantly to our debt; done nothing to protect entitlement programs for future generations; increased the price we pay for energy; and ignored our strongest ally in the Middle East at a time they need our steadfast support the most.

There is no way that this man should be elected to lead our country another four years. No way.

The Voice of Reason: Prepping Romney for Debates

In the past couple of weeks, Republican nominee Mitt Romney has spent considerable time preparing for his upcoming debates with President Barack Obama, according to numerous reports.

Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) has played the role of President Obama in these practice sessions with Romney.

On paper, these debates should be a slam dunk for Romney, as the President is overseeing an economy that has produced record unemployment, record poverty and a record number of Americans on foodstamps.  In fact, the August jobs report showed that for every American who found a job last month, four Americans simply gave up looking for work because the prospect of finding a job was so bleak.

As much as we might like to believe that the debates should produce an easy Romney win based on the economic facts of this President's record, we also know that President Obama has shown he is a formidable opponent.

With the polls essentially showing the race tied, Romney needs to not only do well in these debates; he needs to win them.  He can win them easily if he simply turns every attack back on the President and his record.

Let's say that the President attacks Romney's work at Bain Capital.  Romney's response should be something like this:
Mr. President, I won't apologize for being successful in America.  I'm proud of this success. The fact is that we did something at Bain Capital you were unable to do with this economy -- we took companies that were struggling and helped to make them successful and create more good-paying jobs for more Americans. We were able to create tens of thousands of jobs, and although we weren't successful all of the time, the vast majority of companies we invested in and supported were successful, saving the jobs of thousands of Americans.  As President, I would enact policies that would allow more Americans to start businesses and achieve the American dream.  In contrast, Mr. President, you took an economy that was struggling, and you've made it worse.  The August jobs report showed that for every job created in your economy, four Americans simply gave up looking for work.  That's not forward, Mr. President, that's backward.

See how easy it is to turn around an attack on Romney's success back on the President? Every response by Romney needs to be an attack on the Obama economy. Let's say that the President tries to make Romney's tax returns an issue during the debates.  How should Romney respond? 

Mr. President, a number of people in your party have tried to make my tax returns an issue because they want to distract the American people from your record as President.  I have met my legal obligations not only in terms of releasing my tax returns as a Presidential candidate, but I have also met my legal obligations in terms of paying taxes. The fact is, Mr. President, that I have been successful in business and that I will bring that same experience building businesses and creating jobs to the White House, if elected.  With some 23 million people out of work, underemployed or have simply given up looking for work, we need someone in the White House who knows how to build businesses and create jobs.  I know how to do this, Mr. President.  My record shows this.  Your record shows that you clearly don't.

Again, any attack on Romney needs to be turned into an attack on the President's record.  Let's say that the President tries to deflect blame for his economy into an attack on Republican policies by saying that Romney wants to take America back to the policies that got America into financial difficulty in the first place.  Romney can say something like this:

You know, Mr. President, I find it incredible that nearly four years after you took office you continue to not accept any blame whatsoever for the current economy.  At some point, Mr. President, you have to quit blaming others and take responsibility for your policies that have made a bad economy worse. I'll say this to the American people.  The buck will stop with me if I'm elected as your President.  If I'm elected and if the economy is in the same place or worse three and one-half years after I take office, I won't blame my predecessor. It will be my fault and I will accept responsibility.  In fact, if the economy is not a lot stronger and significantly more Americans are not working three and one-half years after I'm elected, I won't deserve a second term, and I pledge to the American people that I simply would not run again. That is my pledge.  The President pretty much said the same thing after he was elected, that if things weren't significantly better three years later that he would be a one-term President.  The fact is, he doesn't deserve a second term based on his own stated level of expectations. You aren't better off; you're worse off.  This President doesn't deserve a second term; he deserves a pink slip.

Romney should also use this opportunity to connect with the American people, differentiating himself from the President, while highlighting his record:

My fellow Americans, I know that you're hurting.  The last four years, you've seen our economy go from bad to worse.  Many of you aren't working or are working in a part-time job when you need to work full time to support your family.  As Americans, we're patient, but we're not seeing things get better.  Four years ago, you may have voted for Hope and Change, but today you hope you can find a good job, and the wage you're earning is closer to pocket change than what you can raise a family on.  You're paying double the price for gasoline than when this President took office, and the prices at the grocery store have gone up significantly too.  I know because I do the shopping in my family You walk out of the grocery store with a couple of bags and it's $100 or more, and you fill up your gas tank and it may be another $60 or more, when it cost only $30 four years ago.  How can you afford to pay these higher prices when you've lost a job or are working part-time?  You can't. Are you better off than you were four years ago?  Based on what I see at the gas pump, at the grocery store and in the dismal monthly jobs reports, I would say that the answer is unequivocally no.  Under this President, America has faced record unemployment nad record poverty.  The August jobs report showed that for every American who found a job, four other Americans simply gave up looking for work because the prospects were so bleak.  That's not forward; that's backward. While you and your family have faced these challenges, your President has played over 100 rounds of golf and has attended more fundraisers than his last few predecessors combined.  If I don't turn around this economy in three and one-half years, it will be my fault, not my predecessor's. My pledge to you is that if I am fortunate enough to be elected as your President, I will work hard every day for you and your family.  I will put my expertise growing jobs in business to work growing jobs across this country.  I will put my expertise as a  governor, chief executive and head of the Olympics to work putting Americans back to work.  No one will out work me as I work for you. 

As you can see, Romney can turn every attack from the President back on the President, because  his record has been so pathetic.   If Romney can stay on offense, focusing on the President's record of economic failure, I truly believe that his debate performance can turn this close race into a rout.

I'm looking forward to the first debate on October 3.  I have a strong feeling that Romney is also looking forward to the debates -- much more so than President Obama.







   

    



 

The Voice of Reason: The Three Faces of Obama

I loved Crackerjacks when I was a kid. Often I would open the box to find a cheap ring as the prize, a ring that had a small picture on top and would change as you looked at it from different angles.

I was thinking about those cheap rings today, and for some reason our President, Barack Obama, came to mind.

I began considering the possibility that to different voters he is viewed very differently, almost as if he has three faces.  He's the same person, of course, but depending on how you look at his policies and listen to his speeches, you view him in a much different way.

The far-left liberal hears what he or she wants President Obama to say, without really listening to how he plans to accomplish his promises, how he plans to pay for them or even the ramifications of his policies. They hear "blah blah blah blah we need to make the rich pay their fair share," "blah blah blah blah I support gay marriage," "blah blah blah blah medical insurance for everyone," "blah blah blah blah I support increasing grants for college," "blah blah blah blah I support opening our borders to those who came to our country illegally," or "blah blah blah blah free birth control for women."

President Obama promises "free stuff" to far-left liberals, and they love him for it. He sees America as a compilation of various voting blocs and as long as he promises to do something for their voting bloc, they support him. They love the way the President seems to connect with them one person at a time with his soaring rhetoric and his non-formal manner, without paying attention to what he's actually saying. The majority in the voting blocs he targets -- women, hispanics, gay people, young people and blacks -- adore him, even though his policies have created far fewer opportunities for economic success than any Republican President ever has. Based on his record, not his rhetoric, this President has not earned a single vote from these voters.

To those on the far, far right, President Obama is seen as a threat to our country.  They view his policies as a blatant attack on our Constitution and believe he is working purposefully to dismantle our great country, one Amendment to the Constitution at a time. They see him as part socialist, part communist, but certainly not an American. They view him as un-American, a person whose intent is to destroy the system of capitalism on which our country was built and prospered. They see an economy in its fourth year of stagnation as proof positive that he is conspiring to destroy the economic engine that has made America great.  Those on the far, far right believe that President Obama is purposely trying to weaken America through his policies and words.

I have a slightly different view of our President.  Like many others closer to the middle-right side of the political spectrum, I see him as someone who simply did not grow up as we did, saluting the Red White and Blue at ballgames, saying the Pledge of Allegiance at school and listening to those elders who risked life and limb to protect the freedoms we enjoy today.  I see him as someone who as a kid never learned about business through a paper route that allowed him to save a few quarters each week in order to buy a baseball glove, football or Hot Wheels set.  I also see him as someone who was taught to ask what America could do to him and for him, instead of what he could do for America.

He grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia and as we know now he was greatly influenced by people with communist and socialist leanings.  I also believe he was taught that American and British colonists had stolen from these lands and their people.  I also view our President as someone who grew up with a stilted view of America's role in the world.  Instead of seeing America as a great liberator, he saw America as a nation that prospered greatly, while enslaving people, stealing their natural resources and leaving them with little or nothing in return. I firmly believe that instead of being taught about the greatness of America, our President was taught that America became great on the backs of others.

If you look at President Obama from this viewpoint, all of his words and policies make perfect sense.  He believes in punishing those who make money from the work of others, he views America as having too much influence and power in the world, and he sees the 99% in America as part of the 1% when you look at the entire world. To Barack Obama who grew up listening to stories of American and British imperialism, he feels the need to apologize to the world for America's sins of the past, whether real or imagined.

This viewpoint also explains why the President didn't appear to be overly concerned when four Americans were killed in Libya earlier this week (he continued to campaign instead of returning to the White House) and why he seemingly supports Muslim countries like Egypt and Libya much more strongly that he does Israel.

If you've seen the movie, "2016: Obama's America," which I strongly suggest every American do, you now have a better view of what he's doing and why he's doing it. He can't help it; this is what he was taught.

What he wasn't taught was how to be a chief executive, which explains another facet of his make up -- incompetence. He was never a governor. He never ran a business. He was never head of even a Cub Scout Pack. What his upbringing doesn't his explain, his lack of experience does. It also explains why he has spent so little time doing "executive" types of activities such as leading meetings with his jobs council or cabinet. He simply doesn't know how to lead because he's never had that experience.


Combine the President's poisoned view of America's role in the world with his lack of leadership experience that has resulted in incompetence, and we have a country on the brink of disaster just three and a half years after he took office. 

The sad part is that although I believe our President is not purposely trying to destroy America, the results are pretty much the same as if he were. America's economy, budget and foreign relations could not be in worse shape. America is experiencing record levels of poverty, long-term unemployment and debt. We're heading towards a financial cliff, and our President has done nothing to bring Democrats and Republicans together to avert the impending disaster.  Instead, he's spent most of his time campaigning, fundraising and golfing.

While far-left liberals may still be mesmerized by the President's rhetoric, those closer to the middle and those to the far right realize that whether done purposely or not, he is destroying America for this and future generations.

The Voice of Reason: Could These Be the Last Days of America?

The statistics are sobering.

More than 23 million Americans are unemployed, underemployed or have simply given up looking for work. The number of Americans on food stamps has increased by more than 14 million since President Barack Obama first took office, and the number on social security disability has increased 10 percent in that same time period.

Since President Obama was inaugurated, the amount of money the federal government gives to households has increased by a third, to the point that nearly one-half of all households in the country now receive a check of some kind from the government.

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/16-statistics-which-show-that-the-number-of-americans-dependent-on-the-government-is-at-an-all-time-high

Our debt is now over $16 trillion, increasing by more than 50% since our current President took the reins.

 

And yet, the latest polls show President Obama with a slight lead over Republican nominee Mitt Romney.  Given the economic condition of our country, which has been made precipitously worse by our current President, how can this be? 

 

I believe that this nearly 200-year-old quote from French historian Alexis de Tocqueville can perhaps provide the best explanation:

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”

What Tocqueville predicted nearly two full centuries ago appears to have a good chance of coming true.  With a near-majority of Americans receiving assistance from the government, will they vote for the candidate promising the most benefits, President Obama, or will they vote for Romney, a candidate who promises to control spending in order to save America from financial insolvency? 

If what Tocqueville predicts comes true, our nation will collapse financially and then become a dictatorship.

Interestingly, President Obama has not proposed any plan whatsoever to rein in entitlement programs or to slow the growth of our debt that threatens to implode this country financially.  He hasn't proposed anything in four years as President, and he certainly didn't propose any plan in his convention speech. 

Without a change of direction, our country is racing towards a financial collapse. And yet, nearly one-half of Americans indicate that they will vote for President Obama on November 6?

With all of the campaigning during the past several months, few noticed that our President issued an executive order that directs border control agents to ignore immigration laws passed by Congress and signed by a former President.  More noticed when he passed health care legislation to take over one-sixth of our economy, but very few paid attention when Health and Human Services directed Catholic institutions to provide free birth control, stomping on the religious rights of Americans.  Even fewer paid attention when the New York Times reported that President Obama has a "kill list" that includes American citizens as primary targets without any judicial or Congressional review.  President Obama alone decides who lives and who dies.  Are these the actions of a President in a democracy or a dictator?

Tocqueville predicted that a dictatorship follows the financial collapse. Based on our current President's actions, we're already halfway there.

As I wrote in an earlier blog, this election will be the second most important one in our nation's history.  The most important election was the first, when our country elected a leader, George Washington, who established the model for sharing power among the three branches of government, instead of grabbing the near-unlimited power that could have been his.

I fervently believe that this election will determine if America continues being a democracy or if it  transforms into a socialist nation or worse, a dictatorship; if America will regain financial stability or drown in its debt; and if America will continue to be the land of opportunity or a country where the government determines how successful one will become.

In short, this election will determine if these will be the last days of the shining beacon of freedom. Will we become the nation they once called America, or the nation that continues to beckon those yearning to be free?

It will be up to us on November 6.



 

 

The Voice of Reason: Jobs Report Shows Obama's Policies Aren't Working

While working for an electric utility, I worked for a regional vice president who had the rugged good looks of Daniel Craig and the booming voice of Fred Thompson. After moving up through the ranks and becoming one of the company's top executives, his ascension stopped. He actually moved down quite a few notches, exiled to an office doing little to nothing until he retired.

One of the executives later told me that "they had finally figured him out," and that "he was just wasn't very smart."

I could have told them that.  But I'll share more about this with you later.

The fact is that people often look at the wrapping on the package, instead of considering what might be inside that package.  On the outside, the package might be neat, colorful and shiny, but it is only just the covering.  It's what's on the inside that counts, whether you're considering a present, or a President.

President Obama's speech to the Democratic National Convention yesterday evening featured the soothing voice of one of America's greatest orators.  He shared lofty goals about creating millions of new jobs, restoring America's manufacturing prominence, cutting college costs for young people and hiring more thousands of teachers. What was missing, though, were the details -- the strategies that will help America reach those goals.  Sadly, he proposed no policy changes in a second term that would be different from those in his first term that have failed so miserably.

One day after the President's soaring speech, America returned to Earth with the release of the August jobs report.

Even the most generous expert would say that the report clearly does not point to an economy that is "turning around."  To the 23 million Americans out of work, though, the report has to be viewed as disappointing and devastating.

The report featured a downtick in the overall unemployment rate from 8.3% to 8.1%, but only because 368,000 Americans simply stopped looking for work and were no longer included in the data. A paltry 96,000 jobs were created, significantly fewer than the number of jobs required just to keep pace with population growth.

To put this report in perspective, consider this: For every new job created, four Americans stopped looking for work because the jobs outlook has become so bleak. 

One day after the glitz and glamour, the rhetoric and rationalizations, the wrapping is clearly off our President and his party.   What's left is a jobs report that provides indisputable proof that the policies of the current administration have failed.

For some reason, after listening to some of President Obama's speech yesterday and reading the jobs report today, I thought of my old boss, the vice president.  I thought about his good looks and great voice, but how little he really had to offer. I learned early on what the top executives learned years later: This man didn't have any common sense and just wasn't very smart. I learned this as he was just beginning his climb up the organization, when he was a district manager. 

We had experienced an afternoon thunderstorm that left a couple of hundred customers without power.  With power restored to all but about a dozen customers in one area, this manager stopped the crews from working for a couple of hours, taking them milk and cookies.  When our plain-talking dispatcher found out that his crews weren't working to restore power to the few remaining customers because they were enjoying milk and cookies with their district manager, he yelled to his crew on the radio: "Get your butts to those customers now. You can have all the $#@!^# milk and cookies you want once we have all power restored!!!" Believe it or not, this is a true story.

This company manager and our President have a lot in common. Instead of restoring power to customers, the manager had crews drinking milk and cookies.  Instead of focusing on creating jobs early in his first term after millions of jobs were lossed due to the financial meltdown, the President expended his political energy passing healthcare reform.  And now, three years later, with the economy still sputtering, the President has spent significantly more time playing golf, attending fundraisers and giving speeches than working to create jobs by meeting with his cabinet and jobs council, or working with and leading Congress to pass jobs legislation. Those activities that the President enjoys, but don't create jobs, are the milk and cookies of this President.

I actually think that Clint Eastwood summed it up most eloquently and succinctly in a recent interview to explain why he took the time to speak at the Republican National Convention:
 
“President Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people."

If Clint has sized up our President, I have to believe that the American people can't be far behind. The jobs report simply tore the shiny package off of his convention speech and his record of the past four years, revealing what was inside all along.

Nothing.



 










   

The Voice of Reason: Debunking the Biggest Lie at the Democratic Convention

As a kid growing up in the country, I remember being told by another boy that if water in a stream runs over three rocks with moss on them, the water is safe to drink.  I didn't believe it at the time, and I don't believe it now.

The Democrats at the 2012 National Convention are using a similar method to try to purify their lies.  If they say something three or more times, they think it is the truth -- or at least the American people will believe it is the truth.  Just as three mossy rocks won't make water safe to drink, saying a statement three times doesn't make it a fact.

During this convention, you will hear a statistic repeated numerous times, like a mantra.  Democrat after Democrat will say that "this administration has created 4.5 million jobs."  Sometimes the speaker will quantify this statement by saying that 4.5 million "private sector" jobs were created, but typically speakers will leave out the clarification.

I don't know how to say it any other way.  This statement is a damn lie. It misleads the American people into thinking that the Obama Administration is doing a better job than it really is in turning around this economy.  Shame on them.

Compared to when Barack Obama took office, today there are slightly more private sector jobs (about 300,000) and significantly fewer public sector jobs.  As a result, there are about 400,000 fewer total jobs today than when President Obama took office.

Let me repeat that.  There are about 400,000 fewer American jobs today than when the President took office.  He certainly hasn't created 4.5 million jobs during his administration.

But in stating and restating their "fact" about job creation, Democrats don't count the private jobs lost at the beginning of the Obama Administration.  They conveniently compare the number of private sector jobs at the lowest point of the recession, which was in January 2010 (a year after President Obama took office), to the number of private sector jobs today in order to arrive at their 4.5 million figure. In other words, they cherrypick the best possible time points in order to show the greatest difference in jobs -- and they only look at the private sector jobs.

This is misleading, dishonest and unfair to the American people who will cast their votes in November.  It also shows that this administration is willing to mislead Americans in order to try to put lipstick on their pig of an economic recovery.  But no matter how much lipstick they put on this pig, it's still a pig. No matter how many times their "fact" is repeated, it is still a lie.

Even CNN and Yahoo News have called the Obama Administration out on this outright lie.  These liberal news organizations even report that the vast majority of the jobs created have been lower-wage jobs, not the types of "good-paying jobs" that First Lady Michelle Obama said were created by this administration in her speech last night.  Simply put, they are spreading lies on top of lies.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/fact-check-4-5-million-jobs-created-under-175621036--election.html
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politics/fact-check-obama-jobs/index.html

But even comparing the number of jobs today to the number of jobs when the President took office doesn't tell the whole story. Why?  Our population grows, so in order to maintain the same percentage of people working, we must add jobs in addition to the jobs needed to offset job losses. If we don't, the unemployment percentage increases, which has occurred under this President.  Since President Obama took office, we not only have fewer jobs than we did when he took office, we haven't added enough jobs to keep pace with the population growth.  That's why when he took office our unemployment rate was 7.8%, but is now 8.3%, with millions more simply giving up looking for work and not counted in these statistics.  In reality, the real unemployment rate could be as high as 12%.  As one can see, job creation during the Obama Administration has been much worse than most people realize and the Democrats want us to believe.

So now you know the truth, not some watered down version of it, or the truth based on conveniently selected timelines. The Obama Campaign is hoping that Americans won't take the time to search out the truth.

Bloggers such as this one, and the people who take the time to read this blog won't let that happen.

Please share with your family members, neighbors and co-workers.

The Voice of Reason: Under Obama, Families Have Lost One Month's Salary

You won't read this on the front pages of the New York Times or the Washington Post.  You certainly won't see this on NBC News or CNN, and you definitely won't see this mentioned at this week's Democratic Convention in Charlotte, but it is probably the most telling statistic of this failed Presidency:

Under our current President, the average American household has seen its income drop by the equivalent of nearly one month's salary, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Here are the facts. In January 2009, the month Barack Obama became our President, median household income was $54,983. By June, 2012, the median household income had plummeted to $50,964. That’s a loss of $4,019 per family, the equivalent of losing nearly one month’s income.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/09/02/obamas-accelerating-downward-spiral-for-america/ This decrease represents a drop in income by 7.3%.

Are Americans better off they they were four years ago?  Unequivocally, no.  It isn't even close.

President Obama likes to blame the economy on his predecessor, George W. Bush.  But if you look at the numbers, they show a different story.  During the Bush Recession, which began in December 2007 and ended in June 2009, the income of the average American household decreased by 2.6%, about one third of the drop we've seen since Obama took office.

The data show that the Obama recovery has been far worse for the American middle class than the Bush recession.

But there's more to this story.

As Americans have watched their incomes drop under this President, they've also seen costs increase dramatically.  Gasoline has doubled since the day he took office, electric rates have increased and we all know that food is significantly more expensive than it was three years ago.  Unless you pay close attention to what you're buying and how much you're buying, though, you may not see the full impact of the increases in prices. 

Here's an example.  Earlier this weekend, I purchased a large bag of Purina dogfood.  After I brought it home, I noticed that it contained 31.1 pounds of dog food, instead of the 35 pounds the bag used to contain.  I've noticed similar "downsizing" in quantities, which is probably a way for manufacturers to pass on rising costs to consumers without them feeling the pinch.

Unfortunately, the mainstream news media will not inform the American public about how bad the Obama Presidency has been for their bank accounts.  This inconvenient truth would not help the media's cultural hero receive votes from uninformed voters.

It is up to Americans like us, who search for the truth, to let Americans know the facts about this President and the impact his policies have had on our economy and our pocketbooks.

Please share with your friends, co-workers, neighbors and family members.

The Voice of Reason: Why Recent College Graduates Don't Have a Job

So, you studied hard and graduated from college.  Maybe you graduated with honors and perhaps even finished among the best in your class.  You did what everyone said you needed to do in order to get a good job -- you graduated from college. After graduation you've seen advertisements for very few openings in your field, and you've submitted resume after resume. Maybe you've had an interview or two, but haven't been offered a job.  You've had to move back with your parents and have had to settle for a job that doesn't require a college degree.  You're making minimum wage or maybe a few cents more per hour.  You don't earn enough to even think about buying a house, let alone a car. 

Or maybe you graduated from college a couple of years ago, lost a job during the recession and have been looking for another job. You have some experience in your field and you thought that surely you would be able to find a good job after going without work for a couple of weeks.  But the weeks turned into months, and the months turned into a couple of years.  You're wondering if you will ever find a job in your field that pays enough for you to buy a house or car or to support a family -- or to have any of the things normally associated with being a member of the middle class.

Do either of these scenarios describe the difficulty you've faced in finding a job -- a good job -- in your field of study?

If so, you're not alone.  About one-half of recent college graduates have been unable to find a job in their field of study.  The job market for recent graduates is the worst it's been since the Great Depression at the start of the last century.  Tens of thousands of your classmates are also out of work, and things don't appear to be getting any better.

So, why haven't you been able to find a job?  It's complicated, but let me try to explain.

The recession officially ended in June 2009.  Since then, our economy has been in a "recovery."  Unfortunately, this recovery has been the worst since the Great Depression.

The reason this slow recovery is that businesses -- small. medium and large -- are faced with an uncertain future.  The policies of the Obama Administration have created this uncertainty in terms of environmental regulations, taxes on income and  healthcare costs.  This uncertainty has resulted in businesses curtailing new hiring and halting any expansion or investment in capital projects.

In short, as a result of this uncertainty created by the Obama Administration, you don't have a good job.

Let's take a look at each of the areas of uncertainty for business and industry.

President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is clearly out of control.  Just as businesses invest funds to meet one new environmental regulation, another, stricter one is enacted.  In some cases, the EPA seems to be more intent on closing entire industries than protecting the environment. Business and industry don't know what these new regulations will cost or even when they will be enacted, so they are leery of expanding or hiring new people when one unreasonable regulation could close their doors. 

As for taxes, President Obama has made it clear he wants affluent people and businesses to pay what he describes as their "fair share."  The affluent people he's talking about are mostly the small business owners, the people who create the majority of jobs in America.  They don't know how much more in taxes they will pay, so they're afraid to hire new people or to expand their business because they don't know what their profit margins will be -- or even if they will be able to operate profitably when these new taxes are enacted.

The costs of healthcare seem to increase every year, but another monkey wrench has been thown into the equation -- Obamacare -- that has created even more uncertainty. Most of the new healthcare law will not be enacted until 2013 and 2014, so businesses don't know how this new law will fully impact them.  In just the past year, the average cost of healthcare insurance for their employees has increased by $2,500, although the President said that Obamacare would decrease by $2,500 this year. Clearly, this new law will cost a lot more than  the President said, and businesses know that the majority of those increased costs will ultimately be passed on to them in taxes and/or penalties. They're afraid to hire more employes or to expand because they simply don't know what the affect will be on their bottom lines.

This uncertainty is why so few jobs have been created.  This uncertainty is also why you and so many of your classmates have been unable to find a job in their fields of study.

To put this uncertainty in terms anyone can understand, imagine that you save up just enough money for an Ipad.  But as soon as you have the money saved and are ready to buy your Ipad, your car breaks down and you take it to the mechanic.  Do you buy the Ipad until you know how much it will cost to fix your car?  Of course not.  Uncertainty causes you to move cautiously with your money.  Businesses operate the same way. Until they know what things will cost, they are reluctant to spend.    

Remember then-candidate Barack Obama, who promised you Hope and Change?  As a result of his policies, you Hope you will be able to find a job in your field and you're essentially earning pocket Change for doing a job well below your talents and abilities. If President Obama is reelected for four more years, he will undoubtedly continue the same policies that created the uncertainty that has left millions of Americans unemployed or underemployed.

There's are two other major factors to consider during this election: debt and entitlement programs.  Under President Obama, our national debt has increased by 50% in just three and one-half years.  It now stands at $16 trillion.  To put this debt in perspective, the amount owed by the United States equates to over $533,000 for every household in America.  Unfortunately, President Obama has not offered any serious proposal to cut this debt, which threatens the security and standard of living for every citizen, especially younger Americans.  Although Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are all racing toward insolvency, President Obama not made a serious proposal to rein in their costs so that future generations of Americans -- your generation -- has access to these vital programs. 

In short, President Obama is mortgaging your future for his reelection.  President Obama has said that the proposals by Republican nominee Mitt Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, to cut the debt and slow the growth of entitlements are "extreme" and "radical."  The truth is that not doing anything, as President Obama has done, is what is truly extreme and radical.

Fortunately, you have a choice this election.  In Romney and Ryan, you have two people with unique qualifications that will allow them to tackle the serious issues facing our nation.  Romney has a "stellar" business record, even according to former President Bill Clinton. Romney clearly knows what businesses require in order to expand and hire more people.  He also was an effective governor, turning a debt into a surplus without raising taxes and cutting Massachusetts' unemployment rate to under 5%.   Ryan, 42, is closest in age to your generation of any of the candidates, and he is considered to be the most knowledgeable budget expert in Congress.  He knows that unless something is done soon to cut the debt and slow the growth of the entitlement programs, your generation and his children's generation will be faced with a standard of living below that of previous generations and without the benefit of entitlement programs that have served generation after generation of Americans.

Millions of Americans were truly inspired by then-candidate Obama in 2008 with his soaring rhetoric and his promises to unite a divided country.  But four years later, the economy has not improved and our country is still divided.  In fact, things have gotten much worse.

Of all Americans voting in the election of 2012, college graduates in their 20s should understand better than anyone else that President Obama's policies just haven't worked. But will they be persuaded by more the President's inspiring rhetoric, or his pathetic record creating jobs for people in their age group?