Barry stated right from the get-go that he would stand on his principles even if it meant that he was a "one term President"..... he has. Most (96%) of his Senate votes and Illinois Senate votes were cast as "present" not "yay" or "nay"... he didn't want to "position" himself politically. That is his "principles" then and now. He doesn't want to stick his neck out. The only leading that he does is from the "bully pulpit" not from legislative skill. The grandest accomplishment was his "Obamacare" which was entirely driven and written by the minions of Pelosi and Reid, thus it is earmarked with all of their liberal pork barrel inclusions and the entire massiveness of it has doomed it. The general idea was great, provide medical care where needed. Pelosi and Reid saw the sign saying "free donuts" and went crazy with their feeding frenzy! What was needed was leadership that balanced social need and financial resources.


Do you remember how long it took him to setup a surge in Afghanistan? It took like 4-5 months ... and well into the waiting the US general in charge was asked what he had said to Obama and he responded that the president had never gotten in touch with him, ever! I'm afraid that this is typical of his principled approach... BH



Top 10 Reasons Obama Won’t Win Reelection
by  http://www.humanevents.com/ 



With bad news seemingly everywhere, here is something to give hope to conservatives: the Top 10 Reasons Obama Won’t Win Reelection.




1.  Jobless rate too high:  With the latest Labor Department report showing the unemployment rate at 9.1%, jobs will likely remain the No. 1 issue for voters.  Well over 2 million jobs have been lost since Obama took office, and he wasted a trillion dollars on a stimulus bill that didn’t stimulate.  Unfortunately for the American people, his policies will keep the jobless rate high, right up to November 2012.




2.  Economy in doldrums:  It’s not just jobs, but everything about the economy remains snake-bit.  With housing slumping and the stock market tanking, all Americans are feeling the impact of the down economy.  With the threat of a double-dip recession looming, don’t expect a turnaround in time to help Obama’s reelection.




3.  ObamaCare looms:  With health care costs continuing to rise, it is clear that ObamaCare wasn’t the answer.  As the implementation of the highly unpopular health care measure nears, more workers will be dumped from their employers' health care plans, taxes will rise and fewer doctors will be available—giving voters more reasons to dump its architect.




4.  Out-of-control debt and credit downgrade:  The debt-ceiling deal did little to fix the long-term debt problem, as the U.S. is still on tap to borrow $7 trillion over the next decade, adding to the $4 trillion Obama has already racked up since taking office.  With the S&P downgrade, Obama goes down in history as the first President to lose America’s AAA credit rating.




5.  Depressed base:  Progressives are having buyer’s remorse and are trying to convince everyone that Obama is not even much of a liberal.  The anti-war left certainly won’t be out in force on Election Day.  Nor will black turnout match 2008’s historical number.  More of the young will stay home.  The excitement of electing the first black President has worn off and even his staunchest supporters are disappointed that Obama hasn’t fulfilled their expectations.




6.  Opposition energized:  The Tea Party didn’t even exist in 2008, and the 2010 midterm elections showed the country rejects the President’s big-spending policies.  No matter which Republican gains the party’s nomination, expect an energized grassroots opposition to Obama’s second term.




7.  Changes in battleground states:  The terrain that Obama faces in his reelection bid will be more difficult to navigate in 2012 than four years ago.  He starts out by losing six Electoral College votes from states he carried in 2008 due to population changes registered by the 2010 Census.  Then the 2010 midterm elections saw Republicans win governors’ races previously held by Democrats in key battleground states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan—all states Obama won in 2008.




8.  Foreign policy mess:  From the Libyan war to mixed signals given to Middle East protesters, from the Russian “reset” to China’s economic belligerence, there is not much that Obama can tout as a foreign policy success.  Now with deficit hawks setting their sights on the Pentagon, Obama is likely to preside over the dismantling of America’s superpower status.




9.  Media less a adoring:  Obama will still have most of the media on his side for his reelection bid, but they certainly won’t be getting thrills up their legs, admiring the crease in his pants, or writing how the seagulls were awed.  Even Obamaphile Chris Mathhews has turned on the President, saying a recent Obama speech sounded like a Fox News commercial, a harsh epithet coming from the MSNBC host.




10.  Aloof, inept:  Now that America has seen the President up close for nearly three years, the magic that many believed in during his hope and change odyssey is clearly gone.  His aloof personality and scolding partisanship will not endear him to the electorate this time.  As his falling approval ratings attest, he increasingly looks pathetically inept and not up to the job he was elected to do.




HUMAN EVENTS is the news source President Reagan called his "favorite newspaper" and we still hold high the Reaganesque principles of free enterprise, limited government and, above all, a staunch, unwavering defense of American freedom. 

Big win for Wisconsin and the rest of us...

Wisconsin GOP's Stand Could Reverberate Elsewhere

Associated press

Madison –  A stand by Wisconsin Republicans against a massive effort to oust them from power could reverberate across the country as the battle over union rights and the conservative revolution heads toward the 2012 presidential race.

Democrats succeeded in taking two Wisconsin state Senate seats away from Republican incumbents on Tuesday but fell one short of what they needed to seize majority control of the chamber.

Republicans saw it as a big win for Gov. Scott Walker and a confirmation of his conservative agenda, the hallmark of which was a polarizing proposal taking away most collective bargaining rights from public workers.

"Republicans are going to continue doing what we promised the people of Wisconsin -- improve the economy and get Wisconsin moving back in the right direction," Republican Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said in a prepared statement after the victory.

Walker attempted to strike a bipartisan tone in victory, saying that he reached out to leaders in both parties.

"In the days ahead I look forward to working with legislators of all parties to grow jobs for Wisconsin and move our state forward," Walker said in a prepared statement.

Democrats and union leaders tried to make the best of the historic GOP wins. There had been only 13 other successful recalls of state-level office holders nationwide since 1913.

"The fact of the matter remains that, fighting on Republican turf, we have begun the work of stopping the Scott Walker agenda," said Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate.

Phil Neuenfeldt, president of the Wisconsin State AFL-CIO, said voters sent a message that there is a growing movement to reclaim the middle class.

"Let's be clear, anyway you slice it, this is an unprecedented victory," he said.

Still, it was far less than what Democrats set out to achieve. And while they still plan to move ahead with recalling Walker, maintaining momentum for that effort which can't start until November will be difficult.

Sen. Luther Olsen, one of the four Republicans who won, said he hoped the victories would "take the wind out of the recall for Walker, but I'm not sure."

Two Democratic senators face recall elections next week, but even if they prevail, Republicans would still hold a narrow 17-16 majority.

Four Republican senators held on to their seats Tuesday. They were Olsen and Sens. Sheila Harsdorf of River Falls, Rob Cowles of Allouez, and Alberta Darling of River Hills. Two Republicans -- Randy Hopper of Fond du Lac and Dan Kapanke of La Crosse -- were defeated. Former deputy mayor of Oshkosh Jessica King beat Hopper and Democratic state Rep. Jennifer Shilling beat Kapanke.

A ninth senator, Democrat Dave Hansen of Green Bay, won his recall election last month.

Collectively, more than $31 million has been spent on the recalls, largely from outside conservative groups, unions and others.

Republican and Democratic strategists were leery of reading too much into the results heading into next year's campaign in which Wisconsin is expected to be a key swing state.

Democratic strategist Chris Lehane said the results could provide "some early radar warnings" about the 2012 races.

"At a minimum, we already know that the conservatives are providing energy for progressive to fight back like an angry badger that otherwise may not have existed," he said.

Lehane said Wisconsin's tumultuous year since November's elections has been a microcosm of the current "rollercoaster" era of U.S. politics.

Wisconsin voters had mixed emotions about the necessity of the recalls.

Wayne Boland, 41, a Whitefish Bay man who works in marketing for a medical equipment maker, said he voted for the Republican Darling "not because I entirely agree with everything the Republican Party has done or the governor" but because they're working toward addressing the state's problems.

Republicans won control of both houses of the Legislature and the governor's office in the 2010 election just nine months ago.

Democrats had hoped enough wins in the recalls would have allowed them to block the Republican agenda, but the GOP will hold on to their majorities that have allowed them to rapidly pass bills through the Legislature.

The elections were also closely watched in other states undergoing similar partisan battles.

A coalition of unions and labor-friendly groups fighting a Wisconsin-style collective bargaining overhaul in Ohio said the outcome of the recall elections will have little bearing on whether Ohio's law is repealed this fall.

The effort in Wisconsin was about recalling specific Republicans who voted for the anti-union bill while the push in Ohio is about repealing the law itself. That makes it difficult to compare the two states, said We Are Ohio spokeswoman Melissa Fazekas.

Supporters of the Ohio law also are distancing their state from the fight in Wisconsin.

"We're not focused on Wisconsin, and Ohioans aren't looking to another state to tell them where they should stand," said Jason Mauk, spokesman for Building a Better Ohio, a group defending the collective bargaining law.

Ohioans will vote Nov. 8 on whether to accept or reject the union-limiting law signed by Republican Gov. John Kasich in March that limits bargaining rights for more than 350,000 police, firefighters, teachers and other government employees.

Unlike Wisconsin, Ohio's Constitution makes no provision for recalling elected officials.

The Economy

A word from Mike Walker, Colonel USMC (retired)

All,

OK, so things are getting tough.  Sorry, grew up a while ago and my first “American” instinct is to roll up my sleeves, tighten my belt, and get things going in the right direction.  

That means I have a big heart plus a ready and helping hand for those who are in need but little or no sympathy for whiners, enablers, and “self-defined victims.” In other words, I am a progressive that puts a lot more faith in Ben Franklin who liked to quote Aesop than a far too cynical Saul Alinsky.  “God helps those who help themselves” is my motto.  That means I have no political friends.

Nonetheless, here is my gratuitous advice.  

We got it wrong.  By “we” I mean Democrats and Republicans, Wall Street and Elm Street, all the branches of government and the other cats and dogs to boot.

America needs jobs and jobs means focusing like a laser on small businesses.  

We had our chance when it was an easy fix and blew it (was preaching this when George Bush was president in 2008 and have not changed my tune by one note).  Now we need to do the best we can in the circumstances we are now facing.

Bush and Obama gave me a nice little tax break as a middle class American in the name of “stimulus” that cost hundreds of billions of dollars.  Shame on both of them.   Giving me a couple of hundred dollars is nice but those bucks gave me no ability whatsoever to create a job. 

 

Now, based on some super-duper macroeconomic theory of trickle-up or trickle-down or trickle-on-your-pant-leg after too many beers this is supposed to create jobs.  Bunk.

Focus like a laser on small businesses.  

To be truthful, Uncle Sam is largely out of the game.  I write that because the odds that the collective bureaucratic wits in DC will do everything in their power to create federal rules, guidelines and laws to help creating wealth for small businesses who then hire people is a bridge too far.  

The DC crowd has a greater understanding of what it takes to put an astronaut on Mars than they do in removing barriers to small business wealth and job creation.  

The ability to create jobs in the political realm now largely lies with state and local governments.  The most important component is helping community banks extend responsible loans and lines of credit to small businesses.  

That was the big failure of TARP.  I supported TARP and still do but it was flawed.  It was crippled by the myopic mind-set that overwhelmed the judgment of DC and Wall Street (the NY Fed, banks, and insurance firms behind all the CDS’s) when TARP was created in 2008.  The lesson is that macroeconomic solutions will ultimately fail if you don’t address the underlying microeconomic issues.  

In this case the underlying issue was helping community banks.  When the national monetary policy is to set the Federal funds rate as close to 0% as possible you hurt the cash flow to Main Street.  If you add the increased and prudent requirements for financial institutions to keep cash to cover the sour and reckless loans on their books from years ago you virtually starve small banks.  

How can a community bank borrow cash to make loans when it can’t help but come in last in return on investment in a 0% world? They can’t and thus get far too little money from the big boys now desperate for higher returns.  When Federal fund rate is at 0% no one in the depository system and beyond wants to loan money to the little banks that fund small businesses that drive job creation.  

Even if the little banks tried to attract the money from the big boys by offering a higher return on the loan they would be committing suicide.  Why?  Because everyone would assume they are offering a better return on the loan because they are so desperate for cash that they MUST BE IN FINANCIAL TROUBLE.  Kill them!

Thus, not enough money goes to community banks so small businesses are cash starved and hundreds of thousands of new jobs are never created.

To hell with the close-minded  Keynesians from their perch atop Mount Olympus.

Regards,

Mike

Obama Is and Is Not Carter

By Victor Davis Hanson  

There is a lot of anguish on the left that Barack Obama is starting to resemble Jimmy Carter, as if his whining, ineffective style and lack of intestinal fortitude will doom the liberal agenda in the way that Carter once did as well. That analysis is upside down. Obama remains a formidable, albeit teleprompted, speaker, about the best emissary of the leftist worldview imaginable. He is young and vigorous in a way Bill Clinton was and Jimmy Carter was not. The problem is not Barack Obama the person, but Barack Obama’s hard-core leftist agenda. Bill Clinton evolved into a centrist who eventually reflected usually what 51 percent of the electorate wanted. In contrast, Jimmy Carter was, like Obama, an ideologue, but with an ideology that few Americans embrace. 

Obama’s lackluster polls do not necessarily reflect any sudden lack of charisma or a distracted president chumming it up on the golf links, but the growing awareness of the American people that they, for a variety of reasons in 2008, elected another Carter-like liberal whose economic policies of higher taxes, bigger government, and larger deficits don’t work, and whose ill effects are enhanced, rather than mitigated, by presidential jawboning aimed at the very productive classes who do most of the hiring. He is proving a sort of national catharsis, presenting statist, centrally planned ideas in their most attractive passage, and in the process, as the economy stalls, souring Americans on the substance rather than the style.

So there is one difference, and a very important one at that, between Carter and Obama. The so-called progressive community for over 30 years could blame the Carter implosion on his own inept delivery, wooden personality, and grating preachy style. But in Obama they had a figure right out of central casting — young, charismatic, non-traditional, ‘post-racial,’ glib, and at times eloquent. So the present mess, unlike that of 1977–80, cannot so easily be attributed to packaging rather than content, a fact which has far more profound consequences to the leftist cause.

As I understand most liberal critiques, it goes something like this: “Carter’s ineptness doomed an otherwise noble cause; Clinton’s political mastery proved a success, but at the expense of compromising the cause; Obama at last has Clinton’s flair but is a committed liberal, and therefore will succeed where the two others failed.”  I think we are seeing that such analyses are flawed, and a far better one will prove to be: “Even a Barack Obama cannot advance a fundamentally unsound agenda.”

Buckle up, venture to this site to get your lunch handed to you... http://www.usdebtclock.org/