Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Cruz, Haley, Jindal, Rubio: Flight 2016 Cleared for Takeoff!

American Thinker ^ | 03/13/2013 | Ken Blackwell and Bob Morrison


Let's close down the silly season on presidential eligibility early. Our colleague, Ken Klukowski, is a constitutional lawyer who argues here that newly-sworn-in Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) is likely eligible to run for president in 2016. The only question that could arise is the fact the fiery young conservative leader was born in Calgary, Alberta, on Dec. 22, 1970. Let's see: 1970 makes him thirty-five in 2005. He's in!
Is the Canadian birthplace a hurdle? Not really. Since at least 1793, such children of American citizens born abroad have been recognized to be American citizens.
Ted's mother, the former Eleanor Darragh, was an American citizen from Delaware. To argue that his actual place of birth to an American citizen disqualifies Ted Cruz is to argue that millions of undoubted Americans are disqualified. What about military "brats" born in civilian hospitals to parents stationed in West Germany? Or sons and daughters of American business people temporarily working abroad? Or children of U.S. citizens who are missionaries called to foreign lands?
Can conservatives seriously believe that any of these otherwise qualified American citizens should be barred from running for president? We thought as conservatives we are opposed to assisted suicide. But reading the Constitution in such a strained and absurd way would render us politically dead.
Some people, unfortunately, are maintaining that anyone whose parents were not yet fully naturalized U.S. citizens are ineligible. That's because, they say, only the children of U.S. citizens can be "natural-born citizens of the United States" under the Constitution's requirements for being elected president (Art. II, Sec. 1). They say that because of this iron-clad condition, Florida's Sen. Marco Rubio, and possibly even South Carolina 's Gov. Nikki Haley and Louisiana 's Gov. Bobby Jindal may all be ineligible to serve as president.


(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Barack Obama: I'm Not Going To Chase A Balanced Budget, Just For The Sake Of It!

Business Insider ^ | 03/13/2013 | Joe Weisenthal

Barack Obama did an interview with George Stephanopolous on the debt and and budget talks that are happening now. The transcript is here.
There are probably two big headlines to come out of it. One is that the two sides are too far apart for a grand bargain.
The other is that Obama says there's no immediate debt crisis.
The latter is the most controversial because people will say Obama is in denial, but it's objectively true. Borrowing costs are very low, and for the next several years, deficits are likely to be at what people call "sustainable" levels (levels that aren't bigger than nominal GDP growth).
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...

Obama: Sasha & Malia Deserve Massive Debt Burden!

http://scrappleface.com ^ | March 13th, 2013 | Scott Ott

President Obama on Tuesday told ABC’s George Stephanopolous that Americans should not feel sorry that their children will be stuck with more than $16 trillion in debt, noting that: “I have two teenage girls. I know how it is. They can get a little mouthy and disrespectful sometimes.”
“Sasha and Malia are getting to that age where they think they know everything,” Mr. Obama said. “So Michelle and I have made a decision as parents to, you know, if they’re so smart — let them figure out how to pay down the national debt.”
The Obamas have experimented with a variety of discipline methods from ‘time out’, to grounding, to taking away electronic devices for a few hours, but the president said, “Nothing we’ve tried has the lasting effects of a lifetime of crushing tax rates, crumbling infrastructure and bankrupt entitlement programs. We call it ‘tough love’.”
The president said he’s tired of Republicans talking like the next generation is “a bunch of little angels who never disobey, and who need to be protected from the consequences of their misbehavior.”
“If the kids can’t obey their parents,” Obama said, “maybe they can do without the America dream for a generation or two. That’ll teach them.”
The president added that when Sasha and Malia complain about this form of discipline, he and the First Lady, say, ‘If you think we’re harsh, wait until you’re living under Chinese communist rules’.”

The GOP congressman who destroyed Obama’s sequester scare story!

Washington Examiner ^ | 3/12/13 | Byron York

The Obama administration has employed a variety of tactics to frighten the public about the possible consequences of sequestration. Air-traffic control towers will be shuttered. Children will be thrown off Head Start. The nation’s guard against terrorism will be lowered.
Republicans, and in some cases the press, have poked some pretty big holes in some of the administration’s most extravagant claims. But no one has done a better job than a little-known GOP congressman, Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, who took on officials from the Centers for Disease Control at a House hearing last week.
The occasion was a meeting of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies. In questions directed toward Tom Frieden, who is director of the Centers for Disease Control, Harris brought up a White House estimate of the number of children in Maryland who would go without vaccinations if sequestration went into effect. The document said clearly: “2,050 fewer children will get vaccines for diseases like measles and whooping cough.”
It was a serious charge, one that could result in suffering and death; the cuts would apparently devastate something known as the 317 vaccination program. From the CDC website:
Section 317 of the Public Health Service Act authorizes the federal purchase of vaccines to vaccinate children, adolescents, and adults. Over its 50 year history, Section 317-purchased vaccine has been directed towards meeting the needs of priority populations; most recently this has included underinsured children not eligible for [the separate Vaccines for Children program], and uninsured adults.
But committee staff had looked into President Obama’s plans for the 317 program long before the sequester ever took effect. And what they discovered was that the president, in his 2013 budget, had proposed to cut $58 million from the program. The administration claimed that the money could be saved through greater efficiencies and would not involve any reductions in vaccinations. (The proposed cuts never took place.) What stunned Rep. Harris and others was that after claiming in the 2013 budget last year that $58 million could be cut without harming vaccinations, the CDC this year claimed that sequestration cuts to the same program, estimated at $30 million, would have devastating effects. So Harris — who is also a medical doctor — brought the subject up in questioning CDC director Frieden:
HARRIS: Dr. Frieden, I have a great deal of concern about a document that my office got from the White House that talked about the cuts that were going to occur due to Republicans and affecting children. And I’m going to read their quote about vaccines for children. It says, in Maryland, about 2,050 fewer children will receive vaccines due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $140,000. Did the CDC assist the White House in preparing that estimate?
FRIEDEN: I would have to get back to you on that.
HARRIS: You as the director don’t know if you assisted the White House in preparing an estimate that was distributed to every member of Congress?
FRIEDEN: On that specific number, I would have to — to give you…
HARRIS: OK, let’s — let’s forget the number. Let’s forget the idea of how vaccines for children are going to be affected by the sequester. Is this the vaccine for children program?
FRIEDEN: No, it is not, sir.
HARRIS: Which program is it? Is it 317?
FRIEDEN: Yes, it is, sir.
HARRIS: And what did the president’s budget do to 317, the president’s prospective budget for 2013?
FRIEDEN: The precise numbers I would have to get back to you.
HARRIS: Does $58 million cut sound familiar?
FRIEDEN: Yes.
HARRIS: And what was the sequester cut?
FRIEDEN: Again, the precise numbers…
HARRIS: Does $30 million sound familiar?
FRIEDEN: I would…
HARRIS: You think that’s around ballpark, isn’t it? So actually, the president cut the program twice as much in his budget. Can I assume that the president’s proposed cut would have reduced funding to 4,100 children in Maryland?
FRIEDEN: As per the justification that was published with that, we’ve looked at ways that we can run the program more efficiently by helping state and local health departments recoup dollars, for example, for insured patients.
HARRIS: And you can’t do that under a sequester, but you can do it under the president’s budget? Is that my understanding of your testimony today?
FRIEDEN: I would have to get back to you on that.
HARRIS: So let me get it — let me get it straight. Under the president’s cut of $58 million to the 317 program, you think you could get around that to avoid cutting vaccines to children, but under a sequester, that the president blames on Republicans, you don’t know if you can do that?
FRIEDEN: We’re going to do everything we can to limit any damage that occurs because of the across-the-board cut, but it reduces our flexibility significantly.
HARRIS: Is it your testimony that under the president’s proposed cut of $58 million in his budget to the 317 program you could have avoided cuts to vaccines to children in Maryland?
FRIEDEN: We believe that we could have maintained vaccination levels, yes.
HARRIS: Very interesting. I yield back the balance of my time for now.
Harris later learned that the claimed $30 million sequester cut was a high estimate; the actual number for sequestration cuts at CDC will be about $18 million, which should make the cuts even easier to work around. (You can watch video of the Harris-Frieden exchange here.)
“I just found it remarkable that under the president’s cuts they could vaccinate everyone, but under the cuts blamed on Republicans they couldn’t,” Harris said in an interview Tuesday. “When they want to do with less, they can find a way. But when they don’t want to find a way to do with less, they claim they can’t do things in a budget-restricted environment.”
Harris has sent the CDC a list of follow-up questions. But he believes the Centers never really intended to deny children vaccinations — only to try to scare Congress into ending sequestration. “They’ve been caught with their hand in the cookie jar,” Harris said. “I suspect that they would have vaccinated everybody normally. I think there is going to be no decrease in childhood vaccinations from the sequester.”
In the end, though, the vaccination episode is one of the most revealing of the whole sequestration fight. Is this how the Obama administration has operated from agency to agency, across the whole government? “There is a part of me that wishes this weren’t just the tip of the iceberg, but I think it is,” said Harris. “I think this is just one case where they got caught embellishing the effects of sequestration.”

Wake Up America! Detroit is your Future...FORWARD!

Michelle Obama's Mirror ^ | 3-13-2013 | MOTUS

Isn’t it just like that young whippersnapper, Paul Ryan, to go ahead and produce his own budget?

He’s just grandstanding, you know. To draw attention to the fact that laws are only for little people: Case # 3476:

Under the law, President Obama must submit a budget by the first Monday in February, but he has met the deadline only once.(snip)

Hey! Know who else has run a huge deficit for years without having an operating budget?

Detroit! That’s who.

detroit enter at your own risk

They’re bankrupt now, of course; after years of ignoring troubling little facts like an unreported $7.2 billion in retiree health costs. The Governor is now in the process of appointing an Emergency Manager to try to keep it afloat.

Oh, and BTW, they just convicted the city’s ex-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick on 24 felony counts, including racketeering, extortion and bribery; there were no charges brought for not passing a budget though.

kwame cuffs

Kwame was known for living large – hip-hop style large – while the city was going down the tubes.

Kwame-Kilpatrick-guilty-of-racketeeringKwame in his hip-hop days, complete with 4 carat diamond stud

bad ass detroit

Butt I digress. What does this have to do with Big Guy’s budget problem?


Oh hey! Did I tell you yet? We’re going to Martha’s Vineyard again this year! We’re shopping for more suitable digs for our 2 week sleep-away this summer; you know, now that we have more flexibility(snip)

So far, this is our leading contender:

rosbeck_house marthas vineyard

Oh, and one last item from the team on the ground in Detroit: According to John Boyle, (snip)

“Detroit is a microcosm of what’s going on in America, except America can still print money and borrow.”

Maybe it would be better to ask a non-financial expert, like Jay Leno, to explain how all this budget stuff works:

jay-leno

“When it comes to this whole stupid 'sequestration' thing, Mayor Bloomberg told people not to panic. He said we're not going to run out of money. You know, I'm no financial expert, but when you're $16.5 trillion in debt, haven't you already run out of money?" (The Tonight Show with Jay Leno)

...Read the Rest Here>>>

A man

Learn a thing or two!

Up a tree

My Friend?

Obama the Magnificent makes the debt crisis vanish!

Flopping Aces ^ | 03-13-13 | DrJohn

ObamaMagician
In an interview with George Stephanopoulos, Barack Obama claimed that there was no "immediate" debt crisis:

Well– I understand. Which is why, at some point, I think I take myself out of this. Right now, what I’m trying to do is create an atmosphere where Democrats and Republicans can go ahead, get together, and try to get something done. And, y– you know– I think what’s important to recognize is that– we’ve already cut– $2.5– $2.7 trillion out of the deficit. If the sequester stays in, you’ve got over $3.5 trillion of deficit reduction already. And, so, we don’t have an immediate crisis in terms of debt. In fact, for the next ten years, it’s gonna be in a sustainable place. The question is, can we do it smarter, can we do it better? And– you know, what I’m saying to them is I am prepared to do some tough stuff. Neither side’s gonna get 100%. That’s what the American people are lookin’ for. That’s what’s gonna be good for jobs. That’s what’s gonna be good for growth.
Now that Obama is President, the debt will be in a "sustainable place"?
And don't you know that some of us bitter clingers have a crisis mentality:

Well, the– you know, those are still tough. But the conversations are still takin’ place. And– and part of what– I’m– I’m tryin’ to encourage Congress to think about is yes, we’ve got some big disagreements on the budget. But we’ve made some big cuts. There’s not– in any way– an immediate crisis with respect to– our finances. The economy is growing. And, you know, there may be disagreements that we can’t bridge right now– when it comes to financial situation. I’m hopeful that we can. But let’s not have this crisis mentality stall all the other progress that needs to be made to help– Americans find jobs, help Americans grow the economy.
But golly the debt sure was an issue in 2007:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZCzUecCT3M
In fact, Bush adding $4 trillion in debt was downright "unpatriotic"
]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kuTG19Cu_Q
But now adding $6 trillion to the debt is magically "sustainable." Doesn't it seem that $9 trillion is more sustainable than $16 trillion? Or $20 trillion?
Whahappened?
expired
Then again let us not forget that once upon a time Obamacare was not a tax
(excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...

Despite Sequester, Feds Spend Over $1.5 Million to Study Lesbian Obesity!

Examiner.com ^ | March 12, 2013 | Joe Newby

Fat Woman Weighs In
Despite sequester, feds spend over $1.5 million to study lesbian obesity
Over the last two years, the National Institutes of Health have awarded Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston over $1.5 million to learn why nearly three-quarters of lesbians are overweight, Todd Starnes reported Tuesday.
According to the NIH, gay males do not suffer from obesity as much as lesbians, and the government wants to know why, calling the disparity an issue of “high public-health significance."
"It is now well-established that women of minority sexual orientation are disproportionately affected by the obesity epidemic, with nearly three-quarters of adult lesbians overweight or obese, compared to half of heterosexual women,” the grant says. "In stark contrast, among men, heterosexual males have nearly double the risk of obesity compared to gay males."
According to the grant, researchers "will use longitudinal, repeated measures survey data and also biological data from three youth cohorts" that will ultimately include some 47,000 young people.
But Starnes reported that "future grant payments could be impacted by sequestration."
"It is not possible to say how this or any other NIH grant will be affected in the long term beyond the 90 percent funding levels already in place,” said NIH spokesman Robert Bock.
CNS News reported Monday that the hospital received two grants administered by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development for the study.
The first grant, given in 2011, was for $778,622 and the second, given in 2012, was for $741,378.
"The project has the potential to be a five-year study," CNS News said.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...

money Pictures, Images and Photos Your tax dollars at work ...

Obama’s approval drops as Americans take a dimmer view of his economic policies!

Washington Post ^ | March 13, 2013 | Jon Cohen and Karen Tumulty

Two months ago, independents tilted clearly in his direction, with 54 percent approving and 41 percent disapproving. Now, half of independents express a negative opinion of the president’s performance; just 44 percent approve.
The president has also seen an erosion in confidence among groups that he has counted as core supporters. Compared with a Post-ABC poll in December, the share of liberals who place their faith in Obama over Republicans when it comes to dealing with the economy is 14 points lower; there has been a 12-point slide among women.
At 50 percent, Obama’s overall standing in the poll is lower than that of most other modern second-term presidents at this point in their terms. Of the seven second-term presidents who have been in office since Harry S. Truman, only George W. Bush had a positive rating as low as 50 percent at this stage.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...

Give Me!

Posted Image

The Giant Slayer

Posted Image

The Fight

Posted Image

That's Entertainment?

Posted Image

"Let Them Eat Cake"

Posted Image

Organizing

Posted Image

Lying in 50 states

Posted Image