Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Obama's Socialist Agenda’ Category

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Cancun, Mexico?

Answer: Steven Crowder finds more than just a bunch of climate change wing-nuts.

Steven Crowder is back!

Enjoy the global warming alarmists’ hypocrisy… And the hippie flippin’ the bird to the video camera.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the Democrat’s 2,000 page omnibus spending bill?

Answer: Besides the $1.1 TRILLION price tag, the bill is laced with approximately $8.3 BILLION worth of earmarks.

6,714 earmarks to be exact! The Heritage Foundation reports:

The Senate omnibus bill’s offenses go well beyond its overall cost and size. It would spend more than $1 billion to begin implementing the unpopular and unaffordable Obamacare law, which a federal court has ruled unconstitutional. The bill also includes a number of anti-energy policies that make it unnecessarily difficult to tap into America’s domestic energy supply, wastes $1.5 billion in taxpayer dollars on climate change initiatives, and defunds activities for vital nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain.

And, in what has become a grand holiday tradition, the Senate stuffed the bill with more than 6,000 earmarks. [...] While fully funding Obamacare and earmarks, the Senate once again failed to find to room to adequately fund defense. This risks leaving our troops ill prepared to defend the nation at home and abroad.

There is no wonder why Congress’ job approval rating is at an all-time low this week. After getting absolutely dominated in the midterm elections last month, the Democrats have decided to blatantly ignore the American people and continue with their high spending, radical agenda.

Click here to access Sen. Coburn’s (R-OK) database of all the earmarks included in the omnibus spending bill.

Ladies and gentlemen, let’s hope that this enormous omnibus spending bill fails. If the bill ends up being passed, it will prevent the next Congress from making crucial spending cuts until fiscal year 2012. America cannot afford this and I mean that in more ways than one.

*UPDATE* – December 17, 2010 – 1:04 PM

Hate him or love him, one has to admire Senator John McCain’s (R-AZ) stance against earmarks. Check out this latest video of Sen. McCain attacking the “pork” in Washington D.C.:

Good thing the Republicans claimed victory last night! Fortunately, in the words of James C. Capretta, the Democrats were unable to jam a $1 trillion–plus, 2,000-page, earmark-laden monstrosity through Congress!

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked Attorney General Eric Holder and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s op-ed in today’s Washington Post?

Answer: More proof that liberals have the hardest time understanding why the government can mandate one type of insurance and not another.

Here is their op-ed where they continue to bring up the same ol’ debunked argument:

Everyone wants health care to be affordable and available when they need it. But we have to stop imposing extra costs on people who carry insurance, and that means everyone who can afford coverage needs to carry minimum health coverage starting in 2014.

If we want to prevent insurers from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, it’s essential that everyone have coverage. Imagine what would happen if everyone waited to buy car insurance until after they got in an accident. Premiums would skyrocket, coverage would be unaffordable, and responsible drivers would be priced out of the market.

The same is true for health insurance. Without an individual responsibility provision, controlling costs and ending discrimination against people with preexisting conditions doesn’t work.

Apparently the mind of liberal doesn’t allow for the common sense comparison between auto-insurance and Obamacare to seep in. If the Democrats are capable of understanding and passing a 2,000+ page piece legislation (which is debatable), then why can’t they understand the distinct differences between auto-insurance and Obamacare?

First of all, auto-insurance places requirements on the voluntary act of driving and not on life itself. Second, there is a difference between the powers of the federal and state governments – shocker, right? Thirdly, auto-insurance requirements are limited to individuals that choose to drive on public roads (private property is off limits). Lastly, auto-insurance only covers injuries to others, not yourself. If you still don’t see the differences between auto-insurance and Obamacare, Ed Morrissey – from Hot Air – put together a good article that explains it in further detail:

Drivers carry required insurance to cover damage done to others, not themselves, for one thing.  It’s not applicable at all.  Furthermore, states impose the insurance requirement, not the federal government, because states license drivers and vehicles.  Driving is, after all, a voluntary activity conducted on public property (roads); there is no requirement for licensing or insurance for those who drive only on their private property.  People who don’t drive on public roads aren’t required to buy a license or the insurance.

There are other problems with this analogy as well.  Those who do have auto insurance only file claims when significant damage occurs.  Auto insurance doesn’t pay for routine maintenance, like oil changes, lube jobs, and tire rotation.  That’s why auto insurance is relatively affordable.

Also, auto insurance is priced to risk.  If a driver lives in a high-crime area, then the premiums will rise to cover the risks associated with theft.  If they drive badly (get moving violations and accidents), premiums will go up, or in some cases, the insurer will drop the driver.  Policies are priced for risk according to age as well; the youngest and oldest drivers pay more due to their propensity for causing losses.   Those who drive well and present a lower risk get rewarded with lower premiums.  Right now, the federal government is preventing insurers in some instances from risk-pricing health insurance to impose government-approved fairness.  That means we all pay more, removing the incentive to lower risk.

Debunked once again.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (D.R.E.A.M.) Act?

Answers: This devious piece of legislation was passed in the United States House of Representatives last night.

Do not be fooled by the name of this bill. The real goal of the DREAM Act is to provide amnesty for those who chose to enter our country illegally and make it even harder to enforce our immigration laws.

The Democrats are trying desperately to portray this disastrous piece of legislation as something that will benefit only children. Unfortunately, that is not true at all:

It will basically extend an amnesty to an estimated 2.1 million illegal aliens who are as old as 35 or 30, depending on which version of DREAM you are looking at.  But because aliens granted citizenship under the DREAM Act could then sponsor their spouses, children, siblings, and parents, chain migration could result in triple that number of illegal aliens ultimately receiving amnesty and becoming citizens.

What is even more of a joke is the requirements of college and the Armed Forces in-order to secure amnesty for themselves (and potentially their entire family):

You only have to show that you completed two years of college to be entitled to amnesty – there is no requirement that you actually obtain a degree.

[...]

But even those requirements to complete two years of college education or uniformed service can be waived by the Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, if the alien can demonstrate “compelling circumstances” and the alien’s removal would cause a hardship to the alien, his spouse, parents or children.  This is such a loose, wide-open standard that it is no standard at all.  Aliens are always going to claim it is a hardship for them and their families if they are removed from the United States, even if the hardship is of their own making when they showed such a disregard for our laws by illegally entering the country, illegally working, and, in many cases, obtaining fraudulent identification and other authorization documents.

Unfortunately, there are a lot more negative and potential unintended consequences buried inside this hideous piece of legislation. Overall, it is designed to encourage illegal activity and reward lawbreakers, while ignoring enforcement and border security.

Speaking on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives last night, Democrats lined up to rattle off their key (but false) talking point: The DREAM Act is crucial, because it will help those who complete college or military service. Unfortunately, a majority of them failed to disclose the true details of this Nightmare Act and it passed… 216-198.

Democrats are not the only ones to blame. Here are the eight Republicans who crossed the aisle to vote yes for amnesty:

  • Joe Cao (defeated in the general election)
  • Mike Castle (defeated in the primary)
  • Lincoln Diaz-Balart (retiring)
  • Mario Diaz-Balart
  • Charles Djou (defeated in the general election)
  • Vern Ehlers (retiring)
  • Bob Inglis (defeated in the primary)
  • Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

Ladies and gentlemen… That’s what the lame-duck session of congress will do.

Although last night’s final vote count was extremely disappointing, there is still light on the horizon: Passage in the U.S. Senate is unlikely.

For the sake of our country, let’s hope they are right and we are able to stop this Nightmare Act.

*UPDATE* – December 18, 2010 – 1:15 PM.

The DREAM Act cloture vote fails, 55-41! It will not be brought to the Senate floor to be voted on. VICTORY!

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked Lee Doren from How the World Works?

Answer: Bar stool economics!

Unfortunately, this little demonstration and common sense thinking is located at the center of the Democrats’ demonization tactic of class warfare. While the Democrats continue to go down that path, the bigger question is: Why do the politicians (mostly the Democrats) in Washington D.C. feel they are entitled to our hard earned money? That money could be invested in new projects and hire more employees.

The Democratic majority knew the expiration of the Bush tax cuts was lingering and now it is the moment of truth… Do they have the courage to man up and tackle this critical issue facing our country’s weakening economy? America is faced with an unemployment rate of 9.8 percent and President Obama is 7.3 million jobs short of where he promised the economy would be by December 2010. It is time for the Democrats to drink a Four Loko, wake up, and come to terms with the fact that they were absolutely shellacked during November’s election and the liberal agenda was rejected.

It is time to finally extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked one of the “evil” companies that falls within the top tax brackets that President Obama and the Democrats are trying desperately to raise taxes on?

Answer: A company who is not overwhelmed with wealthy executives smoking cigars, sipping on cocktails, feet resting on their desks, and laughing at the rest of middle-class America.

As you can tell, I was definitely exaggerating the descriptions of the employees who work hard at Leland (the company in the video). However, President Obama and his loyal Democrats are trying desperately to portray that image of the so-called “wealthy” Americans who make more than $250,000 a year. Unfortunately, the Democrats do not understand (or chose not to understand) that a majority of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year and don’t earn enough for it to make financial sense to file their taxes in the corporate bracket. With that said, this is where Steven Crowder’s latest video comes in to help make sense of the issue.

After watching the video, you will notice that if a company ends up entering the top tax brackets with an income of more than $250,000 a year they still have to pay their employees from those earnings before taking home their own cut. Therefore, if the federal government decides not to extend the Bush tax cuts for ALL  tax brackets, it is likely that employers and entrepreneurs would be hit extremely hard.

Overall, Steven Crowder’s latest video was informative and entertaining. I sense the attacks from the Left will include the rhetoric such as “This is only one company! Therefore, it proves absolutely nothing.” Yeah, if you are an individual thinking that, I recommend you pull your head out of that dark place where the sun does not shine because the GOP tidal wave is coming in less than two weeks! …Hold on tight!

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the accomplishments of President Obama’s first 19 months in office?

Answer: He’s added more to the national debt than all presidents from George Washington to Ronald Reagan COMBINED.

Now that my friends is “Hope-n-change”. CNS News reports:

In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion, which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan.

The U.S. Treasury Department divides the federal debt into two categories. One is “debt held by the public,” which includes U.S. government securities owned by individuals, corporations, state or local governments, foreign governments and other entities outside the federal government itself. The other is “intragovernmental” debt, which includes I.O.U.s the federal government gives to itself when, for example, the Treasury borrows money out of the Social Security “trust fund” to pay for expenses other than Social Security.

At the end of fiscal year 1989, which ended eight months after President Reagan left office, the total federal debt held by the public was $2.1907 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That means all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan had accumulated only that much publicly held debt on behalf of American taxpayers. That is $335.3  billion less than the $2.5260 trillion that was added to the federal debt held by the public just between Jan. 20, 2009, when President Obama was inaugurated, and Aug. 20, 2010, the 19-month anniversary of Obama’s inauguration.

Don’t worry America… We got a lot for all that money being tossed into our economy, like Obama’s job deficit of 7.5 million!

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the Democrats’ advertising strategy for the upcoming mid-term election?

Answer: Their self-proclaimed “historic” vote for Obama-Care is nowhere to be found.

Honestly Democrats, what’s wrong with millions of Americans losing their current health insurance? Or the individual mandate that will erode our liberty and increase taxes? Or the fact that it’s not paid for? Or better yet, creating a complex one-size-fits-all health-care system that will eventually centralize America’s health-care decisions in Washington? What could possibly go wrong?

Perhaps that’s why Democrats are avoiding the subject all together – besides the few Democrats who just-so-happen to be running against the new health-care law. Politico reports:

At least five of the 34 House Democrats who voted against their party’s health care reform bill are highlighting their “no” votes in ads back home. By contrast, party officials in Washington can’t identify a single House member who’s running an ad boasting of a “yes” vote — despite the fact that 219 House Democrats voted in favor of final passage in March.

One Democratic strategist said it would be “political malfeasance” to run such an ad now.

Democrats have taken that advice to heart; it appears that no Democratic incumbent — in the House or in the Senate — has run a pro-reform TV ad since April, when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) ran one.

I have one word for Democrats: Meow.

Here’s a suggestion, how about you liberal cowards “man-up” and back your record if Obama-Care is such a great thing for the United States? (Democrats’ reaction: click here) Yeah, that’s what I thought.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked President Obama’s health-care reform bill (aka. Obama-Care)?

Answer: It might end student health-care insurance at universities and colleges!

Once again, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was correct when she told America that we had to pass this gigantic health-care reform bill in order to find out what’s in it.

McClatchy reports:

Colleges and universities say that some rules in the new health law could keep them from offering low-cost, limited-benefit student insurance policies, and they’re seeking federal authority to continue offering them.

Their request drew immediate fire from critics, however, who say that student health plans should be held to the same standards that other insurance is.

Among other things, the colleges want clarification that they won’t have to offer the policies to non-students.

Without a number of changes, it may be impossible to continue to offer student health plans, says a letter that the American Council on Education sent Aug. 12 to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, signed by 12 other trade associations that represent colleges.

Additionally, the colleges say that some provisions of the law don’t apply to their policies, including those that require insurers to spend at least 80 percent of their revenue on medical care and that bar them from setting annual coverage caps.

Ed Morrissey – from Hot Air – sums this up nice for us:

In ObamaCare, policies can no longer be tailored to clientele, nor can consumers make choices that best fit their lives.  All policies must look mainly alike, thanks to the top-down command “reforms” in ObamaCare, which mandate coverages regardless of risk or need.  Needless to say, a comprehensive policy designed to cover Americans in their 50s would be vastly unnecessary for almost everyone who attends college in their youth, and vastly more expensive than they can afford.

Thus, universities and colleges have a conundrum.  They can either offer policies that are so expensive that only a few can afford to buy them, which creates all sorts of problems in managing a risk pool, or they can simply get out of the health-insurance business altogether.

Hmm, I wonder which decision they would pick if they were forced to choose? Personally, I think it’s a no brainer. Unfortunately, the Obama-Zombie (students) demographic didn’t bother to indulge themselves in some old-fashion common sense before they headed to the polls back in November of 2008.

My generation can be extremely frustrating at times, because we will be paying for their ignorance for years to come.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the latest political advertisement from the National Republican Senatorial Committee?

Answer: Perhaps the Republican Party isn’t as “extreme” as the mainstream media portrays them to be.

Instead, it’s the out of control “Spendocrats” who are extreme:

  • 57% think the Democrat agenda is “extreme”.
  • 60% favor repeal of Obama-Care.
  • 56% disapprove of Obama’s job performance.
  • 61% favor immigration laws like Arizona just passed.
  • 68% oppose the Ground Zero mosque.
  • 65% are angry at federal government policies.
  • 65% say America is on the wrong track.

When one takes a glance at the numbers above, they have to just sit back and think: “Ouch!” I give major props to the National Republican Senatorial Committee for putting together this advertisement. A lot of conservatives and Republicans out there (including me) feel like it’s about time the GOP put something together that captured the current attitude of America. In the end, hopefully this ad will become a viral success story for the NRSC and help stir up some Republican support amongst the independent/moderate-Democrat demographic. As Jim Geraghty – from The National Review – points out, “Their closing sequence, showcasing that the so-called extreme candidates are either leading or in dead heats, feels like a professional athlete responding to a trash-talker by pointing to the scoreboard.” … So true and brilliant.

With President Obama taking a break from his golf game and retreating to the summer vacation island of Martha’s Vineyard today, this advertisement would be absolutely perfect if it were broardcasted on national television. Oh, just imagine the possibilities…

Question: Could we expect a similar ad by the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) in the near future or do we not want to ruin a good thing? :lol:

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27 other followers