It has finally been revealed ,by an elitist academic, that D.C. does not embrace the trite saying "'honesty is the best policy." (sEE 1 BELOW.)
===
The American worker, who has been a slave to the Democrat Party, is about to be sold down the river as Obama Seeks to take advantage of the shift in voting power.
Latin illegals are in and American workers and, most particularly, blacks are out. (See 2 below.)
===
Pat Condell does it agan:
and
the equivalent reaction of Democrats after last Tuesday: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
===
pERSONAL OBSERVATION:
wERE THE 2016 ELECTION HELD TODAY AND BASED ON THE MOOD OF THE ELECTORATE AS EXPRESSED SEVERAL tUESDAY'S AGO i SUBMIT jEB bUSH WOULD BE THE MOST DESIRABLE rEPUBLICAN CANDIDATE BASED ON HIS PERSONAL DEMEANOR, CENTRIST NATURE, EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE, SUCCESS AS A GOVERNOR OF A MAJOR STATE , MARRIAGE TO AN hISPANIC, HIS CAMPAIGN STYLE AND CANDOR.
tHE LANDSCAPE CAN RADICALLY CHANGE BY 2016 AND, THOUGH ELECTABLE, REPUBLICANS MAY CHOOSE NOT NOMINATE jeb BECAUSE OF HIS ESTABLISHMENT BACKGROUND AND NAME.
i ALSO BELIEVE bEN cARSON, WOULD MAKE AN EXCELLENT CHOICE AS vICE pRESIDENT FOR BALANCE AND VOTER CURB APPEAL!.
===
The American worker, who has been a slave to the Democrat Party, is about to be sold down the river as Obama Seeks to take advantage of the shift in voting power.
Latin illegals are in and American workers and, most particularly, blacks are out. (See 2 below.)
===
Pat Condell does it agan:
and
the equivalent reaction of Democrats after last Tuesday: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
Justice Ginsberg not a happy camper. Obama wants her out so he can appoint another Justice, something even he dares not do by Executive Order. ShADES OF fdr'S ATTEMPT TO PACK tHE cOURT!(See 3 below.)
===
===
pERSONAL OBSERVATION:
wERE THE 2016 ELECTION HELD TODAY AND BASED ON THE MOOD OF THE ELECTORATE AS EXPRESSED SEVERAL tUESDAY'S AGO i SUBMIT jEB bUSH WOULD BE THE MOST DESIRABLE rEPUBLICAN CANDIDATE BASED ON HIS PERSONAL DEMEANOR, CENTRIST NATURE, EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE, SUCCESS AS A GOVERNOR OF A MAJOR STATE , MARRIAGE TO AN hISPANIC, HIS CAMPAIGN STYLE AND CANDOR.
tHE LANDSCAPE CAN RADICALLY CHANGE BY 2016 AND, THOUGH ELECTABLE, REPUBLICANS MAY CHOOSE NOT NOMINATE jeb BECAUSE OF HIS ESTABLISHMENT BACKGROUND AND NAME.
i ALSO BELIEVE bEN cARSON, WOULD MAKE AN EXCELLENT CHOICE AS vICE pRESIDENT FOR BALANCE AND VOTER CURB APPEAL!.
===
dICK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Jonathan Gruber’s ‘Stupid’ Budget Tricks
His ObamaCare candor shows how Congress routinely cons taxpayers.
As a rule, Americans don’t like to be called “stupid,” as Jonathan Gruber is discovering. Whatever his academic contempt for voters, the ObamaCare architect and Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his candor about the corruption of the federal budget process.
In his now-infamous talk at the University of Pennsylvania last year, Professor Gruber argued that the Affordable Care Act “would not have passed” had Democrats been honest about the income-redistribution policies embedded in its insurance regulations. But the more instructive moment is his admission that “this bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.”
Mr. Gruber means the Congressional Budget Office, the institution responsible for putting “scores” or official price tags on legislation. He’s right that to pass ObamaCare Democrats perpetrated the rawest, most cynical abuse of the CBO since its creation in 1974.
In another clip from Mr. Gruber’s seemingly infinite video library, he discusses how he and Democrats wrote the law to game the CBO’s fiscal conventions and achieve goals that would otherwise be “politically impossible.” In still another, he explains that these ruses are “a sad statement about budget politics in the U.S., but there you have it.”
Yes you do. Such admissions aren’t revelations, since the truth has long been obvious to anyone curious enough to look. We and other critics wrote about ObamaCare’s budget gimmicks during the debate, and Rep. Paul Ryan exposed them at the 2010 “health summit.” President Obama changed the subject.
But rarely are liberal intellectuals as full frontal as Mr. Gruber about the accounting fraud ingrained in ObamaCare. Also notable are his do-what-you-gotta-do apologetics: “I’d rather have this law than not,” he says.
Recall five years ago. The White House wanted to pretend that the open-ended new entitlement would spend less than $1 trillion over 10 years and reduce the deficit too. Congress requires the budget gnomes to score bills as written, no matter how unrealistic the assumption or fake the promise. Democrats with the help of Mr. Gruber carefully designed the bill to exploit this built-in gullibility.
So they used a decade of taxes to fund merely six years of insurance subsidies. They made-believe that Medicare payments to hospitals will some day fall below Medicaid rates. A since-repealed program for long-term care front-loaded taxes but back-loaded spending, meant to gradually go broke by design. Remember the spectacle of Democrats waiting for the white smoke to come up from CBO and deliver the holy scripture verdict?
On the tape, Mr. Gruber also identifies a special liberal manipulation: CBO’s policy reversal to not count the individual mandate to buy insurance as an explicit component of the federal budget. In 1994, then CBO chief Robert Reischauer reasonably determined that if the government forces people to buy a product by law, then those transactions no longer belong to the private economy but to the U.S. balance sheet. The CBO’s face-melting cost estimate helped to kill HillaryCare.
The CBO director responsible for this switcheroo that moved much of ObamaCare’s real spending off the books was Peter Orszag, who went on to become Mr. Obama’s budget director. Mr. Orszag nonetheless assailed CBO during the debate for not giving him enough credit for the law’s phantom “savings.”
Then again, Mr. Gruber told a Holy Cross audience in 2010 that although ObamaCare “is 90% health insurance coverage and 10% about cost control, all you ever hear people talk about is cost control. How it’s going to lower the cost of health care, that’s all they talk about. Why? Because that’s what people want to hear about because a majority of Americans care about health-care costs.”
***
Both political parties for some reason treat the CBO with the same reverence the ancient Greeks reserved for the Delphic oracle, but Mr. Gruber’s honesty is another warning that the budget rules are rigged to expand government and hide the true cost of entitlements. CBO scores aren’t unambiguous facts but are guesses about the future, biased by the Keynesian assumptions and models its political masters in Congress instruct it to use.
Republicans who now run Congress can help taxpayers by appointing a new CBO director, as is their right as the majority. Current head Doug Elmendorf is a respected economist, and he often has a dry wit as he reminds Congressfolk that if they feed him garbage, he must give them garbage back. But if the GOP won’t abolish the institution, then they can find a replacement who is as candid as Mr. Gruber about the flaws and limitations of the CBO status quo. The Tax Foundation’s Steve Entin would be an inspired pick.
Democrats are now pretending they’ve never heard of Mr. Gruber, though they used to appeal to his authority when he still had some. His commentaries are no less valuable because he is now a political liability for Democrats.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Obama Continues to Sell Out American Workers for Political Gain
By Peter Morici
The midterm elections made clear American voters want Washington to better address high unemployment and stagnant wages. Yet, on issues ranging from energy to immigration to trade, President Obama continues to put politics ahead of strengthening American families.
Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., is locked in a tight runoff election with Rep. Bill Cassidy, R-La. To improve their chances, both are trying to move a bill through Congress to finally approve the Keystone Pipeline.
The project would bring billions of barrels of Canadian oil to Gulf ports and refineries and create thousands of high-paying jobs, but the president threatens to veto any legislation in deference to the bogus claims of environmentalists that the pipeline would promote fossil fuel use and exacerbate climate change.
Canadian oil is going to get to global markets one way or another — it's too important to our northern neighbors not to. By denying the safest, most direct route, the oil will get there by rail and other pipeline projects that pose more, not fewer, risks.
Even if environmentalists managed to slow development of western Canadian reserves, production would shift to developing countries — where environmental risks are less well-managed than in Canada — or in the Middle East — where oil money too often ends up in the hands of terrorists.
Even if environmentalists managed to slow development of western Canadian reserves, production would shift to developing countries — where environmental risks are less well-managed than in Canada — or in the Middle East — where oil money too often ends up in the hands of terrorists.
Obama appears intent on blocking new jobs in Louisiana and other Gulf States and on worsening terrorist threats, simply to sustain support for Democrats among radical environmentalists.
Some 11 million illegal immigrants live and work in America. Many have become critical in construction and other industries — but only by driving down wages and displacing native-born Americans with third-world competition.
Centrist GOP leaders in Congress recognize they have little hope of winning back the White House if they ignore the sentiment of Hispanic voters, who frankly want the president and Congress to ignore our immigration laws and end deportations.
Clearly possible is the potential for a bipartisan compromise that finally seals the border, limits the legalization of undocumented workers to the truly worthy cases and establishes a rational and effective deportation policy.
Instead, the president appears intent on granting legal status to millions of illegal workers through an executive order that unconstitutionally circumvents Congress. That would force centrist leaders in the new GOP-led Congress to forcefully oppose the president, and permit his surrogates in the media to paint the GOP as anti-Hispanic.
That might help the prospects of Democrats in 2016 but at the expense of flaunting the rule of law, selling out millions of unemployed Americans and pounding down the incomes of working families.
The president is paying off his Silicon Valley financial supporters with a trade deal with China that eliminates tariffs on many high-technology products. The White House claims it would create 60,000 jobs by opening the Chinese market to about $1 trillion in U.S. exports.
Digital technologies are the family jewels of the American economy, but Obama seems intent on giving those away, along with thousands of good-paying jobs, to keep Silicon Valley campaign dollars flowing into Democratic coffers.
Anything for political advantage. The American worker be damned.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) Justice Ginsburg Furious Over Obama's Pressure to Resign
3) Justice Ginsburg Furious Over Obama's Pressure to Resign
A source close to the Supreme Court tells Newsmax that White House efforts to get Ruth Bader Ginsburg to step down from the Supreme Court backfired while infuriating the liberal justice.
To say that Ginsburg was unhappy about the call to resign would be a gross understatement.
The Los Angeles Times reported that Ginsburg, at 81 the oldest member of the court, was "under strong pressure to retire" and "questioning why some liberals want her to leave."
But the close source told Newsmax that Ginsburg directly blames President Barack Obama rather than "liberals" and her comments were aimed squarely at the White House.
According to the source, the Obama administration saw the handwriting on the wall about the midterm elections, and anticipating a strong Republican showing, tried to get Ginsburg to step down before the balloting — to ensure that a Democratic Senate confirmed her replacement.
Now a Republican-controlled Senate ensures that Obama will not be able to tap another far-left justice in his last two years.
But Ginsburg said in a recent interview with the New Republic: "I asked some people, particularly the academics who said I should have stepped down last year: 'Who do you think the president could nominate and get through the current Senate that you would rather see on the court than me? No one has given me an answer to that question.
"As long as I can do the job, I will stay here," she said defiantly.
And she said in an interview with Elle Magazine: "If I resign any time this year, he could not successfully appoint anyone I would like to see in the court."
Obama's two Supreme Court appointments, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, faced strong opposition from Republicans in the Senate. But Sotomayor was confirmed by a vote of 68 to 31, with nine Republicans backing her, and Kagan was confirmed 63 to 37 with five GOP votes.
Hence Obama's move to push Ginsburg into resigning before the GOP takes control of the Senate — an attempt some observers view as a serious encroachment on the judicial branch.
In fact, the Republican victory could persuade Ginsburg to stay on the job at least until 2017 when Democrats could retake the Senate and remain in the White House, the Times reported.
Even with Ginsburg on the job, the Obama administration has had a rocky relationship with the Supreme Court.
The court historically has sided with the White House in a significant majority of cases it has heard. But the Obama administration has a losing record before the court, and has lost an unusually high number of cases in unanimous 9-0 decisions. Obama saw 20 unanimous defeats in the first 5 1/2 years of his administration, while his predecessor George W. Bush saw just 15 in his eight years in office.
The court recently dealt a potential blow to Obama's signature effort, the Affordable Care Act, when it decided to hear a case challenging provisions of Obamacare.
The bottom line, according to the source, is that the court just does not like the Obama administration and its continual disrespect of co-equal branches of the federal government.
Footnote: The last Supreme Court justice nominated by a Democratic president and confirmed by a Senate Republican majority was Rufus Peckham — in 1895.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
