Mr. Grassley Predicts the Future...

Regarding Obama’s chances of getting re-elected in 2012, Grassley tells Newsmax: “I think that he is headed for defeat based upon three things.

"One, Obamacare. Two, the terrible situation with spending and the budget deficit and the fact that the economy is affected by that and jobs aren’t being created. And third, his attitude about America not being an exceptional nation. Probably for the last reason more so than any other, he ought not to be re-elected."

“We have a great deal of credibility based on the fact that we have been looked upon as a different nation, as a world leader, and he wants to put us as a second-class nation — or let’s put it this way, not first among nations. It’s a threat to peace, that position he’s taken.”

Can Mr. Grassley be serious?  Could it be that the Republican candidates, all rejects from a casting for the featured actors in a Three Stooges look-a-like movie - as acknowledged by Glenn Beck, are better than Obama, in Grassley’s eyes?  Where he chuckling as he made these remarks, I would have known that he was making a joke.  As it is, Mr. Grassley is not joking and that is disturbing, to say the least.

In case Mr. Grassley is watching/listening, consider this:

1. United States is now ranked 21^st out of 27 of the industrialized nations in education.
2. United States is now ranked 42^nd when compared to the nations of the world in life expectancy, behind Cuba!

On your watch:

a.      We financed two wars under your watch during the Bush 43 era.

b.      We never had a balanced budget between 2000 and 2008.

c.       We sold America’s birthrights to the Chinese for pennies on a dollar.

d.      We oversaw the Republican destruction of the middle-class.

e.      We saw the spending of over eight trillion dollars, for which we have no benefits.

f.        We are witnessing the Republican response to creating jobs - none!

g.   And lastly, sent the country into an economical tailspin, losing at its height – seven hundred jobs per month beginning in August of 2008.

You have the audacity to belittle this President!  You and your Republican cohorts fought his every effort to resurrect the job market.  You refused to allow the closing of Gitmo by defunding the project, even though there are three maximum security prisons in the United States begging for inmates – prisons that currently house other terrorist convicted in our civil courts.

You won’t, and for obvious reasons, give this President credit from turning the job loses around in six months, instead you ridicule and misrepresent his every remark and action as a way of doing what Sir, covering the shortcomings of One George W. Bush?  Your comments are well received by a constituency that you have purposely denied a formal education, and continue address using terms and examples that incite the worst from them.

WATCH:

Read more on Newsmax.com: Grassley: Obama Wants America to Be 'Second-Class Nation' 

In a democracy, silence is not golden; it is condonance in the face of injustices; it is fear, where the thought of reprisal fosters control – Rodney A. Davis

Obama Sucks!

I am sick and tired of clueless numbskulls walking around here shouting from the top of their lungs - Obama Sucks! Obviously, you loved the crap that Bush 43 shoved down your throw and you are looking for more! More job loses; larger deficit spending; more tax cuts for the rich; more nonsensical obstructionism on the part of the GOP; just more of anything that would lead to the eventual destruction of the United States of America.

Had America been paying attention from the beginning, we would not have entered Iraq. Bush's Father asked him... "what in hell's tarnation are you doing; do you have an exit strategy". He had no comment for his Father and his book should tell all - read it and find out just how much you were duped by the infamous duo of Bush/Cheney.

I, like many other veterans of Viet Nam who have a knowledge of nuclear weaponry, knew that Saddam had no WMDS. There never were any, but Bush 43 could do no wrong. There are many distinctions that Bush 43 will have as asterisks by his name... first President to enter two war fronts at the same time; first President to attack a foreign country without provocation; first President to 'give' tax cuts to the top one percent of the people at the expense of the working class and not pay for it; first President to spend over ten trillion dollars - more than any other President. I could go on, but you get the picture.

What I don't understand is that the legacy of Bush 43 is there for all to see - he ruined this country! Yet, you have those who would shout Obama sucks - why, because he stopped the job lost of seven hundred thousand per month, because he passed a comprehensive health care plan for all of America, or is it because he has done so much in two years with so little to work with because his predecessor gave it all away in dumbshit spending?

Bush 43 was handed a silver spoon by the Clinton Administration and he promptly used it to dig a hole for this country. You now have a decent President trying to bring America back and all I can heard is Obama sucks - well, if Obama sucks, then Bush 43 blew it!

In a democracy, silence is not golden; it is condonance in the face of injustices; it is fear, where the thought of reprisal fosters control – Rodney A. Davis

Give Big Business a Tax Break – Not

It seems that the only thing that will save the economy is a tax cut… so says the majority of conservatives. Conservatives want to give Big Businesses tax cuts; they want to give tax cuts to small businesses; and they want to give tax cuts to taxpayers.

Here is the real deal… Debt is bad for the economy and tax cuts are good. We know this because a lot of very serious people in ties keep saying it on the teevee machine. Never mind that these two positions are somewhat contradictory -- tax cuts make it difficult to reduce debt -- that's just the way things are. If we give tax cuts to the "job creators," we're told they'll go all crazy with the job creating and everything will be perfect forever.

My mathematics teacher long ago told me that any problem can be solved using basic mathematics and this ‘tax cut’ thing is a prime example. President George W. Bush 43's tax cut is a prime example of what tax cuts can do to an economy. Remember that the Bush tax cut was across the board and designed to eventually be a permanent fixture; meaning that everyone got the same percentage tax cut and would get it forever. A person making two hundred thousand dollars naturally would receive a larger tax cut than a person making fifty thousand dollars.

The Middle-Class of the United States has traditional paid the majority of the taxes received by the IRS (Internal Revenue Service). The average person that received Bush’s tax cuts got six hundred dollars. Consider that the average person during the Bush Administration was making fifty thousand dollars and now you know why tax cuts are of no value to the majority of taxpayers – the Upper-Class and Big Business were greatly rewarded by the Bush Administration. What really happened is that we lost the main group that pays taxes, the Middle-Class, and now the only people receiving tax cuts are the rich and Big Business. That the Middle-Class is almost non-existent is evident.

The Oil Industry under that Bush administration got tax breakers that led to astronomical profits for the giants within the Oil Industry. The records show that the Oil Industry benefited greatly from Republican influence. Big Business was predicted to ‘flame-on’ and the United States’ economy is going to chug along at an easy clip… not.

Tax cuts are never the end-all answer to the problems within the American economy – they never have and never will. The IRS sees any tax cut as a cut in pay. The IRS sees a tax cut as a less money to pay the country’s bills. Keeping that in mind, there is never an instance where a prolonged tax cut will benefit the country as a whole. Tax cuts increase the national debt, put money in the coffers of those who may or may not invest that tax cut and in general are of no lasting value. On the other hand, targeted tax cuts of a short duration do make a difference.

The Bush Administration has stood in favor of tax cuts through thick and thin. In the midst of a booming economy and large projected budget surpluses, President Bush’s top economic policy initiative — both as a candidate in 2000 and upon taking office — was to cut taxes. When the economy slowed, the Bush Administration’s response also was dominated by tax cuts. Now, in the face of yawning deficits and its own pledge to reduce them, the Administration has again put forward large, permanent tax cuts as part of its most recent budget.

In summary, balanced tax cuts that target a particular element of the economy for a short duration appears to be the best route to take when attempting to stimulate the economy without creating a nightmare for the entities that have to pay the bills on the Federal, State, and Municipal levels.

In a democracy, silence is not golden; it is condonance in the face of injustices; it is fear, where the thought of reprisal fosters control – Rodney A. Davis