Richard Barnes

A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. – Thomas Jefferson


Entries in Democrats (110)


Liberals Do As I Say Not As I Do

Sometimes it is just too much fun arguing with Liberals because sooner or later either facts destroy all they are attempting to claim or their own logic falls apart conflicting with itself.

In a recent online discussion on another website the argument went a little like this:

Liberal: Republicans wage war on women (fill in the blank with this week's talking points)

Right wing poster: Obama pays his female staff less then the men.

Liberal #1: No that's a lie.

Me: Here is the link to the 2011 White House Annual Report.  If you look at the median income for men and women it's an 18% difference.

Liberal #2: Well it's Republican's own fault, they blocked the fair pay act.

Now let me interject here for a moment, this 2nd poster's argument basically says that Democrats will not do what they themselves claim is the right thing to do unless forced to do so by the law.

Liberal #1: What Democrats are pushing for is equal pay for equal work, your "median income" value by sex does point to an under representation of women in the higher paying jobs at the White House, but women and men at the same tier of responsibility are paid EXACTLY THE SAME at the White House.

Interesting that this poster own explanation points out that Obama's staff has fewer women in the top level jobs.

Me: Look up the job "Assistant Staff Secretary" of which there are 3 in that position Theodore makes $65,000 where as Caitilin and Sarah earn $60,000.

Facts do not support Liberal #1's claim.

So this leads us with two eventual truths...

1) There is a legitimate reason for men to earn higher incomes on average

2) Obama and the left are just as guilty, if not more so, of underpaying women.

Either way, the logic doesn't hold for Liberals.


Push Polls 2012 Edition

Democrats once again are up to their old tricks.  Here's how this one took place...

I'm sitting home enjoying time with my kids when I receive a call from the number 303-647-1016 which shows up as "survey center" on caller ID.  I'm a sucker for surveys so I answered the phone.  A friendly young man on the other end asks basic questions asking on a scale of 1 to 100 how would I rate each of the following then rattled off the names of current politicians running in 2012 for all the state offices.

After going over each candidate and John Lynch for good measure they then began the pointed questions about Ovide Lamontagne and Maggie Hassan.  They start asking if I'd heard (insert charge here), filling in the blank with several of the charges Republicans have made against Maggie based on her prior record.  Then they asked if that was alarming and to what degree on a 1 to 4 scale.  Then they followed up with the Democratic Party counter claiming Maggie was the greatest thing since sliced bread and Ovide would bring an end to life as we know it here in NH.  You know the typical claims, he'd destroy business, crash the housing market, undo all the great things Lynch did for NH and then the real kicker he'd destroy the NH education system by giving parents the choice of where to send their kids instead of forcing them into one sized fits all cookie cutter schools.  And get this, he may even single handedly change the NH Constitution to allow parents to even pick... religious schools (gasp!).

I remained friendly the whole time while I could tell the caller was getting a little disapointed as I continued to say my opinion to vote for Ovide over Maggie was not changed but after almost 20 minutes of this he finally thanked me for my time and it was only then he rambled off the disclaimer that the call was baught and paid for by the Democratic party.

When I googled that phone number I found several sites discussing that it had been used in other misleading attempts to sway voters.  One caller was targeted because they had an hispanic sounding name and were hit with several survey "questions" aimed at making the Democratic candidate in their state look like the pro Hispanic candidate.  Another was told up front that they were representing the Foundation for American Veterans even asking for donation.  Others yet said that they received no answer on the line several times when the number called and only when their spouse answer did they get a response with targeted questions to the specific sex they were targeting.  Typically pushing the war on women claims.

Because I refused to change my stance and told them out right I would not support the Democratic party's candidate I wonder if that's the only reason they finally disclosed that they were representing that party.  My guess is if I expressed shock at the claims they made (which by the way ignore actual facts like say... voting records and the actual bills either candidate supported) and said I would switch my vote over to Maggie I highly suspect that they would just have thanked me for my time and hung up without disclosing who they were.

Should any of my readers get a call on their caller ID from that number please try this and post the results.


Republican or Democrat Quote Quiz

Let's play a game!  I'm going to give a series of quotes and you have to guess if the statements were made by Democrats or Republicans.

1) "We're not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that's fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you've made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you're providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy."

2) "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

3) "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,"

4) "The great task before our founders was putting into practice the ideal that government could simultaneously serve liberty and advance the common good. and Government, he believed, had an important role to play in advancing our common prosperity."

5) "Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness."

6) "If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made it that happen.”

7) "Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along."

8) "This is nobody in this country who got rich on his own."

9) "The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more."

10) "What I do is I'm going to try to reorganize the health () to be more willing to treat sick people, but it means above all you young people, especially you young people in good health … you have to pay more. And by the way, we will have, if you're too old, not going to give you everything that technology and all these drugs during the past two years of your life and maybe go to another couple months. It is very expensive … then we will let you die."

11) "I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned."

12) "The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrence to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system, and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes..."

13) "It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough jobs or enough profits."

14) "Today we need a nation of minute men; citizens who are not only prepared to take up arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as a basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."

15) "A man does what he must.. in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers, and pressures.. and that is the basis of all human morality."



Have you taken guesses yet?  If you want to go for the bonus write down who you think said each one before continuing.



Ready for the answers?  Sorry to say this but it's a trick quiz, all these quotes were stated by Democrats.

1 through 6 were all President Obama quotes

7 and 8 were both Elizebth Warren

9 was Michelle Obama

10 was Robert Reich Secretary of Labor for the Clinton Administration

11 through 15 by today's standards all sound like comments a Republican would have made but they were all made by J. F. Kennedy.  Kind of makes you wonder what his thoughts would be about Obama and the current Democratic party.



Obama Job Growth

By now I'm sure you've seen the chart popping all over the internet showing jobs decreasing under Bush and everything turning around bright and sunny under Obama.  If you haven't here it is:

First thing off the bat that caught my eye was how they start the chart at Jan 2008.  This is well after Democrats took control of both the House and Senate and had plenty of time for their policies to begin taking effect.

Then I noticed it stopped at March 2011, why?  The data is available well after that date, why stop showing how well Obama has been doing.  Oh wait, in April 2011 job growth fell another -190 and in June 2011 it feel another -445.

Here is the data in full as provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec                  Annual
2002 -346 737 -261 -51 413 -124 -2 292 597 -294 -487 -95 379
2003 991 65 -48 199 -89 246 -316 75 60 375 440 -13 1985
2004 61 70 -89 227 172 322 382 17 -86 245 499 -106 1714
2005 120 140 269 600 355 105 312 408 -33 147 -49 253 2627
2006 398 307 284 20 328 264 -151 423 190 499 220 436 3218
2007 58 29 263 -734 317 160 -158 -223 562 -298 649 -322 303
2008 124 -240 -49 22 -201 -191 -208 -334 -137 -267 -714 -750 -2945
2009 -1141 -527 -906 -100 -360 -291 -112 -433 -683 -374 206 -639 -5360
2010 532 165 171 470 34 -203 2 199 6 -272 -135 283 1252
2011 110 221 213 -136 180 -423 65 304 353 190 317 176 1570
2012 847


(numbers in thousands)

We took a hit after 9-11 and you can see the economy was unstable going into 2002 but Bush with Republican control kept the country headed in the right direction.

It wasn't until well into 2006 after Democrats swept the house and senate that we saw any real down turn.

In 2010 the government dumped a ton of money into the economy with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, otherwise known as the Obama stimulus.  One of the criticisms of the stimulus however is that the money spent will be divided over several years, we're currently in those years.  What happens when the spending stops?

Of the 3,669,000 jobs created since 2010 how many are permanent that can sustain themselves without government having to take wealth from others to create the impression of job growth?

The other factor this chart doesn't account for is underemployment.  This would be someone working at a high paying job who became unemployed settling for half or even less of their current salary just to get back to work.

The other question to ask is at what cost are the jobs we're seeing coming at?  Obama's new budget has nearly 1 trillion in deficit spending, a debt that will be passed on to our children.  And even with this out of control spending we still have over 4.6 million jobs still to be created just to get us back to close to where we were before Democrats took control of the House and Senate.






One More Example of Obama Harming This Country

If you were told there was a possibility to create tens of thousands of permanent jobs tomorrow would you think it's a good thing?  I certainly would.

Now what if you were told that it had bi-partisan support of both Republican and Democrats?  Sounds even better right.

What if on top of both of those if I told you it would also give the ability for us to create a product we export to other countries for profit?

And now what if I told you it would also give our country the ability to lessen our dependency on oil from the Middle East and lower our costs for fuel and heating oil?

Who in their right mind would ever say no to that?

Obama would.

The Keystone XL Project would do all of those things but ignoring his own party's support Obama instead used this as an opportunity to play politics and claim Republicans want dirty air and dirty water.

What makes matters even worse is now Canada's Priminister has stated that he will instead pursue plans to instead to sell that oil to China.

The Washington Times wrote the following in an article you can read in full HERE:

the Obama administration Wednesday rejected the proposed route for the Keystone XL oil pipeline that would provide up to 20,000 jobs on a project stretching from Canada to the Texas coast.

The pipeline, which would have been the largest infrastructure project in the country, has been a political nightmare for President Obama, with top business groups, Republican presidential candidates, the Canadian government, unions and even some of Mr. Obama’s fellow Democrats all slamming Wednesday’s rejection.

After Obama was first elected didn't we hear time and time again from Democrats that their increased spending was necessary because we needed to build up a better infrastructure in this country?  Yet here we have one of the largest ever that would bring great benefit to our country and Obama shoots it down.

“This political decision offers hard evidence that creating jobs is not a high priority for this administration,” U.S. Chamber of Commerce head Tom Donohue said. “The president’s decision sends a strong message to the business community and to investors: Keep your money on the sidelines, America is not open for business.”

Hard to argue with that.  When unemployment continues to hover close to 10% (many argue that true unemployment is well over 10%) how do you not look for ways to make a project work that will bring tens of thousands of permanent new jobs to this country?

The application has been under review by the government for three years, and Mr. Obama unsuccessfully tried to put off a final decision until after the November elections.

This quote is what worries me the most.  Obama is clearly playing politics pushing off things like this as much as he can so not to tick off too many people before his re-election but if he is re-elected and doesn't have to worry about coming off popular enough to keep independent voters on his side what more will he do?  How many other things like this that he knows will outrage voters has he been successful at pushing off under after the November elections?

Mr. Obama issued a statement Wednesday afternoon saying he agreed with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s decision to reject the project that would carry oil from tar sands in Alberta to refineries on the Gulf Coast, saying the project as proposed “would not serve the national interest.”

Really?  It would not serve the national interest?  New jobs, less dependent on Middle Eastern oil?  Our ability to refine the oil we bring in into gas which we then export for profit?

“I’m disappointed that Republicans in Congress forced this decision, but it does not change my administration’s commitment to American-made energy that creates jobs and reduces our dependence on oil.”

Ah the old green pipe dream.  Problem is our country runs on oil and there is no current alternative.  So instead of living in the here and now and moving forward with a project that would help produce jobs and lower the cost of oil he instead pushes a political agenda.

Oh and did I mention that oil is also needed for things like plastics?  By shooting this project down, Obama has approved the continued rise in the cost of oil to our nation increase costs not just of fuel and heating oil but also increases costs of every day items.  That plastic lawn chair for instance that you sit in during the summer, or the plastics that make your children's toys, the casing for your computer mouse and keyboard and so on.  This is increasing the costs of living on the poor of this country.

Don't just take my word on it, here are the statements from other Democrats on this project:

  • Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA):Landrieu says she’d support Keystone in payroll/ui/doc fix bill. Says ‘good deal’of D & R support for it.” (Trish Turner, Twitter, 12/15/11)
  • Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK): “Another sticking point is that Republicans inserted in their bill language that would fast-track the proposed Keystone X-L oil pipeline extension from Canada down to the Lower 48.  …Senator Begich is supportive of moving the project forward and his office says that’s not a problem.” (Alaska Public Radio, 12/14/11)
  • Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND): “I personally think the pipeline is absolutely in the national interest.  It’ll help us reduce our dependence on foreign energy, at least foreign sources that are hostile to our interests… I, for one, on this side would hope that this could be part of a final package…” (Floor remarks, 12/14/11)

  • Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO): “Well, let’s hope we can negotiate something like that… if states’ rights are being protected and if this is going to be something maybe that we can try to jumpstart the approval process, make it go more quickly.” (MSNBC, 12/14/11)
  • Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV): “I am for the Keystone pipeline. …  everyone’s for it, it creates thousands of jobs!” (Fox News, 12/12/11)
  • Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT): “I am proud to again offer my support for the Keystone XL pipeline and the jobs it will create. We need a quicker decision, based on the merits of this project.” (Floor Remarks, 12/13/11)
  • Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC): “I’m very much for the pipeline. There is no question about that.”  (MSNBC, 12/14/11)
  • Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK): “I commend the Speaker for including the construction of the Keystone XL pipelinethat is supported by business and labor.” (Release, 12/12/11)
  • Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA): “‘I think the president’s wrong on this,’ said Cardoza, who is retiring after this Congress.  ‘He can veto whatever he wants, but those are both policies I support.’” (POLITICO, 12/7/11)
  • Rep. Gene Green (D-TX): “Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) said he’s not swayed by Obama’s veiled veto pledge. … ‘The Keystone is awfully important,’ Green said.” (POLITICO, 12/8/11)