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)

Happy 2012

Happy 2012 to everyone out there in cyber-land!

What an upcoming year we have ahead.  With this being a major election year where even the presidency up for grabs, the lumping Democrats took in 2010's elections and the fact they have nothing positive about their record to run against, Democrats are not holding back at all with their punches.  Just look at the editorials of the major NH papers, all the Democratic regulars are pushing letters out on a weekly basis attacking anything and everything they can find.  Our friends at Blue Hampshire and MoveOn.org  can't write about their parties accomplishments so they too have gone into full attack mode.

One problem the Republican party has in the upcoming year is the fact it has standards.  An example of this is the primary.  Just look at how Republicans are willing to point out the faults of others in their own party.  Democrats had a flawed candidate with very little overall experience, no foreign experience, who had ties to very questionable candidates including a known cop killer and who even launched his political career in that same cop killers own living room.  Not only did they not see fault in any of this they went on to elect that man president.

How many people recall all the hype the Democrats claimed would happen if they won in 2006 and 2008?

Since they took over the house and senate the economy has grown worse, unemployment has gotten worse, the situation in the Middle East has grown worse, the deficit spending has hit record highs... and so on.

All the things they blasted Bush for they've done worse.  Gitmo is still open, the patriot act was extended and expanded to give the government even more control to spy, we've gotten involved in additional conflicts in the Middle East, Obama's spending levels makes Bush's look responsible and so on.

Do they rail their own party for their failures?  Of course not.  Instead they focus on Mitt Romney's not bothering to campain in NH since he's leading polls for the primary by 40%.

I guess they'd rather focus on that than discuss how after Obama said Iraq's war is over that country is now slowly failing into civil unrest.  Or debating how much of other peoples things should be taken away by force and handed over to those who choose not to work (ie the occupy groups).

Sit back and enjoy all you political junkies, it's going to be a fun year!

Cigarette Tax

I have to hand it to our friends over at Blue Hampshire, they sure know how to pick and choose facts for a story.

Take for instance the article found HERE, "What a surprise! Cigarette Tax revenues down!"

In their article they post this single quote from an article on WMUR:

"Administrative Services Commissioner Linda Hodgdon said Wednesday that revenues are $4 million below estimates. She said the biggest disappointment was the tobacco tax, which was $2.6 million behind projections for the month and now is $3.5 million behind for the year. The Legislature cut the tax 10 cents hoping to spur sales, but Hodgdon said sales are behind last year's numbers."
(From WMUR story below.)

The WMUR story can be read HERE.

Read the title Blue Hampshire gave to this article and read the quote posted very carefully before going on.

Let's start with the simple fact that less revenue equals less smokers.  Since smoking leads to health problems and more need for health care which puts a drain on the system for the rest of us I fail to see how anyone could see this as a bad thing.

But I go on...

If you go to the WMUR story you'll find this part conveniently left out of the Blue Hampshire version:

Despite the poor month, the state is still almost $11 million ahead of projections. Through October, the state has collected $498 million for the fiscal year that started July 1.

It turns out what our liberals friends are claiming is not true.  Cigarette revenue is down for a single month, over all it's up $11 over projections.  It's revenue as a whole (from all sources) that's down for the year.

One other factor to consider is that while Blue Hampshire is implying that somehow the cut in taxes is directly responsible for the loss in revenue if you look at other facts you'll see it isn't the case.  Any reasonable thinking person should question any claim that decreasing the price resulted in fewer sales (as pointed out in the article). Reality can be found in the version of the story posted by the Nashua Telegraph which shared this additional bit of information:

The state issued 55.7 million tax stamps for cigarette packs from this past June through October.

Over the same period last year, 57 million tax stamps were bought.

Tobacco sales have been going down steadily in New Hampshire and other states as fewer people smoke.

The state sold 71.5 million tax stamps during the five-month window five years ago.

So over all fewer people are smoking as evident by the salves over the past 5 years. If we want to look at true cause and effect then perhaps the smoking ban passed by Democrats in 2007 (4 years ago) should be considered as well for its impact on cigarette revenue.

Liberals Are Failing

Over at Blue Hampshire there is an article titled "A Look in the Mirror: We're Failing".  In it they point to a NY Times article discussing how this country over all has gotten worse over the past few years.

Blue Hampshire writes:

We are getting poorer. The American Dream is   - we hope - comatose, with family incomes falling for the first time since the Great Depression.

Mirrors and censuses "close the loop" of feedback for our political system. They bring us back to cold hard facts.

We're getting poorer. We've failed our children, who are moving back in with their parents - they would fall below the poverty line too, if they didn't.

These statements are based off the following facts as quoted in the NY Times:

Another 2.6 million people slipped into poverty in the United States last year

...

the number of Americans living below the official poverty line, 46.2 million people, was the highest number in the 52 years the bureau has been publishing figures on it.

And in new signs of distress among the middle class, median household incomes fell last year to levels last seen in 1996.

...

It was the first time since the Great Depression that median household income, adjusted for inflation, had not risen over such a long period, said Lawrence Katz, an economics professor at Harvard.

...

It is also fresh evidence that the disappointing economic recovery has done nothing for the country’s poorest citizens.

...

The report said the percentage of Americans living below the poverty line last year, 15.1 percent, was the highest level since 1993.

...

Overall, median household income adjusted for inflation declined by 2.3 percent in 2010 from the previous year, to $49,445.

...

Minorities were hit hardest. Blacks experienced the highest poverty rate, at 27 percent, up from 25 percent in 2009, and Hispanics rose to 26 percent from 25 percent. For whites, 9.9 percent lived in poverty, up from 9.4 percent in 2009.

The article also supplies two charts, the first showing the median household income by year, the 2nd showing the percent of people living below poverty level.  Both charts show dates of recessions as well.

 Important dates to consider when looking at either of the above charts are

2000 - the dot com bubble popped leaving a number of tech workers out of jobs.

2001 - we were hit on 9-11 with the worst terror attack in this countries history

Given those two facts alone one can understand the downturn starting around 2000 but with Bush and full Republican control that crisis was short lived and you can see both charts starting back in the right directions around 2004-2005.

2006 - Democrats won big in the elections taking control of both Congress and Senate

2008 - Obama wins the White House

Starting around 2006-2007 you can see things grew worse and have nose dived ever since with no sign of stopping.

Its hard for anyone to look at that evidence and blame anyone but the Democratic party.

That said however, it no longer matters who started it because we're now in it.  Our country is failing and Washington is short on answers.  The real question now is what should be done to fix it.

Obama last week got up in front of the country repeating the same tired rhetoric he's been saying from day one which clearly isn't working.  Our friends at Blue Hampshire state in their feedback "We know what to do to turn this around, we have the resources to turn this around, yet we refuse to choose to turn this around" but don't offer any details to those of who who don't know what they are claiming we refuse to do.  Is it raising taxes on those with money?  Is it doubling or tripling the size of government?

A Republican version of the jobs bill submitted this week offered a very simple but eloquent solution, eliminate corporate taxes on corporations actually manufacturing their products in this country.  Hard to argue that companies paying thousands, if not millions, wouldn't look to lessen costs by simply opening their factories over here.  It would save them shipping costs and with the tax cut it would save them in taxes.  The benefit to our country in turn would be two fold, one unemployment would go down since more people would be working... two with more people working more people would be able to pay income tax making up the lost revenue our federal government gave up to draw the jobs back in the first place.

Democrats solutions so far?  Tax and spend.

Maybe Obama was right in 2008, it is time for change!  Only this time let's try a change that works.

Republicans are the most powerful party ever

I'm convinced that the Republican Party is by far the most powerful party ever.  Clearly one Republican can accomplish more then 100 Democrats and even in the minority they have full control over everything that happens within the government.

What makes me say such a thing?  Easy, the Democrats are making this very argument themselves.

Look at the facts...

In the 2006 the Democratic party won control of both Congress and Senate.

In 2008 while keeping control of the house and senate the Democratic party also gained control of the White House with the election of Barack Obama.

Even after the 2010 election Republicans remain the minority party having only won back control of Congress but Senate and the White House remain under Democratic party lead.

Given that the Democrats have been the majority party in control of government since the 2006 election they continue to blame Bush and Republicans for problems.  So Bush's impact overrides Democratic party control even today.

On top of that, with the tea party Republicans gaining control of congress, democrats now blame them for the loss of the AAA credit rating.  Let me get this straight, even after several years in power the Democrats cannot make any changes to what Bush did prior but yet in less then 1 year in power the tea party Conservatives are already making major impacts on this country?  How can anyone listen to this leap in Liberal logic and buy into anything they say?

Even John Kerry has jumped onto the blame the tea party band wagon.  He's saying it's all their fault because they refused to raise taxes.  In other words its not the fault of those who spent out of control for all these years it's the fault of those who ran and won saying they would stop spending and fight to lower taxes for actually doing what they ran on and won.  Hmmmm.

Is this a bit like blaming a dealer for someone going through withdraw symptoms because they refuse to give them more free drugs after getting them hooked?

This country has a problem that needs to be dealt with.  Both partys have acknowledged it and at different points in history both parties have even called for balanced budget amendments to deal with it when the other is in power and controlling the purse strings but until the tea party group took control no one has been actively dealing with it.  And clearly since Republicans have had such an influence on everything even when they've held a minority for years, just think of what will be accomplished if they come back into full control with help of the tea party.