Just take the initial quote:

“If we want an economy that’s going to grow in the future, people have to understand we have to bring those deficits down. And it’s going to be difficult, hard for us to do. And the path to that___________.”

Then fill in the issue you would currently like to advocate!

Watch Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner demonstrate:

“If we want an economy that’s going to grow in the future, people have to understand we have to bring those deficits down. And it’s going to be difficult, hard for us to do. And the path to that is through health care reform“

Wow!  Talk about impressive!  It is extremely difficult to even conceive that rampant health care spending could fix the entire economy, and the deficit!  But Secretary Geithner knows that Obama administration officials can say pretty much anything, and only a racist would think to object!

Get your “Do it yourself Obama administration quote maker” and you too can claim that the only way to save the economy is fixing the weather one day, and providing taxpayer funded abortions the next!

Has campaign finance reform and fear of personal secrets seeing the light of day deprived us of candidates to the point where we are left with someone who’s worst skeleton is that he once played hooky so he could catch the premiere of Harry Potter?

Young Jared Christiansen is a Democrat for governor of Wisconsin, the cheesiest state in the nation.  Hopefully Wisconsinites can get over the fact Brett Favre might be a Viking in time to hit the polls and elect Master Christiansen.

After all, why would anyone want to miss the chance to “bring ingetrity back to the system”?

Some highlights from his resume:

-Successfully led campaigns against invading foreign hordes as a Marine Master Chief

-Extensive medical simulator experience

-He is “one of the best hosts” at his local McDonald’s.  This definitely will be a hit with visitors to the capitol, who will be eagerly offered fries and milkshakes.

-He has finally pinned down the cause of all crime: “crime is caused by differences in culture, religion, sexual orientation and other issues.”

-He does enjoy “mending things that are broken” which is a vast improvement over most politicians who enjoy perpetuating their positions of power while paying lip service to the people.

Wait he wants to cut Federal funding for healthcare and instead fund it entirely with state funds?  I’m starting to like this kid.

There seems to be some shock over Justice Ginsburg’s statement.  She apparently thought the follow up to Roe vs. Wade would be Medicaid funding for abortions.  The purpose of which would be allowing low income people to have all the abortions they need.  Or as Ginsburg referred to them “populations that we don’t want to have too many of”.

The origins of the pro-choice movement have ties to eugenics.  There certainly was a need for education on contraception at the time that Margaret Sanger was disseminating information on reproductive health to girls in the early 20^th century.  However, Sanger herself said some very controversial things that sound an awful lot like Justice Ginsburg.

Compare Justice Ginsburg:

“Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the Court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.”

To Margaret Sanger:

“More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief aim of birth control.” Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

“…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ’spawning… human beings who never should have been born.”  Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

“The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

It is blatantly obvious that controlling specific populations is a part of the pro-choice movement, and always has been.  The lesson to be learned, as usual, is individual responsibility is key.  The federal government must not be involved in the business of abortion, especially if government run healthcare is on the horizon.  The prospect of the government promoting abortion for certain racial or income groups is disconcerting.  The legal debate over life must be returned to the states.

It is encouraging to see this bill introduced, although its prospects at the current time seem weak.  The amendment failed on a party line vote.  That means there were Democrats who feigned regret over their pro-stimulus votes, because they did not take this chance to repent.

Now, with the Repeal the Stimulus Act there will be another chance for them to make amends; and a roll call vote for the people to examine.

If the “stimulus” is not repealed now, stimulus repeal will be the new teeth of the Tea Party movement, and a primary voting issue in 2010.  Better to repeal it during the 112th congress, than never.

It is actually Sen. John Ensign (R-NV). Which you can confirm at 1:53:20 of this video: http://www.cspan.org/Watch/Media/2009/03/04/HP/A/16000/Treasury+Sec+Geithner+at+Senate+Finance+Cmte.aspx

The stimulus has now proven to be detrimental to ending the recession, the exact opposite of its intended purpose.  The markets live in fear of the anticipated effects of record deficit spending, the housing market’s brief turnaround is being threatened, the bond market correctly fears inflation caused by record deficit spending, and the Dow Jones industrial average has declined since the bill was passed.  Banks are now able to pay back TARP funds, only to find markets quivering at the potential consequences of the stimulus.

Now is the time to REPEAL THE STIMULUS, and free the American economy from the largest impediment to recovery.

The Stimulus bill was supposed to save us from imminent depression, it was supposed to create jobs, it was supposed to involve no earmarks and wasteful spending, and it was supposed to have strict oversight of how the money was spent.

Instead it is now prolonging recession, costing jobs, is loaded with earmarks and wasteful spending and has ineffective oversight.

When the Stimulus package was being pushed through Congress, Obama Administration advisors Cristina Romer and Jared Bernstein, promised unemployment would not go beyond 8% if we passed the stimulus.  They threatened a worse scenario without it.  Now unemployment is at 9.4% and far worse than their predictions for the economy had no stimulus been passed.  That equals 1.5 million jobs lost under Obama.

The economy appears to have been through the worst, and the stimulus still looms having only injected $43 billion of the funds.  For something designed to give a quick economic jolt to stop an emergency decline into depression, it is clear it has failed; and it would have been impossible for it to have stopped a depression anyways.

During the frenzied push through Congress of the Stimulus bill we were promised “no earmarks” and oversight of the spending.  “If you take a look at the bill, the fact is there are no earmarks in this bill” Obama told ABC on Feb. 3^rd.  By ‘no earmarks’ President Obama must have meant 9,000.  That number includes the gem of John Murtha’s airport.  One can find long lists of wasteful earmarks, as Joe Biden said: “We know some of this money is going to be wasted”.

In light of The Obama Administration’s failure to live up to its end of the bargain: the American people have every right to cancel the deal.  All the Congressmen who claim regret for their vote have the opportunity to correct their mistake.

It is time to move the government out of the way and allow the American people to get to work rebuilding the economy.

This week Rep. Tiahrt introduced an amendment to repeal the stimulus.  Support Rep. Tiahrt’s amendment, but most importantly do not let the issue die.  If repeal does not pass during this congress, it should be a seminal issue during the 2010 campaign, and the first objective of the 112^th Congress.

This is an issue for the American people, and the Tea Partiers, to brandish until it is fixed, or every politician who swindled them is kicked out of office.

The people must demand Stimulus repeal to the end.

June 4, 2009

Dear Friend of Liberty,

Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed bill is now up to 186 cosponsors!

That means over 40% of the entire House of Representatives is currently signed onto HR 1207.

Unfortunately, your Representative Nita M. Lowey is still holding out.

We’ve come a long way, but now it’s time to push for an outright majority of the full House.

And that starts with turning up the pressure on Nita M. Lowey.

Ron Paul needs you to keep writing, calling, and emailing to convince your Representative to support Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed Bill.

In fact, you should call right now.

Nita M. Lowey’s Congressional Office number is (202) 225-6506.  Tell him to join the 186 of his colleagues in cosponsoring Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed Bill.

…

It is an interesting tactic, taken right out of the Hillary Clinton playbook.  However, it was used successfully there because Hillary was ‘listening’ to people she had not been living with or serving before.  In that situation, listening is preferable to talking, and coming off as though you know better.

The ‘New America’ listening tour fails in this aspect.  The problem is the group involved in the tour is listening to people they already hear from.  Their first meeting, in Arlington, could not have been a bigger waste of time.  The people in the crowd included a plethora of Washington movers and shakers whose opinions are quite easy to find.

BUT this effort could be a tremendous tool if it was aimed at the right target.  Since the election loss, there have been many minority leaders urging Republicans to get involved in their communities.  There has also been a tremendous amount of lip service paid to appealing to younger voters.  However, very few demonstrable actions have been taken in this regard.  A listening tour that went around to minority groups, and churches, and/or colleges and youth organizations would have been a great first step in an effort to get involved in those communities.

Imagine if they took the time to listen to African-American churchgoers in DC on the school choice issue?  They could actually use the media attention they are getting to shine light on one of President Obama’s failures, instead of giving the press the anti-Reagan soundbite they so desired (way to go Bush III).

Unfortunately, these Republican leaders seem to think the key decision in moving forward is figuring out whether the platform should be more conservative or moderate.  When the real challenge is bringing the values that made this country great to a wider spectrum of Americans.

This does a great job of clearly explaining what the initial problem is with taxes on international companies, and then explaining why Obama’s approach is the wrong one.  I think taking note of the clear explanation of how the system makes no sense and hurts the U.S. is helpful and something normal people would understand better than other approaches I’ve seen.

The problem is the U.S. penalizes companies for brining home money, NOT that they are tax dodging scumbags, by forcing them to pay more taxes you are just creating incentive for them to further sever ties with the U.S. OR making them far less competitive in the global marketplace.  And Obama’s stated goal is to bring that money back, and this is not going to accomplish that…another example of Obama tactics that will not accomplish his supposed goal.

“Specter said, ‘I simply was not going to put my 29-year record before the Republican primary electorate.’”

At first I don’t think the impact of this statement quite sinks in.  One has to take a moment to realize, Arlen Specter does not think voters should be able to take him out of the Senate.  In fact he apparently believes in some sort of reverse term-limits; where serving for a long enough period of time should exempt you from having to face your constituency in an election.

Arlen Specter ’simply’ does not belive in Democracy.