Tuesday, April 26, 2011


Have you ever looked at a credit report? Credit Reporting agencies use them to boil your financial health down to a number or score. This score is used to determine your creditworthiness. Ultimately, this score is used to determine both the amount of credit someone extends to you as well as the interest rate they will charge you for borrowing the money. If your credit score stinks, lenders will be less likely to give you money and if they do, they will charge you much higher interest rates than they would someone that has a better credit score.

Standard & Poor’s is the outfit that does this for governments. S&P looks at a government’s outstanding debts, income (taxes), stability of their economy, financial planning, etc. and make a determination on a government’s rating. S&P assigns a grade to their score which describes how they see their financial health. For instance, Scranton’s last score was a BBB-, Wilkes-Barre last got an A, and Pennsylvania received an AA.

Standard & Poor’s recently reworked the score for the United States of America. They reviewed our general credit worthiness, state of our economy, and present debt. The outlook was not good. Because of “very large budget deficits” and “rising government indebtedness” and because “the path to addressing these is not clear to us (S&P)” the United States sovereign credit rating has been downgraded from stable to negative.

During the Bush years (2003-2008,) the U.S.'s general (total) government deficit fluctuated between 2% and 5% of GDP. This was bad enough. Obama and the Democrats however, blew the doors off. Since taking power, they ballooned the debt to more than 11% in 2009 and have yet to knock it back down.

Democrats and their allies will use this as yet another excuse to increase taxes. This isn’t really prognostication, just a simple realization that every solution proposed by Democrats inevitably includes a tax increase.

Bill Whittle does an excellent job of proving just how stupid this line of thought is here:

Washington and Pennsylvania both have a problem. But that problem isn't a revenue problem, it is a spending problem.

It’s time to make a decision. Do you want the money your work for or do you want the loving embrace of your government?

Americans need to decide if they want to remain all things to all people and turn over the majority of their money to the government or if they will once again embrace individual responsibility. Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. And, because of the runaway spending of the Obama Administration, you have less time to decide. Are you taxed enough already or aren't you?

We say enough is enough.

What say you?

Monday, April 25, 2011

Scranton Union Makes Case for Right to Work

The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) is a public-sector union. That means they represent unionized workers that get paid with taxpayer dollars to perform a function of government.

Lots of folks think the FOP is simply an advocacy group for law enforcement professionals. They don't realize that while they do advocate for law enforcement, they also represent the collective bargaining unit for most unionized police officers.

In Scranton, the local FOP has been at war with Democratic Mayor Chris Doherty pretty much since Doherty was elected. That war has once again pushed aside reason and commons sense.

Presently, the FOP is disputing the arrest powers of Scranton's Police Chief. The Chief, who is not a member of the FOP union, made an arrest in a drug case. In the past, the FOP apparently was able to require that management (Chief) also be a member of their union. This was contested in court and the FOP lost.

The FOP, still apparently smarting from that loss, has filed a complaint based on the Chief actually arresting an alleged criminal. It appears that the contract that the FOP operates under requires that all law enforcement in the city belong to their union. Apparently a badge in Scranton has no authority unless it is accompanied by a union dues card.

Public pressure was brought to bear on the union and its brass for this complaint and they seemed to be relenting but now seem to have been emboldened. They are apparently content to just battle it out in the courts.

One could certainly ask what idiotic Scranton Mayor ever signed a contract with provisions like that but that would be unfair and a little ignorant of the facts. You see, Pennsylvania is a state that has legislatively approved discrimination in limited circumstances.

While you can no longer advertise for "help wanted" based on race or ethnicity as was done in the past, you can discriminate based on private memberships as it relates to unions. You can absolutely require an employee belong to a union in order to get or keep a job or perform a job...particularly in the public sector.

The freedom to associate is the right of everyone. Forced association is discrimination and should be prohibited. Presently, there is an effort in Pennsylvania to join 22 other states in banning this discrimination.

As demonstrated by this case in Scranton, Right to Work legislation is desperately needed to restore both the rights of the workers as well as to restore some degree of sanity to public sector employment.

Without it, individuals in Pennsylvania will continue to be deprived of their basic freedom of choice to decide which organizations they want to belong to and which private organizations they want to support financially.

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Party of No, Still No Budget

Democratic President Barack Obama took the opportunity of his facebook infomercial to attack Republicans and Congressman Paul Ryan's budget proposal.

This, from the head of the party that didn't pass a budget despite being in complete control of the government since 2009.

Obama attacks Republican efforts to pass a responsible budget saying the Ryan Budget isn't particularly courageous.

Courageous? Seriously? Coming from the head coward that wouldn't pass a budget because his party was on the precipice of a major electoral beat down?

BHO also calls the Ryan budget radical and points out that it changes the social compact of this country in a fundamental way.

Finally, some truth from this President.

The Republican budget is radically different from Obama's plan to just keep maxing out the credit cards and hope for the best. And yes, it does change the social compact in the US in that we will no longer will we borrow to bestow charity.

Our country is in serious trouble. It is time for the Democrats and the President to offer more than rhetoric.

Where is the Democratic budget proposal?

Do they have nothing to offer besides simply saying no?

Monday, April 18, 2011

Left Wing Counter Protest to Tax Day Tea Party

The above video was recorded on 4/15/2011 at a Left-Wing counter protest to a peaceful Tax Day Tea Party event.

This next clip shows the left-wing creeps shouting racist taunts at a tea party attendee.

This is the new left, same as the old left.

Every single leftist that took part in this counter-rally deserves our thanks.

It isn't very often that the left gives us such public, defining displays of their real agenda.

This is the Democratic Party at its core.

Friday, April 15, 2011

Left-Wing Hater: State Rep Margo Davidson

As Pennsylvania’s legislature was debating an expansion of gun rights in Pennsylvania a few Democrats offered opposition to the bill.

Some of them mean well, they just don’t understand the Constitution. Others, not only don’t understand the Constitution, but are genuine jackasses.

One such genuine jackass is Democrat State Representative Margo Davidson. Instead of debating the merits of the bill before her or adding something of substance and thought to the discussion, she asked if she could blow the brains out of one of her colleagues.

Republican Speaker Smith ordered the statement stricken from the record as the jackass state rep giggled.

Smith should have allowed the statement to stand. It is her right to be profoundly moronic. Besides, it’s not often that lefties like Davidson simultaneously demonstrate their profound ignorance as well as their hate.

Read more

Obama at Fundraiser...Hot Mic? Not really.

Obama Even Puts Biden to Sleep

Demcorat Vice-President Joe Biden, falling asleep during Obama's Budget speech.

I guess we can't really blame Joe...hearing the same old talking points over and over again has to be pretty boring.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Debt Ceiling...The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same

Geithner figures that Obama will have maxed out the credit cards again by May 16, 2011. In order to keep the lights on, Obama wants Congress to increase his limit.

As Congress considers the debt ceiling increase, they should pay special attention to the words of both President Obama and Vice-President Biden from March 16, 2006 as recorded in the Congressional Record:


Mr. President, I rise today to talk about America’s debt problem.

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.

Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is ‘‘trillion’’ with a ‘‘T.’’ That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.

Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we’ll spend on Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America.

And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on.

Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities. Instead, interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans—a debt tax that Washington doesn’t want to talk about. If Washington were serious about honest tax relief in this country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by returning to responsible fiscal policies.

But we are not doing that. Despite repeated efforts by Senators CONRAD and FEINGOLD, the Senate continues to reject a return to the commonsense Pay-go rules that used to apply. Previously, Pay-go rules applied both to increases in mandatory pending and to tax cuts. The Senate had to abide by the commonsense budgeting principle of balancing expenses and revenues.

Unfortunately, the principle was abandoned, and now the demands of budget discipline apply only to spending. As a result, tax breaks have not been paid for by reductions in Federal spending, and thus the only way to pay for them has been to increase our deficit to historically high levels and borrow more and more money. Now we have to pay for those tax breaks plus the cost of borrowing for them. Instead of reducing the deficit, as some people claimed, the fiscal policies of this administration and its allies in Congress will add more than $600 million in debt for each of the next 5 years. That is why I will once again cosponsor the Pay-go amendment and continue to hope that my colleagues will return to a smart rule that has worked in the past and can work again. Our debt also matters internationally. My friend, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, likes to remind us that it took 42 Presidents 224 years to run up only $1 trillion of foreign-held debt. This administration did more than that in just 5 years. Now, there is nothing wrong with borrowing from foreign countries. But we must remember that the more we depend on foreign nations to lend us money, the more our economic security is tied to the whims of foreign leaders whose interests might not be aligned with ours.

Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘‘the buck stops here.’’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.


Mr. President, I was necessarily absent this morning when we considered Senator BAUCUS’s amendment to the debt limit increase. If I had been here, I would have supported the Baucus amendment.

The Baucus amendment is clearly needed. The massive scale of other nations’ accumulation of our debt has added another level of danger and complexity to our international economic relations.

This is a two-way street. The tsunami of debt created by the policies of this administration has to go somewhere. China is one of the major purchasers of that debt. Japan, Great Britain, and others have major holdings, too. In the short term, that has soaked up a lot of our bonds, and helped to keep interest rates down. That is a good thing.

However, that has kept the Chinese currency artificially low, and ours artificially high. So they can sell their products at a discount, and our exports are more expensive. That is a bad thing.

Our trade deficit was a record $726 billion last year; $202 billion of that was our trade deficit with China alone. But as the rest of the world copes with the waves of U.S. debt, we are now all in the same leaky boat. There is just so much of our debt other nations want to hold. The more of it they accumulate, the closer we are to the day when they will not want any more.

When that happens, slowly or rapidly, our interest rates will go up, the value of their U.S. bonds will drop, and we will all have big problems. We need both more awareness, and more understanding, of this fundamental threat to our economic well being and the global

But the roots of that threat lie in the disastrous policies of this administration. Because this massive accumulation of debt was predicted, because it was foreseeable, because it was unnecessary, because it was the result of willful and reckless disregard for the warnings that were given and for the fundamentals of economic management, I
am voting against the debt limit increase.

In the 5 years he has been in office, President Bush has added more to our
foreign debt that the 42 Presidents before him. It took 224 years to accumulate $1 trillion of debt to other nations. It took President Bush just 5 years to more than double it.

Over $3 trillion in debt, foreign debt and debt held by Americans, has been
piled up by this administration. When he set out on the course that brought us to this sorry state, the President was clearly and repeatedly warned that massive tax cuts would
leave us vulnerable to natural disasters, economic slowdown, or threats to our national security. ‘‘Don’t worry,’’the President told us. ‘‘I know what I am doing.’’

After 9/11, in the face of what he has himself called the moral equivalent of the World War II, or the Cold War, he insisted that while everything else had changed, he would not change his economic policies.

Facts had changed. His promise to balance the budget, his promise to pay down the debt, were proved to be false. But he refused to take responsibility for his policies. He refused to admit that a changed world demanded a change of course. His refusal has pushed us deeper and deeper into the hole.

His refusal added $450 billion to the debt in 2002; it added $984 billion in 2003; it added $800 billion in 2004. And here we are again today, adding another $781 billion. With that addition, our national debt will be $8.6 trillion at the end of this year.

The President’s budget plans will bring that number to $11.8 trillion at the end of the next 5 years.

This is a record of utter disregard for our Nation’s financial future. It is a record of indifference to the price our children and grandchildren will pay to redeem our debt when it comes due.

History will not judge this record kindly.

My vote against the debt limit increase cannot change the fact that we have incurred this debt already, and will no doubt incur more. It is a statement that I refuse to be associated with the policies that brought us to this point.

The following Senators joined them in voting against increasing the debt limit in 2006:

Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)

Congress should refuse to extend any more credit to this administration for many of the same reasons Obama and Biden both listed in their own protests at extending credit to President Bush.

Every complaint they made against Bush is only worse now.

If you take them line by line, all of their complaints are worse today than they were under Bush in clearly quantifiable measures...hard dollars.

Enough is enough!

Government Shutdown Recap

Because House Democrats failed to pass a budget since 2009, Republicans had to step in and pass a continuing resolution to stave off a government shutdown.

Conservative Republicans hate the deal, since it only cuts $38 Billion. Democrats increased the national debt by over $4 trillion since Obama took office. $38 billion doesn’t do much to address that.

Drop, meet bucket.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) issued its harshest rebuke of Democratic President Barrack Hussein Obama yet regarding US debt. The IMF said the USlacks a credible strategy” to stabilize its mounting debt.

While Democrats continue to be the party of No - no plans, no answers, no solutions - Republicans are proposing some of their own.

Republican Congressman Paul Ryan released his Path to Prosperity budget to save jobs, jump start the economy, and relieve the debt crisis by cutting spending.

Democrat President Barack Hussein Obama, categorically opposed Ryan’s reform measures. No surprise, Obama proposed no plan of his own…he merely offered up some vague platitudes to the left and called for increased taxes.

Do the Democrats ever have a solution to a problem that doesn’t involve raising taxes?

Friday, April 8, 2011

Lessons from Wisconsin

Wisconsin has been ground zero on government spending reform. Governors across America are facing escalating costs that they must either cut or pass on to the taxpayers in the form of tax increases.

Wisconsin Republican Governor Scott Walker refused to increase the burdens on taxpayers. He proposed a budget repair bill that saved hundreds of millions of dollars for the taxpayers over the next two years. To do this, Walker proposed:

  • Requiring state and local government workers to pay increased monies (about 8% of their take home pay) toward their healthcare costs and pensions
  • Require a voter referendum to increase government employee wages above the rate of inflation
  • Require that government worker unions have yearly elections to recertify that their members still want to belong to a union

None of these changes to collective bargaining rules applied to police or fire as Walker was afraid it could disrupt public safety.

Union and Democratic leaders went nuts.

Realizing they could not win the day, 14 Democratic Senators, dubbed “Fleebaggers,” left the state to deny a quorum of the Senate. Without the quorum, they could not adopt the bill. All of this was for naught since there were procedural remedies to these Democrats failing to do their taxpayer-funded jobs.

The budget passed.

The Unions and Democrats decided to start a counter-offensive. Their target was Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser. Their two-pronged attack in defeating Prosser would both put a sympathetic judge on the state supreme court that could conceivably overturn the budget repair bill and simultaneously repudiate Governor Walker and the Tea Party.

All the stops were pulled out. Wisconsin’s unions focused with all the intensity they could muster on this one race. They defined Prosser as a carbon copy of Walker. Their slogan was literally “Prosser=Walker.” They even launched a website tying the two together.

During the campaign, they attacked Prosser relentlessly. Each attack was escalated by another. There was a pile on by other left wing radical groups. The Left was able to transform this small state election into a national referendum on their cause.

Additionally, Wisconsin is a blue state. President Obama won Wisconsin with 56% of the vote. Your average Wisconsin voter must support left wing ideals right? Surely they would soar to victory with all of this effort, all of this money, and all of the left wing groups coalescing together to impact a race in a blue state.

The result? Failure.

Despite early returns that showed a win for the Left (and their premature jubilation), Prosser pulled it out. He now leads with an approximate 7,500 margin.

So what happened?

The Left poured every resource available to them into this one race. They mobilized all of their supporters. They railed against the right wing radicals trying to take away what was theirs. They spent countless dollars painting Prosser as a shill of the Tea Party and Governor Walker.

What happened, quite simply, is the left was successful.

The Left was successful in talking about the Walker budget and educating the voters on it. The Left was successful in painting Prosser as a person that shared the same values as Walker. The Left was successful in laying bare their real message and real agenda to the voters of Wisconsin.

The voters of Wisconsin rejected it.

Given the same education, the American people will reject it as well.

Government Shutdown

What are they fighting about?

As a government shutdown looms, much of the debate in Washington has been on how to avert the crisis.

At least, much of the debate on the Republican side of the isle. The Democrats have proposed absolutely nothing to avert a government shut down outside of chanting “No” to every solution proposed by the Republicans.

The Democratic talking points revolved around the general theme that seniors and the poor will have to eat cat food to survive if Republicans don’t kill them off first.

That is the best they have to offer and it is patently ridiculous.

Worse, this one is absolutely, positively the fault of the Democrats. The Democrats had control of Congress and the Senate since January 2007. They added the White House to their control in January of 2009. Yet, they did nothing. With Democrats in absolute control of both Congress and the Senate as well as the White House they still could not bring themselves to pass a budget since 2009.

That singular failure of leadership has resulted in the situation we are in today. They were either too afraid to pass a budget that dealt with the problems of the day or they lacked the political will to do so but in either case, they failed to lead and failed the American people.

We face a $14.3 trillion debt that the above named Democrats increased by over $4 trillion just since Obama took office in 2009. The unchecked increased spending on welfare, social security, medicare, bailouts, unconstitutional healthcare mandates, unprecedented expansions of government, and failed economic stimulus programs that have defined this President have only made it worse.

Despite causing the problem, the Democrats are doing nothing to solve it. The Republicans are failing to realize why…Democrats want a government shutdown.

Democrats lost the debate on the economy. Americans were simply too smart to buy the Democrat bailouts and stimulus programs as anything other than a waste of money. The fact that gas prices have doubled since President Obama took office hits everyone in the wallet and they feel it. Americans know that their economy is in the tank regardless of what the President says and they fear that they will leave this country far worse than for their children and grandchildren than they found it.

Americans might have been bamboozled before but they are paying attention now.

That scares the hell out of the Democrats.

They have already proven that even with complete control of every level of government for several years that they cannot fix these problems. So what can they do?

They need a new crisis and a boogeyman to distract everyone from placing blame where it really belongs. They are waiting in the wings to take President Obama’s former Chief of Staff’s advice when he famously said “never waste a good crisis.”

What would be more distracting than seeing our troops in foreign lands have to face payless pay days? What would be more distracting than Social Security recipients that are completely dependent on their monthly check to survive go without for a month or two? What would be more distracting than the US Government shutting its doors to its people?

Democrats need this shut down to distract the American people from their failed policies and inability to lead or even perform the most basic function of government, budgeting. They need an opportunity to show how they can sweep in and save the American people as benevolent dictators again.

Republicans are doing everything they can to keep the government functioning. Yesterday, they passed yet another bill to keep the government open and keep our military paid. The bill passed 247-181. President Obama’s answer was to issue a Statement of Administration Policy that stated that he would veto this bill and allow the government to shut down if it was passed by the Senate.

If the Democrats succeed in shutting down the government, the Republicans should immediately send legislation to the Senate that brings agencies back one at a time. They should fund only those which are Constitutionally mandated and let the others languish while the shutdown remains.

Is anyone really going to miss taxpayer funded welfare for cultural elites such as Piss Christ or taxpayer-funded bailouts for mega-corporations?

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

It's Time for Fairness in PA Civil Courts

On Monday, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives Judiciary Committee began to tackle the issue of legal reform in the Commonwealth.

The question simply stated: if you are found partially liable for damages, should you only have to pay the portion for which you are responsible for? Common sense (and common fairness) would answer yes. Democrats, in an overt display of pandering to the trial lawyers that bankroll their campaigns, answered no.

Democrats believe your liability should be determined not only on what you actually did, but also based on someone else’s ability to pay.

That’s right, even if you are only found to be 10% liable for an accident, you should pay the full 100% of the damages if the other party can’t pay their 90% liability.

This is symptomatic of the Democrats dancing to the fiddle of the trail lawyers. Their allegiance to special interests is blinding them to basic fairness and common sense.

If you do something wrong or are otherwise negligent causing someone to be harmed, you should pay to make that person whole to the extent that you damaged them. It is a disgusting display of pandering to make an individual pay more than their fair share simply because the other person, who they have no control over, cannot afford to pay.

Do Democrats believe that this same rule should apply to criminal matters? Should we now try and incarcerate Pennsylvanians for crimes they didn’t actually commit as well just because they cannot apprehend the person that actually committed the crime?

Despite the overt Democratic pandering to their special interest masters, HB 1 – The Fair Share Act, was committed. It should move steadily for a vote and be adopted by every elected Representative that believes in basic fairness.

You can read HB1, the Fair Share Act, here.

Friday, April 1, 2011

First BHO Ad for 2012

A Nation of Takers, Not Makers

(H/T to @lackawannagop)

According to the Wall Street Journal, more Americans work for the government than work in manufacturing, farming, fishing, forestry, mining and utilities combined.

Every state in America, with the exception of two, has more people working for the government than working in manufacturing and industrial goods.

It gets worse...