Welfare Nation by Bill O'Reilly

My parents were children during the Great Depression, and it scarred them, especially my father, who saw destitution in his Brooklyn, N.Y., neighborhood: adults standing in so-called "bread lines," children begging in the streets. My grandfather was a New York City cop, and so my dad did not suffer as others did. But he never forgot the brutal scenes and worked hard his whole life to build some financial independence.

Fast-forward to the severe recession of 2008, when millions of Americans lost jobs and equity in their homes. No bread lines, but much pain. The Obama administration responded by pouring trillions of dollars into stimulus and rescue programs, some of which succeeded in stabilizing tottering banks and auto companies. But along with that, the president and his acolytes openly encouraged Americans to use the welfare system. And now the entitlement culture has exploded.

According to the Census Bureau, more people in America today are on welfare than have full-time jobs. There is a culture of dependency being created that is truly shocking. A recent study by the Cato Institute concludes that welfare now pays more than minimum-wage work in 35 states. So why enter the workforce at the bottom if the government will give you the same compensation for sitting on your butt?

Some believe that the Democratic Party, which champions the entitlement culture, is doing so to assure future votes from those receiving benefits. And right now, about half of all American households are getting some kind of compensation from the feds. Some of that, such as Social Security and Medicare, has been earned. But nearly 50 million Americans are receiving food stamps, and 83 million are on Medicaid.

Via: TownHall

Continue Reading.....

ObamaCare: Illegal Voter Mine for the Democratic Party?

While many Americans remain focused on the ominous implications of ObamaCare with regard to health insurance or the faulty website, a far more serious issue remains under the radar. On Wednesday, two national election watchdog groups alleged that ObamaCare is really a massive voter registration vehicle masquerading as ahealthcare bill.

Gregg Phillips, the founder of the election integrity group Voters Trust takes it one step further. “I think [it] is the biggest voter registration fraud scheme in the history of the world,” he told Breitbart News.

Phillips, along with Catherine Engelbrecht of True The Vote, cited a report published by Demos, an organization founded by left-wing activist billionaire George Soros.“Building a Healthy Democracy: Registering 68 Million People to Vote Through Health Benefit Exchanges,”couches this effort in noble terms, contending that “the freedom to vote must be fiercely protected for all citizens, regardless of class or privilege.” Yet the report focuses on the problems encountered by lower-income Americans who register and vote in far lower percentages than those earning more than $100,000 per year. Report author Lisa J. Danetz notes that of the approximately 68 million individuals she envisions being registered by the law, most of them will be low-income individuals “who will eventually enroll in subsidized health care under the law.”

Democrats enjoy a huge political advantage with regard to low-income, largely uninsured Americans. A Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation poll taken last summer reveals that uninsured Americans favored Barack Obama over Mitt Romney by a margin of 62 to 27 percent. Among insured Americans, Obama’s edge was only eight points. Part of the political divide is explained by the fact that Hispanics and black Americans comprise half the nation’s uninsured citizens. Thus, any surge in voter registration facilitated by ObamaCare will undoubtedly favor Democrats.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading......

How Crazies Are Destroying Your Party

This is what happens when the two parties ruling Washington lose touch with America and pander to their crazy-extreme bases: President Obama's competency and personality ratings are nose-diving, according to a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll; barely a sliver of the public thinks highly of the Republican Party; and two-thirds of Americans want to replace their own member of Congress.  

Peter Hart, a Democratic pollster who conducted the survey with Republican Bill McInturff, called this a "Howard Beale moment," a reference to the famous rant from the 1976 movie Network.

"We're mad as hell," Hart said, "and we're not going to take it anymore."

Privately, party strategists agree. On Obama, a Democratic operative who works with the White House emailed me to say: "It's his Titanic moment. He's hit the iceberg, but they keep acting like no water is coming into the ship."

A GOP operative who also requested anonymity said that Wednesday's hearing on Obamacare highlighted what's wrong with his party. "We looked like we were beating [up] the HHS secretary," he said of Kathleen Sebelius. "Why do we have to always overdo it?"

Like many other party regulars, these two operatives worry that hardheaded partisans are pushing both the GOP and Democratic Party away from the political center. The phenomena is playing out unevenly (the GOP is arguably more beholden to its base than the Democrats) and for a number of reasons, including hyper-redistricting, the democratization of political money and the polarization of the public itself.  

But with each self-inflicted Washington crisis, notions such as an independent presidential bid, the dissolution of one or both major parties, and the rise of new political organizations seem less outrageous. The thinking goes like this: If voters today are more empowered than ever via technology (consider the disruption of retail, entertainment, and media industries), how long will they wait before blowing up the two-party system?

Via: National Journal

Continue Reading.....

President Obama: Redistributionist in Chief and ACORN's president

The truth is still the greatest threat to Obama and the greatest hope for the American dream.

It's incredible, but true, that a redistributionist ACORN guy could be elected President of a center-right nation like the United States.

It's true because the truth about Obama and his socialist views and ACORN connections was not generally known and the liberal media establishment wanted it that way.

Audio (www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFSY2dnTSZQ)of Obama:

"...I definitely welcome ACORN's input. You don't have to ask me about that. I'm going to call you even if you didn't ask me.

"When I ran Project Vote, voter registration drive in Illinois, you know, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it. Once I was elected, there wasn't a campaign that ACORN worked on down in Springfield that I wasn't right there with you. Since I've been in the United States Senate, I've been always a partner with ACORN as well. I've been fighting with ACORN, alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career."

It should not be a shock that Obama lied about his redistributionist views. He previously lied about his involvement with the ACORN political party in Illinois, known as the New Party. See www.wnd.com/2012/06/obama-member-of-acorns-3rd-party/, where it is reported that "[t]he socialist-leaning New Party had such a close relationship with the controversial group ACORN that at one point the two shared an office address, fax lines and email addresses" and the New Party "sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda."

As an Illimois state senator in 1998, Barack Obama told an audience at Loyola University in Chicago the truth: He actually believes in redistribution.

A video is available at http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/19/video-rnc-jumps-on-obamas-redistribution-quote/.

But President Obama, running for reelection, rejecting the charge that his economic plan amounts to a redistribution of wealth.

During a "60 Minutes" interview by Steve Kroft last December, President Obama claimed that his real goal is to rebuild a strong middle-class America, not to redistribute wealth.

"What's happened to the bargain?" Obama said in an interview with CBS correspondent Steve Kroft. "What happened to the American deal that says, you know, we are focused on building a strong middle class?

Kroft specifically asked Obama about his mention of "income inequality" in a recent speech. "People will say this is socialist Obama," said Kroft. "And he's come out of the closet," Kroft added.

Obama rejected that as nonsense and insisted that income inequality has nothing to do with socialism. "Everybody's concerned about inequality," Obama said. "What's happened to the bargain? What's happened to the American deal that says, you know, we are focused on building a strong middle class?"

Video is available at http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/19/video-rnc-jumps-on-obamas-redistribution-quote/.

To be elected in 2008, Obama blatantly lied about his relationship with ACORN.

If the truth had been generally known, Obama would have lost.

The truth is still the greatest threat to Obama and the greatest hope for the American dream.

Via: Renew America

AP: Mitt Romney Runs Campaign Like CEO He Was

WASHINGTON (AP) — Mitt Romney seems to be both candidate and campaign CEO these days, and some Republicans say he's trying to do too much.

He reviews TV ads and polling data on an iPad. He writes many of his speeches. He's often talking like a consultant.

One instance of that gave him trouble last week, when a secretly taped speech to donors was posted online just as polls show him narrowly trailing President Barack Obama.

"Here are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them," Romney said at the May fundraiser. "And so my job is not to worry about those people — I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

Democrats accused Romney of writing off half of the country. The former Massachusetts governor insisted he was just talking about the polls and trying to make the point that 47 percent of people probably will support the Democratic incumbent, no matter what their reasons.

Some Republicans grimaced.

They say Romney's explanation was evidence of a big problem with his campaign: The nominee simply is taking on too many duties. Romney's job is to inspire voters, they say, and not manage every detail of his campaign.

"He was talking about the electorate as if it were a ledger sheet," said Alex Castellanos, a Republican strategist who worked closely with Romney on his 2008 presidential campaign. "It diminishes him."

More broadly, the episode illustrated Romney's leadership style, which he's honed over decades in the private sector, where he was an actual CEO. It also provided a look at how he might lead the country as president.

Romney spokesman Kevin Madden defended Romney's approach.

"It's his campaign," Madden said. "On a campaign like this, everything is derived from the candidate's vision, and the reason they are offering their leadership to the American people."

During three decades in private business, Romney made big money turning around struggling companies with hands-on leadership and a laser-like focus on the smallest details.

Via: AP

Continue Reading...

In Chicago, a Democratic civil war

So much for Democratic Party harmony.

Just a few days after a convention that displayed the party as one big happy family, a civil war has erupted in Chicago between the Democrats’ disparate wings.

Rahm Emanuel, the volatile, far-from-union-friendly mayor who is a mainstay of the national Democratic Party, and the almost-as-volatile Chicago local of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), itself a mainstay of the national Democratic Party, are at loggerheads over the future of Chicago’s schools and teachers. The school strike that began Monday should be an alarm bell in the night for Democrats everywhere.

At stake in the conflict is not only the future of education reform but also the role of unions within the party and, by extension, the nation. Emanuel’s clear desire to reduce the teachers union’s role in the city’s schools is hardly his alone. It’s shared by other Democratic mayors such as Los Angeles’sAntonio Villaraigosa. Still other heavily Democratic cities, such as San Jose, Calif., have reduced their employees’ pension benefits. What’s brewing is a battle between Democratic Party management (chiefly mayors, backed by a significant portion of the public) and Democratic Party labor, also backed by a significant portion of the public. If there’s a win-win scenario out there, the party and its publics would do well to find it.

Via: Washington Post

Continue Reading...

Democratic Platform Calls for Constitutional Amendment Limiting Free Speech

(CNSNews.com) – The 2012 Democratic Party platform includes language calling for a constitutional amendment restricting free speech rights during elections, saying that the Supreme Court decision in theCitizens United case should be overturned.

“Our opponents have applauded the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United and welcomed the new flow of special interest money with open arms. In stark contrast, we believe we must take immediate action to curb the influence of lobbyists and special interests on our political institutions,” the 2012 platform says.

“We support campaign finance reform, by constitutional amendment if necessary,” it adds.

In its 2010 decision, the Supreme Court said that the government could not restrict the political speech of activist groups or other independent organizations by limiting how much money they could spend during an election cycle. The court also struck down federal limits on when independent groups could engage in election-related activities such as running television ads or publishing political materials.

During oral arguments, the Obama administration argued that federal campaign finance laws allowed the government to ban the publication of books, pamphlets, or any other material it felt qualified as election-related communications.

By calling for a constitutional amendment – as President Obama has in the past – the Democratic Party is saying it supports an amendment restricting the First Amendment rights affirmed by the Supreme Court. Such restrictions, by the Obama administration’s own admission, would allow the government to ban the publication of books, pamphlets or any other type of material by independent political groups.

Via: CNSNews

Continue Reading...