What Happened to the National Debt?

Republicans have gotten sidetracked and Democrats would rather talk about anything else.

Ted Cruz is annoyed with Congress. That shouldn’t come as a surprise since, as with any decent legislator, Ted Cruz is almost always annoyed with Congress. “My single greatest frustration in Washington,” he told Time, “is in the [past] seven months, the U.S. Senate has spent virtually zero time even talking about jobs and the economy. We spent a month battling about taking away people’s Second Amendment gun rights.”

He’s right that Congress, and the Senate in particular, have neglected the economy in favor of less urgent issues like immigration and gun control. But there’s another, more specific issue – closely intertwined with both the economy and jobs – that’s been virtually absent from the conversation in Washington: the national debt.

It’s a curious oversight. The debt hasn’t exactly disappeared; the official total stands at about $16.9 trillion, and more thorough tallies put it upwards of $70 trillion. The American people are still worried about our fiscal imbalance; a Pew poll from the beginning of this year found that reducing the deficit ranked third on a list of public priorities, up 19 percent since the beginning of Obama’s first term, the biggest rise for any issue. And the news cycle has brought plenty of reminders of the deleterious effects of debt, most recently when Detroit collapsed under the weight of an estimated $18 to $20 billion in liabilities.

For much of 2010 and 2011, the debt was given plenty of prominence thanks to the ascendance of the Tea Party and a series of budget skirmishes that illuminated Washington’s infuriating inability to cut spending. Then came the 2012 election season. Mitt Romney was never an effective advocate for debt reduction, or deficit reduction, or spending cuts (or any issue, or cause, or thing, for that matter). The Democrats, hell-bent on discussing anything other than the budget, threw a series of temper tantrums over piddling issues, inventing the “war on women” and recasting Romney’s mostly spotless career at Bain Capital as an earth-shaking plutocratic stampede over the poor. The attacks were entirely predictable, and when Romney didn’t effectively respond, so was Obama’s victory.

Via: The American Spectator

Continue Reading....

Missouri Voters May Get The Right To Vote For Employee Choice

According to Missouri Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, Missouri voters may soon get the chance to vote whether to give employees the right to decide for themselves whether or not to fund union bosses by putting so-called Right-to-Work legislation on the 2014 ballot.

Similar legislation has been stymied in the past in Missouri, partly because of opposition from some union-friendly Republicans and partly because of an expected veto by Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon.

“I believe we will pass right-to-work next year and bypass (Nixon) entirely by putting it on the referendum ballot for voters,” Kinder publicly declared during the conference. His comments came during a how-to session highlighting the recent passage of a right-to-work law in the historically unionized state of Michigan.

When passed in 1935, the National Labor Relations Act gave unions the ability to negotiate so-called “union (income) security clauses” into union contracts that enable unions to have workers fired from their jobs if they refuse to pay union dues.

In 1947, however, Congress amended the NLRA to allow states to self-determine whether or not to force employees to pay unions by giving states the right to pass Right-to-Work laws.

• Note: State Right-to-Work laws do not apply to airline and railroad employees who are covered under the 1926 Railway Labor Act.

Since 1947, in the face of stiff union opposition, 24 states have chosen to honor their workers’ right to decide for themselves whether or not to pay union dues–with Indiana and Michigan being the most recent.

Right-to-Work laws, however, are tenuous and, ultimately, dependent on who controls Congress since it is only one sentence–Section 14 (b) in the National Labor Relations Act–that gives states the right to determine whether Right-to-Work laws exist at all.

Via: Red State

Continue Reading....

Black senator blasts Harry Reid for suggesting Republicans are racist

The only black lawmaker in the U.S. Senate blasted Senate majority leader Harry Reid on Friday for comments suggesting Republican opposition to President Barack Obama is the result of racism.

South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, a Republican, called on the Nevada Democrat to apologize after saying during a radio interview on Friday that he hopes Republican opposition to Obama is “based on substance and not the fact that he’s African-American.”

“I am sincerely disappointed by continued attempts to divide the American people by playing to the lowest common denominator,” Scott said.

“Instead of engaging in serious debate about the failed policies of this administration – from the ever-increasing burdens created by the national health care reform plan to the tax and spend approach to economic recovery, along with countless others – Democrats are once again trying to hide behind a smokescreen,” the Republican said.

Added Scott: “Our country deserves more from those in Washington. I hope Senator Reid will realize the offensive nature of his remarks and apologize to those who disagree with the President’s policies because of one thing – they are hurting hardworking American families.”

Via: The Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

[]VIDEO] The Five Takes On Obama’s ‘Placebo’ Press Conference

The hosts of The Five mostly agreed thatPresident Obama’s Friday afternoon press conference, which mainly covered issues of national security was too little, too late. Fox & Friends’ Steve Doocy, who was filling in for Greg Gutfeld, called it a “placebo” press conference that failed to address the big issues of the day in a substantive way.

Bob Beckel was the one hold-out, who thought the president did “very good job” despite that fact it was three weeks too late and it did not “convince” him to embrace the NSA.

Doocy did think it was “great” that Obama addressed the NSA with his new four-point plan, but he said despite all that, the government is still going collect “trillions of our phone calls and our e-mails and this is just a placebo press conference so that it goes away.”

Eric Bolling said after watching the press conference, he still believes Obama is “clearly violating the Constitution” with the NSA surveillance programs. Later, he said, “I am so darn tired of President Obama hiding behind the Patriot Act. This is the Patriot Act on steroids, on human growth hormone… The Patriot Act was passed with certain parameters and this blows those parameters out of the water.”

Watch video below, via Fox News:

Via: Mediaite

Continue Reading...

DREAM ACT ADVOCACY GROUP TO 'TARGET' REPUBLICANS AT AUGUST TOWN HALLS

During the August recess, a DREAM Act advocacy group intends to target Republican Representatives at town hall events to pressure them into supporting immigration reform legislation that will most likely be pending before them when they return to Washington in September. 

The DREAM Action Coalition (DRM Action) is urging activists to attend town halls throughout August in at least 30 states, even in heavily Republican districts, to ensure their concerns get aired.  

Breitbart News reporter Lee Stranahan attended a pro-immigration reform town hall, hosted by Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), in Houston last week and noted how important it was for opposition forces to show up at town hall events. Stranhan reported "the anti-amnesty calvary didn't arrive" at the Houston event; "while hundreds of pro-reform voices filled Houston's City Hall, only three adults showed up to make the case against the deeply flawed, nation-altering comprehensive immigration reform proposal."

As Stranahan later explained on Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot channel 125, it is important for amnesty opponents--like DRM Action seems intent on doing from the other side--to show up to such events because local newscasts always are looking for the "opposing" point of view when putting together their stories of the town halls. 

The DRM Action group has a town hall schedule on its website and a list of over 90 Representatives, many of whom are Republican, the group intends to "target" in these states:

Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading.... 

Obama defends health care legislation, announces plans to overhaul surveillance programs

WASHINGTON –  President Obama defended his controversial health care legislation Friday, calling Republican efforts to repeal it an “ideological fixation.”

The president made the comments during an hour-long White House press conference where he also said it was a mistake for the GOP to tie funding the government to the healthcare law.

“The idea that you would shut down the government unless you prevent 30 million people from getting health care is a bad idea,” Obama said. “What you should be thinking about is how can we advance and improve ways for middle class families to have some security so that if they work hard they can get ahead and their kids can get ahead.”

The president added that Republicans would risk the wrath of the public if they vote to shut down the government this fall in an attempt to cut off funding – a comment that’s not sitting well with some in Washington.

“Rather than engage in partisan attacks, President Obama should work with Congress to implement better health care reforms that lower costs, protect jobs and provide better care, as Republicans have consistently offered,” Rory Cooper, the spokesperson for Majority Leader Eric Cantor said in a written statement.

“Obamacare increases costs, turns full-time jobs into part-time jobs and reduces the quality of care. President Obama should urge the Senate to pass our bill codifying his desired employer mandate delay which also extends this privilege to every individual citizen

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading....

Responsible Citizens Celebrate Starbucks with Gun Appreciation Day

If you need a Friday afternoon pick-me-up and support your right to carry a firearm, head over to Starbucks. The national coffee chain has a policy that respects gun laws in states around the country and today, Second Amendment advocates and those who refuse to be victims of violence are celebrating. If your state has concealed carry, so does Starbucks. If your state has open carry, so does Starbucks. 

Starbucks seems an unlikely dueling ground in the national debate over guns, but the ubiquitous coffee chain Friday will once again find itself squarely in the cross hairs in the battle between gun control and gun rights advocates.

More than 2,000 gun rights activists plan to visit their local Starbucks with their sidearms for a national “Starbucks Appreciation Day.”

The Seattle-based chain takes no formal position on guns but has a corporate policy of following applicable state gun laws — including “open carry” laws in more than 40 states that allow permit-holding patrons to bring their loaded weapons into the shop while they sip their lattes and caramel macchiatos.

Gun owners began staging the appreciation days a few years ago when the company faced pressure from gun control advocates to ban firearms from his stores.

Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz resisted the move, saying in one interview, “I’m not a politician. I run a coffee company and we’re trying to abide by the laws in which we do business.”

This year's guns and coffee celebration comes as violent crimes across the country are down while purchases of firearms are up.                                                                        

Congressmen, Staff Prepare to Quit Over Obamacare

Several members of Congress will announce their retirements and congressional staffers will be making retirement plans when Congress returns from summer recess next month, more than a few seasoned observers of Capitol Hill predict.

Why? Because of Obamacare, these observers predict. 

With present Congressional health benefits coming under the aegis of the Affordable Care Act — the official name for Obamacare) — Jan. 1, the paychecks of members of Congress and their staffs will be affected in a big way.

The Office of Personnel Management has approved a rule allowing current congressional healthcare subsidies to continue. Members of Congress and their personal office staffs, however, still must start buying their insurance on their individual states' Obamacare exchanges rather than choose from among the plans available to other federal employees.

"I'm going to have to get my health insurance through the Virginia exchange now," a veteran U.S. House staffer told Newsmax last week, "and I don't know the first thing about it."

Another Hill staffer who has worked for a House member for nearly 20 years — and who has a pre-existing condition — told Newsmax he planned to retire on Jan. 1 and seek another job.

"I just can't afford the change in [health benefits]," he said, pointing out there will be a bigger bite from his paycheck because of Obamacare.

Staffers who work for the House leadership or who are on the staffs of congressional committees will remain under the current healthcare system.

All other federal employees still will be under the Federal Employees Health Benefits program, including those who work at the White House and the Internal Revenue Service, which will play a pivotal role in administering and enforcing Obamacare.

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading.....

Standing Up to the Unions. In the Bay Area, even Democrats are opposing outrageous union demands.

Even in California, the buck stops occasionally.

The final outcome is not yet clear, but even a four-day strike against BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit, the rail system that serves San Francisco and the surrounding area) in July and the threat of a longer one haven’t won transit-union workers in the Bay Area the concessions they want.

According to BART, the workers, who are represented by Service Employees International Union Local 1021 and Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555, are demanding a 15 percent raise over the next three years.

Make no mistake: We’re not in Oliver Twist territory here. According to BART, the employees  — who do blue-collar work such as manning the stations and operating the trains — make an average of $71,000 a year plus $11,000 in overtime. The median household income — household, mind you — in San Francisco County is $73,000. BART employees may not have the lifestyle of Mark Zuckerberg, but they are not anywhere close to poverty.

BART has already made some concessions, including allowing employees to continue paying a mere $92 a month for their health insurance, even if they have dependents. (They will have to pay higher premiums, however, if they choose one of the more expansive plans.) Originally, BART wanted to offer a 4 percent raise over the next four years; now it is proposing a 9 percent raise over the next four years.

Another sticking point is BART’s insistence that employees start contributing to their own pensions. And these pensions are much more generous than the ones many California workers receive. According to CalWatchDog, a site operated by the Pacific Research Institute, a conservative think tank, “60 percent of final pay is just the start for a veteran BART worker who retires.” Asking the workers to make a 5 percent contribution to the pension fund, as BART has done, is hardly the work of a Scrooge.

Via: National Review Online

Continue Reading....

Americans Don’t Need More of Obama’s Stimulus Spending

In a series of campaign-style speeches, President Obama has laid out recycled economic proposals, which include yet another tax increase to pay for $50 billion in new infrastructure stimulus spending. This after Washington already spent $70.6 billion under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009. The trouble is that Washington can’t afford more spending.

The President’s latest tax-and-spend proposals also ignore the effects of that first stimulus. Setting that embarrassing lack of “shovel-ready” jobs aside, researchers at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University found that “stimulus dollars created more job shifting than actual new jobs.” Economist Garett Jones reported that as a result of the stimulus, “less than half of the workers came from the unemployment line, and instead were hired away from other firms and businesses.”

A case in point is the first “shovel-ready” project funded by the stimulus: the resurfacing of Route 650 in Maryland. Instead of creating new jobs, however, the stimulus money Maryland received was used to pay for the salaries of full-time employees.

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley (D) cut the state’s infrastructure budget because of the $771 million gained in stimulus funds. He also raided the state’s Transportation Trust Fund, which is intended to pay for highway repairs, diverting $861 million over three years to help balance the state budget. According to Reason, “[E]ven with the stimulus, [Maryland] state spending on transit infrastructure has seen a net decrease of $90 million since 2009.”

Via: The Foundry

Continue Reading....