Apparently Chris Matthews is deaf or stupid

Chris Matthews asks Paul Ryan (R-Wisc) what he would cut from the deficit to reduce spending and Ryan answers. Chris says he doesn't hear anything about cuts. WTF? You're an idiot.

Watch for yourself.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

MSM-in the throws of climax; the Public-eh....just not that into you.

To cap off this week in news it looks as though the MSM can't understand why, as the President achieves legislative goal after legislative goal, the American people aren't orgasmic for Obama's achievements.

“An earthquake hits Washington,” fill-in ABC anchor David Muir announced Friday night as he gushed that “it comes as the President wraps up a seismic week.” He soon noted how the First Family began a brief vacation in Maine which, he proposed, “comes after the President marked quite a week in Washington. The oil, for now, is finally stopped, and on the political front, his financial reform package finally passed.” He pleaded: “So why such low poll numbers?”
Over “Getting His Due?” on screen, Jake Tapper related how “some Democrats have been grumbling that the public is not giving the President enough credit for all he's accomplished in such a short time.”

The day before, NBC's Chuck Todd empathized with the frustration Obama must be experiencing given legislative victories “comparable to any President in history.” Friday's Hardball on MSNBC carried the full question to Obama that Todd had posed 24 hours earlier in Michigan, but was cut short on Thursday's NBC Nightly News and not run on Friday's Today:

That must be frustrating. You've had an enormous amount of legislative victories – it's comparable to any President in history. It has not translated into political capital with the public. Honestly, are you frustrated by that?

Could it be this Administrations poll numbers have been on a cataclysmic downward spiral and getting worse because the American people don't like what they're seeing? Could it be that all the promises of how awesome stuff was going to be once passed hasn't panned out? Could it be that the American people are waking up to the truth of what this Presidents policies are going to do to this country?

Yes.

Where is your annual Trustees' report on Social Security and Medicare?

Did you know the annual Trustees' report on Social Security/Medicare was supposed to be published in mid-April or May? Did you know they asked for an extension through the end of June? Did you know the report still isn't out?

Yeah, me either and it seems the only people who care are Investors Business Daily.

Are Overdue Reports Concealing ObamaCare Impact On Medicare?

Every year, the Annual Report of the Social Security Board of Trustees comes out between mid-April and mid-May. Now it's July, and there's no sign of this year's report. What is the Obama administration hiding?

The annual report includes detailed information about Social Security and its financing over the next 75 years, produced by the Office of the Actuary of the Social Security Administration.
...............
(But) The implications for Social Security aren't what the Obama administration is hiding by delaying the annual trustees reports. Those annual reports also include information regarding Medicare over the next 75 years. What the administration is trying to hide are sweeping draconian cuts to Medicare resulting from the ObamaCare legislation, which the annual report will document.

Exactly. Aren't all the deep cuts to Medicare and Medicaid how they are paying for this thing? To top it all off, they can't ever actually get those cuts passed into law, so there will be no savings from it. Apparently though, these figures are going to show up in the report and they know the doctors will start screaming when they see that. I wonder how those AMA Docs will feel about ObamaCare then.....

Olympia Snowe will vote for Financial Reform Bill

Republican Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine indicated today she would vote for the passage of the financial reform bill. With her vote they are almost assured of inflicting this nightmare on the American people.

Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine says she will vote to overhaul financial regulations, pushing the legislation to the verge of final passage and a victory for President Barack Obama.

Snowe becomes the third Republican to announce support for the bill, almost guaranteeing 60 votes to overcome procedural obstacles to the legislation.

Whew! I was starting to worry Olympia was going to act like an actual Republican.......

It's premature to tell you we have no funding for the IRS in health care either....

With each passing day we learn of some new law, requirement, agency or fee associated with that "awesome" new health care bill passed by our lawmakers just a few short months ago. It does seem though, the biggest beneficiaries of jobs creation will be the IRS. With nearly every page turn there is some new mandate, tax, fee or tax paper work that will now go through the IRS in order to be sure we all have health care that is unaffordable and unsustainable.

In addition to the new 1099 filing requirements-the one that is a complete and total small business killer, swamping them with massive amounts of unnecessary paperwork-there are other new requirements.

It also falls to the IRS to administrate the whole kit 'n' caboodle of the health care bill.

Under the new law, the IRS will be required to verify incomes for households applying for premium assistance credits on insurance exchanges; determine whether businesses are eligible for small-business tax credits; ensure that individuals are complying with the mandatory coverage requirement; and collect penalties from those who aren’t.

The best part? Oh all of that new stuff (and MORE) is completely and totally unfunded. That's right. The expense of adding new agents and all the processing that will have to be done on the paperwork and what-not wasn't included in the cost of this legislation.

It's ok though, IRS spokesperson Robert Marvin and Senator Max Baucus think we will just worry about that tomorrow.......(can't you just hear Scarlett O'Hara's voice.....)

IRS spokesman Robert Marvin said Friday that the agency hasn’t yet determined how much extra funding it will need.

“While the IRS has already started work on the healthcare provisions, many of the key components are several years away from implementation,” Marvin said in an email. “It's premature to discuss funding issues.”

The office of Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the Finance Committee, echoed that, saying Friday that funding and staffing levels won’t be decided until the IRS comes up with an implementation strategy.

Of course it's premature to discuss funding issues, the November elections haven't happened yet.

Scott Brown bitch slaps Dodd and Frank

Maybe so folks are actually going to stand up for the little guy in Washington. Maybe it will only happen once, but hey at this point I'll take what I can get. Yesterday Scott Brown, (D-MA) sent a letter to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank telling them he would not support the financial reform bill that came out of conference in the dead of the night last Friday. The reason Brown gave for not supporting the reform bill: the $19 billion in new "fees" (or more accurately TAXES) being levied against the banks. Tax hikes that will certainly be passed on to the consumer and small business.

Dear Chairman Dodd and Chairman Frank,

I am writing you to express my strong opposition to the $19 billion bank tax that was included in the financial reform bill during the conference committee. This tax was not in the Senate version of the bill, which I supported. If the final version of this bill contains these higher taxes, I will not support it.

It is especially troubling that this provision was inserted in the conference report in the dead of night without hearings or economic analysis. While some will try to argue this isn’t a tax, this new provision takes real money away from the economy, making it unavailable for lending on Main Street, and gives it to Washington. That sounds like a tax to me.

I have always strongly opposed a bank tax because, as the non-partisan CBO has said, costs would be passed onto the millions of American consumers and small businesses who rely on major U.S. financial institutions for their checking, ATM, loans or other services. This tax will be paid by consumers who will have to pay higher fees and the small businesses that won’t get the funding they need to invest and create jobs.

Imposing this new tax is the wrong option. Our economy is still struggling. It is wrong to impose higher taxes and ignore the impact it will have on our economy without considering other ways we might offset the costs of the measure. I am asking that the conference committee find a way to offset the cost of the bill by cutting unnecessary federal spending. There are hundreds of billions in unspent federal funds sitting around, some authorized years ago for long-dead initiatives. Congress needs to start to looking there first, and I stand ready to help.

Sincerely,
Senator Scott P. Brown

Scott Brown is not my favorite all the time, but this, he gets my approval. Thank you for standing up to these bullies and not "passing it to see what's in it" That isn't how passing new legislation in this country should work.

Did you know we are getting a NEW Consumer Protection Agency?

Moreover, don't we already have a Consumer Protection Agency????

As part of the new Financial Bill that passed out of committee at some ridiculous hour of the day we are now about to be ruled by more unelected officials and subjected to more government command and control without oversight. Welcome the era of new Consumer Protection Agency. This agency will reside within the Federal Reserve, another organization with far too much power, full of unelected officials that can do anything they want without benefit of sunlight.

But the provision receiving the most accolades from consumer activists is the establishment of a consumer protection agency. The bureau will be an independent agency within the Federal Reserve, with its own budget and a director appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

"Finally, we're going to have this cop on the beat that's going to have some teeth, that's going to be able to rein in abusive lending, and deceptive products and services," said Susan Weinstock, financial reform campaign director at the Consumer Federation of America. "It's going to oversee . . . all sorts of things that tripped up consumers."

A cop with teeth? The government will protect us from bad lending practices, but who will protect us from the government?

The worst Administration in history-which cannot handle the Gulf oil spill, national security, illegal immigration, Wall Street, or a weak and dying economy-is now in charge of regulating most all consumer credit everywhere........

I don't feel better.

FYI: Giving out more jobless aid is NOT creating jobs

Our illustrious leaders in Washington are itching to spend more of our hard earned money. I guess they haven't heard-we're broke too.

The demise of Democrats' jobs-agenda legislation means that unemployment benefits will phase out for more than 200,000 people a week. Governors who had counted on fresh federal aid will now have to consider more budget cuts, tax increases and layoffs of state workers.

In a continuous effort to make themselves look good until November the Democrats want to pass more jobless aid to people who have already been receiving jobless aid for more than 99 weeks. While I realize it is a real drag to be unemployed-indeed I have been unemployed before-there is a limit to how much aid one can receive. When have you extended the aid long enough?

Oh wait, I know, through November.

There is no benefit in keeping this charade up. The reason these benefits have to continually be extended is because the economy is not getting better. The rest of America cannot take care of those who are out of work in perpetuity. Life simply does not work like that. It is also a well documented fact that those receiving aid wait until the last minute to actually look for work. If you keep extending benefits, they'll keep not working. It's human nature.

The Dems would love to see this pass though, they are convinced this is the answer.

The rejected bill would have provided $16 billion in new aid to states, preserving the jobs of thousands of state and local government workers and providing what White House officials called an insurance policy against a double-dip recession. It also included dozens of tax breaks sought by business lobbyists and tax increases on domestically produced oil and on investment fund managers.

"This is a bill that would remedy serious challenges that American families face as a result of this Great Recession," said Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chief author of the bill. "This is a bill that works to build a stronger economy. This is a bill to put Americans back to work."

Unfortunately, more debt, extending unemployment benefits to folks-many of whom have been collecting for well over 6 months-and saving the jobs of thousands of government
employees doesn't actually make the economy stronger or put anyone back to work. It simply perpetuates the stagnate, small business killing hell we're all living in right now. Let's also remember, the insurance policy against a double dip recession was the $787 billion dollar stimulus bill passed last year. Why would we need more insurance against something that was already insured against?

Financial Overhaul Bill passes out of committee....no one knows what’s in it.

In another unbelievable act of hubris our legislatures have put together a mammoth bill that will not actually do anything, nor do they have any idea what's in it. A House-Senate conference committee to completed work on toughened financial rules for banks and financial institutions at about 5:30 this morning to the tune of more than 2,000 pages.

"It's a great moment. I'm proud to have been here," said a teary-eyed Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee led the effort in the Senate. "No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we've done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done."

Yeah, again with the no one will actually know how it works or whats in it until we actually get it in place. Then they will probably have to pass a whole bunch of other laws, rules and regulations to make the bill even "better" because that is how our law making process now works. Pass a bill that makes no sense, does nothing good and promotes more socialistic policy-then improve it by passing amendments and other regulation later.

The depth and breadth of corruption, deal making and out-right lying being done by the people who are supposed to be take care of this country is completely disgusting. November may not come fast enough.

Obama wants to remake the economy. Asks for OFA's help

Oy vey....no surprise here:




Yay! Let the decimation of the economy begin!

More rules that are just like Socialism........Business REQUIRED to continue offering Insurance

Once again this Administration is meddling in the private operation of private business. This week the Health and Human Services Committee unveiled a new plan to require all businesses to continue to offer their existing health care plans and not shift a significant portion of the surely skyrocketing cost to the employee. Now that it has become clear the health care bill passed is a social and fiscal nightmare that will bankrupt the country, it is certain they want to be sure it will take evil business down too.

The White House on Monday outlined broad new rules designed to prevent employers from dropping health insurance benefits for their workers or shifting huge new costs onto them.

The regulations empower the administration to revoke the so-called grandfather status of businesses that shift “significant” new burdens onto employees — a considerable penalty that would subject those plans to all the consumer protections in the Democrats’ new healthcare reform law.
.....

The new rules say that employers can make “routine and modest” adjustments to their premium, deductible and co-pay requirements, Sebelius said, but “significant” cost hikes or benefit cuts would cost them their exempted status. The goal is to ensure that grandfathered plans “don’t use this additional flexibility to take advantage of their customers,” she said.

“We don’t want a massive shift of cost to employees,” Sebelius said.

They don't want a massive shift of cost to the employee, but they have no problem bankrupting the business? Are they unfamiliar with who actually creates the jobs in this country? Legislation like this will only serve to freeze hiring and wages even more than they are already, forcing many businesses to shut down entire segments that will no longer be cost effective to keep open. There is nothing like threatening the wage creators right in the middle of the highest unemployment and economic turmoil in recent history. Yeah, that outta make things better.

Another noteworthy consequence of this move? There is no way that many insurance plans will not loose their "exempt status" because of these new regulations. This will absolutely result in a massive shift of employees to the government option. Keep what you have? Right.

Please do not call this an unintended consequence-they know exactly what they are doing.

Don't you love supporting Fannie and Freddie

Republicans tried to force a vote today that would have gotten Fannie and Freddie off the backs of the American tax payer. It's a shame our wonderful congress just didn't see the value in that.

The U.S. House of Representatives Wednesday blocked an effort by Republicans to end the taxpayer support of Fannie Mae (FNM: 0.9, -0.011, -1.21%) and Freddie Mac (FRE: 1.16, 0, 0%).

While Fannie and Freddie lead the charge in loans gone bad, Congress believes we should continue to support them regardless. After all, combined they provide almost 3/4 of all new mortgages.

According to Barney Frank, there is no reason to take them out of conservatorship, after all they are making money. Oh really Barney?

However, the companies continue to rack up losses on mortgages they bought or guaranteed at the height of the housing boom. They foresee receiving more taxpayer funds under an agreement in which the Treasury pumps in enough capital each quarter so that the companies maintain a positive net worth.

It is of course unimportant that not only have we jammed over $145 billion into these two companies since 2008, but in any year they don't show a profit, we pump even more dough into them to be sure they do.

The Federal government had no business propping them up to start with and they have no business continuing to put taxpayer money into a failing business. If Fannie and Freddie are so totally awesome, let them stand on their own.

Obama is a car-jacker.......

Yesterday, at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s fundraising dinner, President Obama likened Republicans to bad drivers wanting the keys to the car back.

In partisan remarks before the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s (DCCC) fundraising dinner this evening, President Obama said that Republicans are like bad drivers, who once drove the car into a ditch and now want the keys back.

“After they drove the car into the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want to keys back. No! You can’t drive. We don’t want to have to go back into the ditch. We just got the car out.”

That's a real hoot considering we are now in a MAC truck, careening out of control, down a mountain, with no brakes. With rising deficits, an unsustainable (and climbing) debt-to-GDP ratio and ginormous government programs, it is ridiculous to claim that Democrats have somehow swept in and saved the country.

If this is saving, please, let me alone!

White House using new math, again

On Wednesday the Obama Administration launched a media campaign touting the payback of bailout money given to GM more than a year ago. $5.8 billion was repaid nearly 5 years ahead of schedule. They are claiming this is proof the bailouts were successful and worth the risk.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said that while the administration doesn't believe that GM and Chrysler have escaped danger of another collapse, the news represents a validation of the president's decision to get involved with the automakers. "I'm making the case that, looking back, almost a year later from the president making a very difficult and unpopular decision to loan money to GM and Chrysler, in order to go through a structured bankruptcy, and save 1 million to 3 million jobs," Gibbs said, "I think we could all agree that the depth of our economic downturn would hardly have been helped with those million or so people additionally out of work."

Unfortunately, a few pesky facts are being left out of this fantastic and astounding revelation......First off, while it is super great and awesome that this $5.8 billion has been repaid early, there is the other $43 billion that was converted into free money and used to buy 61% of GM. There is an excellent chance most of that money will never be repaid-it will go right into the unions. Second, the million jobs saved?.....I wonder what the 65,000 folks just laid off would think about the jobs "saved". They are probably wishing they had been part of the that 1 million. Third, I'm curious, do you supposed the 65,000 workers laid off applied for unemployment benefits-which were then extended last week to infinity. How much will that cost the American Taxpayer?

If this is an example of success, I really don't want to see failure.

GM's Pension a boondogle ready to burst all over the American people?

In what is just one more example of this Administrations inability to see beyond the end of their nose, you know, even into next week, it was recently disclosed that both Chrysler and GM face unfunded pensions plans for retired and current employees. With more than half of a $27 million shortfall being owed to U.S. beneficiaries, the GAO says the federal Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. will face an unprecedented crisis as these benefits mature.

When the two automakers emerged from bankruptcy reorganization the pension problems were seen as a more distant issue, and presumably one that would be eased by economic growth. But the auto industry is facing a slow recovery, and neither the new GM nor the new Chrysler has produced a profit.

Really, I'm just wondering who this news is shocking? The whole time they talked of bailing out the automakers I said the money would never be paid back, because there was no predicting when they were going to be profitable again. Now we find that, SURPRISE they also don't have enough money to fund benefits that bankrupted the company to start with. Do you suppose there is any chance they are starting to see the unintended consequences of thinking anyone is too big to fail? Pension funds will be next. Where does it end?

White House "We're going to return 10% more of what we stole from you"

Thank goodness for those tax cuts President Obama passed last year! According to the White House Americans all around the nation are receiving a whopping 10% MORE of their own money back in refunds this year.

“So far, Americans who have filed their taxes have discovered that the average refund is up nearly ten percent this year –to an all-time high of about $3,000,” Obama said. “This is due in large part to the Recovery Act.”

How kind of them to give us 10% more of what was ours to start with back to us.........

Let's make the Health Care Bill better by REALLY screwing the public.

In an effort to make something that is awful even awfuller, rather than removing unnecessary spending and sweetheart deals the White House is now considering extending some of those deals to every state. Because they cannot garner the votes needed to pass some kind of health care bill-even through reconciliation-the Administration is now considering extending special considerations like increased Medicaid funding and kickbacks to build hospitals not only to the original benefactors, but to all states that might "qualify".

The White House is backing down from efforts to drop "sweetheart" deals poisoning health care legislation as House Budget Committee Democrats meet Monday to craft a "fix-it" bill that does not yet have a price tag.

In a new take on its policy, White House top strategist David Axelrod said President Obama only objects to state-specific arrangements, such as an increase in Medicaid funding for Nebraska, ridiculed as the "cornhusker kickback."

But instead of dropping them, the concept behind those deals could be widened so that all states benefit.

How excellent is it that in a time when we are broke, President Obama is fine with expensive, unnecessary special deals as long as all the states can get in on it. This outrageous spending and careless business sense in running the country must stop. How is it not understood that the outrage from the people does not come because one state got a special deal, but because we can afford NO DEALS. We can't afford the health care bill, even if you take special deals out. Extending those deals further doesn't make it better. It is insulting to me and every other American that we continually be forced to pay for things like this that have no place in health care legislation. It has come to the point where it is clear Obama, Pelosi and Reid have no concern at all what the American people want. They only care they pass this legislation no matter the cost to the American people or the toll it will take on our quality of life.

Guest Post-The Screw You Politics Of The 2000-2001 Balanced Budgets

By: Brian Bollmann

In the 2008 election, both the Democrat and Republican candidates were touting the balanced budgets of the late 1990’s Clinton Presidency and Republican Congress. Over and over we heard how bad the Bush Presidency and Republican Congressed handled their fiscal responsibility and how all this would change with either Democrat or Republican option for President. Republicans and Democrats in 2000 – 2001: Good. Republicans and Democrats in 2002 – 2008: Bad. Everyone seemed to agree.

They say any time the Democrats and Republicans are in agreement – you know one thing – Americans are getting screwed.

I’ve seen this 1st graph many times showing that in 2000 and 2001 there was a budget surplus, and with the 9/11 attacks, the Bush wars, and the Bush economic policy, we went to hell in a hand basket and had to elect a Democrat Congress and the chosen one. Now we see that Obama has double-doubled-down on the debt and we will race to a debt greater than 100% of our GDP.

But there’s that nagging budget surplus in 2000 and 2001. There are the Republicans and Democrats in agreement. And, it still bugs me, tests credulity, and bothers me down to the cockles of my heart.

Out here in the real world, you know that your budget must stay within the amount of money you make. Let’s say you make $48,000, owe $75,000 on a house, and owe $15,000 on a car. At the beginning of the year, you owe, $80,000. Throughout the year you receive income of $4000 per month, you pay for food, utilities, clothing, entertainment, taxes and all the things you need throughout the year. You make payments on your house and your car. At the end of the year, let’s say you now owe $82,000. Did you budget properly? Did you spend more than you should have? Did you have a balanced budget? The answer is clearly no.

However, our elected officials and bureaucrats have been telling us for 10 years that the 2000 and 2001 budgets were balanced.

The next graph was created from data readily available on the White House web site at:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals/

A table “Table 7.1—Federal Debt at the End of Year: 1940–2015” lists the year-by-year Gross National Debt from 1940 – 2009 with estimates through 2015. A simple calculation determining whether debt went up or down for a given year shows that GROSS NATIONAL DEBT HAS RISEN EVERY YEAR SINCE 1968.

In 2008 and 2009, we added an incredible $1.9 Trillion to the national debt each year. But look back to 1999 - 2001; as you can see we also added to our Gross National Debt. In 1999, only a miniscule (by Federal Government standards) $23 Billion was added to the debt, but the bottom line, there WAS an increase in the Gross National Debt. The last year that the Gross National Debt went down was 1968.

In the real world where you and I live, this means the budget WAS NOT balanced. This means that the elected officials and bureaucrats are playing games with the numbers. This means that your Federal Representatives and Presidents are continuing to perpetuate this lie!

Surprised? I doubt it; I wasn’t.

So, now you know the facts. Now you are armed with information. The next time one of your elected liars tries to tell you that our wonderful Federal Government balanced the budget in 1999-2001, tell them they are perpetuating a lie and that you won’t stand for it.

And, to me, if the Tea Party wants to get active, the place to start is with a Balanced Budget Amendment.

More jobs lost in February?......all the fault of Global Warming falling from the sky.......

There is a very bad jobs report coming out on Friday that will tell us unemployment rose during February and it was the fault of the Global Warming blizzards that hit the east cost.

Economic officials on Monday were already spinning expectations for the report, saying it would be important to look past February’s figures to the “underlying trends,” according to White House economic adviser Larry Summers.
“The blizzards that affected much of the country during the last month are likely to distort the statistics,” Summers told CNBC.

This is just the latest in a string of excuses as to why we continually lose jobs these days. I wonder when they are going to figure out it is the declining economy and bad policy of this Administration that causes those numbers to go up every month......

A Deficit Panel? Seriously.

President Obama has plans to announce the establishment of an 18-member "Deficit" Panel on Thursday. The goal of this panel is to find ways to cut soaring deficits......

Obama's version of the commission is a weak substitute for what he really wanted: a panel created by Congress that could force lawmakers to consider unpopular remedies to reduce the debt, including curbing politically sensitive entitlements like Social Security and Medicare.

As rejected, the bipartisan 18-member panel would have worked for much of the year and, if 14 members agree, report a deficit reduction blueprint after the November elections that would be voted on before the new Congress convenes next year. The 14 would have to include at least half of the panel's Republicans.

This is the most ridiculous thing I have heard this week. We don't need an 18-member panel to tells us how to cut the deficit. I am but one person and I know the answer to this question: STOP SPENDING SO MUCH MONEY! The government has to stop trying to be all things to all people and they have to stop treating the American people as a endless faucet of free flowing money. If you want to lower the deficit, don't raise the debt ceiling, then freeze it at those unsustainable levels. If you want to lower the deficit let business and the free-market go to work on the economy and generate jobs-as has been proven time and time again. If you want to bring America back to what it should be, leave it alone-stop creating panels and interfering every step of the way.