493.) President Obama urged Egyptian officials to refrain from violence against peaceful protesters. The thought struck me, why should they listen to him? What is he going to do? He has already shown he is either unwilling, or afraid to enforce anything he says; I reference of course his actions against Iran when they where attempting to enrich uranium.
494.) Vice President Joe Biden and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs both have refused to label the President Of Egypt a Dictator. This man has held the country in a state of emergency power for over two decades. Basically he can tap phone lines when he wants, he can detain people with out warrent, he fixes elections, sends out security forces to attack people who vote against him, nothing is really pointing to him not being a dictator. in 2006 he agreed to have a multicannidate presidential election, but he trumped up some fraud charges against his opponet and had him thrown in jail for three years. How is this man not a dictator?
495.) I said in the previous post that President Obama wanted to push for new green energy jobs, and I also talked about how the government uses taxes and regulations to create false market forces to move the economy to where it thinks it should go. President Obama has proposed new mining regulations which could in his staffs own words “proposed new coal mining regulations to protect streams would eliminate thousands of jobs across the country.” The estimates are as high as 7000 workers could lose their jobs as a result of the President’s plan that is almost a tenth of the coal miners in the nation. Just what do you think will happen to our electricity prices when these regulation take affect? The words “necessarily sky rocket” come to mind.
496.) The number of waivers for obamacare has jumped from 222 to 750. This just a week after the GOP led house announced investigations into waivers granted to companies. I guess the unions are having a hard time dealing with the cuts they will have to make to compensate for the governments new mandate. Progressives always seem to forget that companies are in the business of makeing money, not providing jobs and health care. That is not their primary function. Their pimary function is to make their owners money. They hire people to work for them in exhange they pay them. The worker is a byproduct not the goal. People like President Obama do not see it that way they see the worker as all important and they believe that the company sprouted to help them. That is backwards. I don’t want to sound evil, and I do not hate workers, I am merely stating a fact. If obamacare is so great, if it is going to solve all the evils in the world, why are so many people having to get waivers from it? It is time for fair and equal protection of the law, make everyone fallow the law that he loves so much, that he thinks is the greatest thing sense man gained his freedom from tyrants. It is an economic disaster waiting to happen, and he knows it, I am pretty sure in a recent speech he said that he wanted to turn America into the best place in the world for business. How does mandating a company provide costly health care help make our country more friendly to business, well judging by the ever climbing number of waivers he has granted I am willing to bet it doesn’t.
497.) The crowning jewel of President Obama’s first year in office, Obamacare, hit yet another snag yesterday when a Federal Judge ruled the entire law unconsitutional. U.S. District Judge Roger Vison ruled that congress overstepped its consitutional bounds with the individual mandate. He said “Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void,” he then said, “The individual mandate applies across the board. People have no choice and there is no way to avoid it. Those who fall under the individual mandate either comply with it, or they are penalized. It is not based on an activity that they make the choice to undertake. Rather, it is based solely on citizenship and on being alive,” Basically this judge said exactly what I have been saying all along, just a lot more eloquently. It is a scary thought, the government having the power not only to regulate what you do, but also what you don’t do? The judge struck down the law, not for politics, not because he doesn’t like democrats, or because he hates old people, but because the law expands the governments power somewhere it is not legally allowed to go. He said in his ruling “It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause. If it has the power to compel an otherwise passive individual into a commercial transaction with a third party merely by asserting — as was done in the act — that compelling the actual transaction is itself “commercial and economic in nature, and substantially affects interstate commerce,” it is not hyperbolizing to suggest that Congress could do almost anything it wanted.” President Obama is not willing to let go of this new found federal power, and he is definatly not willing to let his beloved healthcare bill go with out a fight. In typical Obama fashion his administration quickly pounced on the ruling, and not by defending the law but trying to smeer the judge. They accuse the judge of “judicial activism” I do not see how a judge finding no provision in the consitution to punish someone for the lack of activity is judicial activism. An assistant to the President Stephanie Cutter said that the ruling is “a plain case of judicial overreach.” She argued that “courts have a consitutional obligation to preserve as much of a statute as can be preserved.” The problem with President’s complaint is that the judge is not legislating from the bench, he is just merely fallowing the letter of the law. You see in their hurry to get the bill ram rodded through congress President Obama and the progressives on the hill forgot to add a severability clause, which would have made it possible for just the individual mandate to be struck down. I would like to hear the President come in front of the public and defend what he has called the linchpin of the health care overhaul, just how is an individual mandate consitutional.
498.) President Obama said “Government should not intrude on private family matters I am committed to protecting this constitutional right. I also remain committed to policies, initiatives, and programs that help prevent unintended pregnancies,” That is odd it really is President Obama just said that the government should not intrude on private family matters, yet he is willing to tell parents what they can pack in their kids lunch. Look at his wife going around the country telling people how they have fed their kids wrong. Is that not a private family matter? Is health insurance not a private family matter? Basically its not okay for the government to tell you not to kill the seeds of the next generation, but it is okay for the government to tell you what you can and can’t eat. Let’s not pretend that President Obama stands for individual liberty and an unintrusive government. If he did he never would have stolen from GM bond holders to fund the unions. President Obama has constantly supported an increase in government power, which means a decrease in personal liberty. You cannot stand for big government and personal liberty, the two are different sides of the coin.