Tag: Graham

The Shutdown: Clowns to the Left of Me…Jokers to the “Right”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

clowncarAs the Government Shutdown wanes on, polls are coming out, seemingly every day, blaming the 17% Shutdown on Congress. Heck, some are even actually laying the blame on the shoulders of President Barack Hussein Obama, where is most certainly belongs.

As yesterday ended, Congress found themselves still without any sort of agreement, as the Wall Street Journal reports…

Top Senate leaders said they were within striking distance of an agreement Monday to reopen the federal government and defuse a looming debt crisis just days before the U.S. could run out of money to pay its bills.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said on the Senate floor that the leaders had made “tremendous progress” toward a deal and that he was hopeful Tuesday would be a “bright day.” The Senate’s Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, seconded Mr. Reid’s optimism. “We’ve had a good day,” he said.

The White House postponed a planned afternoon meeting of congressional leaders with President Barack Obama, saying the schedule change would give Senate leaders time to hash out a deal.

The latest proposal would reopen the government at current spending levels until Jan. 15 and extend the federal borrowing limit until early February, according to aides familiar with the talks. Lawmakers also would begin longer-term negotiations on the budget, with the task of reaching an agreement by Dec. 13.

Even before the deal was unveiled, it provoked grumbling Monday night among restive House Republicans. Mr. McConnell said Monday he expected to “get a result that will be acceptable to both sides.”

By setting up yet another series of fiscal deadlines, the agreement, if embraced, would carry the hallmark of other deadline-driven deals that have become typical of the increasingly polarized Capitol.

“Everybody realizes that whatever happens, we’re going to be litigating this another day,” said Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, a member of the Senate GOP leadership.

…Republicans who entered the budget battle determined to gut the health law have steadily scaled back their demands in the face of Democratic resistance. Still, many could find it hard to accept the Senate proposal, especially if it makes no changes to the health law.

Some House Republicans would likely resist the deal, putting House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) in a tight spot.

Mr. Boehner could face a rebellion from the House’s most fiscally conservative lawmakers, many of whom were elected with tea-party support. That would force Mr. Boehner to rely on Democrats to pass the Senate measure.

The lack of immediate spending cuts, as well as the absence of major changes to the health law, could prompt conservative opposition.

“I can’t vote for something that doesn’t have substantive spending cuts right now,” said Rep. Joe Barton (R., Texas).

Many House Republicans declined to comment until they saw the final Senate proposal. Some still were smarting from Mr. Obama’s decision to end discussions with them on Friday, which effectively sidelined the House GOP and accelerated talks in the Senate. The House offer abandoned many of the GOP’s initial policy demands. It would have raised the debt ceiling for six weeks without making other policy changes. But it didn’t appear to contain any explicit agreement to reopen the government immediately.

“We believed that we could have worked with the president,” said Rep. Pete Sessions (R., Texas) “and then the president dropped us like a hot potato.”

There is actually more animus from the House Republicans toward the RINOs in the Senate, than the WSJ alluded to, as Breitbart.com tells us…

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), chair of the House Budget Committee, told conservative talk radio host Charlie Sykes Monday morning that House Republicans had demanded a one-year delay in Obamacare’s individual mandate, along with an end to congressional exemptions, while offering a six-week debt ceiling hike to allow room for negotiations on broader budget issues. The offer was made to President Barack Obama last Thursday.

President Obama, said Ryan, listened but declined to respond. In the meantime, Ryan said, it became clear the president was negotiating separately to obtain more favorable terms from Senate Republicans, trying to “jam” the House Republicans in the process. Ryan told Sykes that Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had “overplayed their hand” in attempting to prolong the crisis to maximize political damage to Republicans.

Ryan described the delay to the individual mandate as an “obvious” step to take, given that technical issues with the Obamacare exchanges might prevent the mandate from being enforced at all. “We could have spent the weekend putting an agreement together that says we’re gonna deal with the debt, we’re gonna deal with this economy, and we’re gonna fix these big flaws in Obamacare, or at least give people delays in these penalties.”

While Ryan actually makes a good point, concerning delaying the Individual Mandate, that is like using a slingshot to bring down an elephant.

The fact of the matter is that Americans do not want Obamacare…period…as proven by the fact that only 51,000 nationally, signed up for Obamacare in its first week.

That is less Americans than attend a College or Professional Football Game.

Evidently, the Manchurian President feels like he can more easily con the old RINO’s in the Senate, like McConnell, McCain, and Graham, who have been publicly bashing Conservatives for a while now, including the last week, than he can Cryin’ John and Company, in the House.

Meanwhile, average Americans, like you and me, are forced to watch these clowns and jokers, as they hurl accusations at one another, making Capital Hill and the White House sound more like a Daycare Center, rather than the Seat of Government.

Judging from the fact that Obama is the one who refuses to negotiate…

I’d say that somebody needs a nap.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Syria Situation: Tyrants and Turncoats and RINOs…Oh, My!

On By kingsjesterIn Politics8 Comments

kerryassaddinnerMay I ask you something? If somebody is a tyrant and a dictator who hates your country with a passion,, and you were a sitting United States Senator, would you be having a “couples dinner” with him?

Well, back in 2011, as this picture which I have posted shows, that is exactly what our present Secretary of State John F. (I served in Vietnam) Kerry, did.

In fact, later in 2011, speaking at a think tank, Kerry said,

Well, I personally believe that — I mean, this is my belief, okay? But President Assad has been very generous with me in terms of the discussions we have had. And when I last went to — the last several trips to Syria — I asked President Assad to do certain things to build the relationship with the United States and sort of show the good faith that would help us to move the process forward.

The thing is, Kerry, by 2011, had a well-established history with Syrian President Assad, per David Horowitz’s discoverthenetworks.org…

Since the early 2000s, Kerry has been the federal government’s highest-ranking apologist for Syrian President Bashar Assad. Indeed it was Kerry who made numerous efforts to undermine the Bush administration’s attempt to isolate the Syrian dictator after its courtship of him ended in failure in 2003; after Bush repeatedly accused Syria of supporting terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere; and after the United States withdrew its ambassador to Syria following the 2005 assassination of Lebanon’s former premier Rafiq Hariri in a car bombing most likely orchestrated by the Assad regime.

In January 2009, just days after Barack Obama’s inauguration, Kerry was sent to Syria as part of a policy review by an Obama administration looking to establish new relationships with countries the Bush administration had considered hostile. (This was the first of five trips Kerry would make to Syria between 2009 and 2011.)

During the January 2009 trip, Kerry listened to Bashar Assad advise him that Washington must “move away from a policy based on dictating decisions,” and that future relations between the U.S. and Syria should be based on a “proper understanding” by Washington of Middle East issues and interests. In return, Kerry used the occasion to bash the former administration. “Unlike the Bush administration that believed you could simply tell people what to do and walk away and wait for them to do it, we believe you have to engage in a discussion,” he said.

A year later, Kerry, as the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, sat down once again with Assad. “Syria is an essential player in bringing peace and stability to the region,” he said in April 2010. “Both the United States and Syria have a very deep interest … in having a very frank exchange on any differences [and] agreements that we have about the possibilities of peace in this region.” And once again, he called on Syria to stop supplying weapons to Hezbollah.

In November 2010, disclosures of diplomatic cables by the WikiLeaks website revealed that Kerry had been busy undermining Israel as well: He had told leaders in Qatar that the Golan Heights should be returned to Syria, and that the capital of a Palestinian state should be established in East Jerusalem, as part of the “peace process.”

Now, in 2013, just last week, in the nationally-televised speech his boss did not have the nerve to make, Secretary of State, John Kerry, said,

In an increasingly complicated world of sectarian and religious extremist violence, what we choose to do — or not do — matters in real ways to our own security. Some cite the risk of doing things. We need to ask what is the risk of doing nothing.

It matters because if we choose to live in a world where a thug and a murderer like Bashar al-Assad can gas thousands of his own people with impunity, even after the United States and our allies said no, and then the world does nothing about it, there will be no end to the test of our resolve and the dangers that will flow from those others who believe that they can do as they will.

President Barack Hussein Obama and SOS John Kerry are playing a very dangerous game. Obama met with Senate RINO’s John “Juan McAmnesty” McCain, and his pet dog, Lindsey “Tiddie” Graham, trying to convince them to, once again, betray their party, and their nation.

The “Sunshine Boys” held a press conference after the meeting. Lt. Col. Allen West was watching, and made this observation:

Watched Senators McCain and Graham’s press conference after their meeting with President Obama on the subject of Syria. It seems the tagline to be used is ‘degrade Assad and upgrade the resistance.’ I hate to be the one to ruin the party, but this administration did exactly that in Libya and never considered the unintended consequences. Now in Libya we have a proliferation of Islamist forces who are training terrorist insurgents to head to Syria, supported by the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda, as well as a consulate attack resulting in the death of four Americans, one being an Ambassador. In Egypt we ‘deposed’ Mubarak and enabled the Muslim Brotherhood and the unintended consequences are a civil war in Egypt and increased persecution of the Coptic Christians. So here we go again with the Obama administration, and useful tools from Congress, embarking America on a nebulous endeavor in the Middle East without consideration of the untended consequences. The opposition in Syria are Islamists supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and Al Qaeda, and the Muslim Brotherhood. The Obama administration has not supported the Free Syrian Army under COL Riad. NO, to any US military action in Syria. The Obama administration has a confused Middle East policy and has shown ineptness in understanding the second and third order effects.

Indeed.

As I have written before, I believe that Obama has made promises to the Muslim Brotherhood and its off-shoots like al-Qaeda. And, as we all know, he certainly doesn’t care what happens to Israel.

As for Juan the Maverick and his faithful dog, Tiddie, they are two full of their own self-importance and superior intellect, like the rest of the GOP Moderate Elite are, to realize that they are putting our entire nation at risk.

Dr. Charles Krauthammer called this while situation “Amateur Hour”.

Given the fact that there is plenty of amateurish behavior to go around, I would say that it is more like “The Gong Show”.

And, we desperately need Jaye P. Morgan to ring the Gong.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Power, Perks, and Privilege: Washington Vs. the U.S.A.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics7 Comments

americaneagleflagWhat in the Sam Hill is going on in this country?

We’ve got “leaders”…and I use the world loosely…that seemingly could not care less what the American Citizens who elected them want to happen in our nation.

For example, we have a President of the United States, who won’t allow us inside OUR White House, which we bought and paid for. Meanwhile, he, his crass bigot of a wife, and their kids, as I reported yesterday, are about to go on a trip to Africa, which will cost us, the American Taxpayers, up to 100,000,000 dollars.

Hey, Scooter…while you’re over there…visiting the land of your bir…err…ancestors…say hello to your brother for us. You know…the one who lives in a hut.

Additionally, he and members of Congress…on both sides of the aisle…want to jump in the middle of a Civil War in Syria…on the side of the “noble” rebels.  Some nobility. Those “rebels” are supported by, and support in return, the bloody Muslim Terrorist Organization known as al-Qaeda. Are all of you “Beltway Boys (and girls)” blooming idiots?

There are no “Good Guys” in this scufflin’ match. Why don’t we just sit this one out and let “the last man standing” win?

I thought that we were supposed to have a system of checks and balances in this country.  Between Obama signing Executive Orders and ruling like an emperor on his throne and the spineless Republican Leadership basically giving him carte blanche to do whatever the heck he wants, average citizens, like me, are experiencing a feeling of moral outrage and a feeling of helplessness.

We have elected Senators and Representatives who have seemingly forgotten who pays their salaries and who put them in office.

Look at what is facing us, right now.

These Congresscritters seem to be dead set on betraying the very country that they are supposed to be serving. They want to reward the illegal behavior of millions of “undocumented immigrants’, who sneaked into our sovereign nation, to have the monetary and Social advantages of being an American, without any of the responsibilities.

While claiming an altruistic motive behind their  drive for Amnesty, these Congresscitters’ actual motivation is more self-serving than anything else. They want to create more voters for their political party.

And, that is where the Democrats are playing Sen. Marco Rubio, and the rest of his new-found friends in the GOP Elite for fools.

If the Moderate Republicans believe that any of these illegal aliens are going to vote for them, when they can vote for the Party of Baracky Claus, instead…they’re dumber than Jim Carrey’s Anti-gun Video.

While I’m on a rant…Sen. Rubio is another subject which I would like to address. Did he fall victim to a Space Pod, or what? I remember this guy from the Mid-terms, speaking out about our Constitutional Rights, in front of Tea Party Rallies, with great Conservatives like Sarah Palin and Lt. Col. Allen West.

Now, ol’ Marco spends his days at the G.O.P. Elite Country Club, sipping Apple Martinis with Juan McAmnesty and his pet dog, “Toodie” Graham.

Evidently,

Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely.

Our Founding Fathers were afraid of that. They viewed national service, as just that. A farmer or a merchant would be elected to the Senate or the House, he would spend his term, in the service of his country, and then he would rejoin his follow American Citizens, and allow fresh ideas to be heard.

Not now. Now, Congresscritters make a career out of it, often dying in office, like Frank Lautenberg, who was 89.

Why? Is the reason that they stay past their usefulness in office, because they truly wish to serve their constituencies? I don’t think so.

I believe it’s a combination of Power, Perks, and Privilege.

Why should they leave…if we are dumb enough to keep electing them?

Thank you, sir. May I have another?

What can average Americans, like you and I, do about this?

I mean, it’s become dang near impossible to tell the Republicans from the Democrats. In fact, the Moderate Republican Leadership acts as if they want to be Democrats, bending over so far in “compromise” with the opposition party, that they can see their own hindquarters.

It is almost as if we have become two countries…the tiny area of blue, which we saw in electoral maps, concentrated around the Northeast and the coasts, and the red areas, which basically comprise 90% of America, including the area referred to as “The Heartland”.

Out here in “The Heartland”, the majority of Americans still “bitterly cling” to our Bibles and guns…and try hard to live up to and uphold the Traditional American Values taught to us by our parents and grandparents, in spite of being bombarded daily by an out-of-touch leadership in Washington and their sycophants in the Main Stream Media.

The strength of America lies in its people…not an ever-expanding, nanny state, all-powerful Federal Government.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Dr. Benjamin Franklin, 81 years old, was approached by a lady, as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation.

The lady asked him,

Well, Doctor…What have we got? A Republic or a Monarchy?

Dr. Franklin answered,

A Republic, madam. If, you can keep it.

Today, almost 235 years later, we still have a Republic. If, we can keep it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

BenghaziGate: The “I’m Rubber, You’re Glue” Defense

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

The latest “But…but…they did it ,too!” Defensive Strategy from the Democrats,  concerning the unabashed lies told by this Administration and its spokesperson, Susan Rice, regarding the murder of 4 brave Americans on 9/11/12, on the ground of the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, is an attempt to President George W. Bush’s claiming that there were WMDs in Iraq with the Obama Administration’s numerous bald-faced lies blaming an un-watched Youtube video for the Middle Eastern Riots on 9/11/12.

The Democrats’ claim doesn’t hold water.

From the New York Post:

There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.

The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.

The documents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons arsenal — most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.

In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mustard, a blister agent, the documents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.

Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.

Regarding BenghaziGate, Susan Rice had a lot to say yesterday, in her meeting with Senators McCain, Graham, and Ayotte. It was a meeting that did nothing by leave the Senators feeling more uncomfortable about the quadruple murder at the Consulate, than when they began the meeting.

Susan E. Rice may have hoped that paying a conciliatory call on three hostile Senate Republicans on Tuesday would smooth over a festering dispute about the deadly attack on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, and clear a roadblock to her nomination as secretary of state.

“If you think these three Senators walked in with open minds and no agenda, I’d like to sell you a bridge that crosses the East River into Brooklyn. McCain’s little kangaroo court is about as transparent as his anger.”

But the senators seemed anything but mollified, signaling instead that they would still oppose Ms. Rice, the ambassador to the United Nations, if she is nominated by President Obama, even after she conceded errors in the account of the assault she gave on Sunday morning television programs shortly after it occurred in September.

Two of the Republicans, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, said they would seek to block Ms. Rice, who according to administration officials remains Mr. Obama’s preferred choice to succeed Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. The third Republican, Senator John McCain of Arizona, said on Fox that he would be “very hard-pressed” to support Ms. Rice.

“Bottom line, I’m more disturbed than I was before,” Mr. Graham said after the tense, closed-door meeting.

The continued criticism of Ms. Rice, 48, a diplomat with close ties to Mr. Obama, deepens an already bitter and unusually personal feud between the White House and Republicans over Libya. Responding to a question about criticism of Ms. Rice at a news conference two weeks ago, Mr. Obama said, “If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me.”

It also raises the prospect of a confirmation battle if the president goes ahead with nominating Ms. Rice. To some extent, that battle is already under way, even before he has submitted her name. Ms. Rice’s visits to senators, which will continue Wednesday, bear all the hallmarks of a presidential nominee seeking to win over reluctant lawmakers.

A senior administration official said the harsh reaction to Ms. Rice’s appearance on Tuesday would have no effect on her chances for secretary of state. “They’ve been saying the same thing for months,” he said.

Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts and the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, is the other leading candidate for the post. Several senators, including Mr. McCain, said they would prefer Mr. Kerry and predicted that he would sail through a confirmation hearing.

In a statement after the meeting, Ms. Rice said she incorrectly described the attack in Benghazi, which killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, as a spontaneous protest gone awry rather than a premeditated terrorist attack. But she said she based her remarks on the intelligence then available — intelligence that changed over time.

That’s called “lying”, ma’am.

Those Senators should not rest until they find out who issued the “Stand Down” order on that fateful night, leading to the murders of those brave Americans.

As Americans, we must not relent in seeking the truth in this rapidly evolving scandal.

No matter how many revisions to their initial lie-filled explanation of the attack that they offer.

President Harry S. Truman had a sign on his desk in the Oval Office that said, “The Buck Stops here.”

I firmly believe that President Barack Hussein Obama has one on his desk that says, “It’s Not My Fault.”

Washington’s “Revenue” = Our Money

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

20 years ago, members of Congress signed the following pledge from the Americans for Tax Reform:

I, _______________, pledge to the taxpayers of the _____ district of the state of__________, and to the American people that I will:

ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses; and

TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.

Evidently, Obama’s promises aren’t the only ones that come with expiration dates.

Foxnews.com reports

New York Rep. Peter King and Sen. Lindsey Graham said Sunday they would break the pledge and accept tax changes to generate more revenue to curb the trillion-dollar federal deficit.

Their statements followed a similar one Thursday by Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss.

“I agree entirely with Saxby Chambliss,” King said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “A pledge you signed 20 years ago, 18 years ago, is for that Congress. … The world has changed, and the economic situation is different.”

The New York congressman said he was opposed to tax increases but that “everything should be on the table” when President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid try to broker a deal.

“I’m not going to prejudge it, and I’m just saying we should not be taking ironclad positions,” King added. “I have faith that John Boehner can put together a good package.”

Should Congress and the White House fail to reach an agreement, a $500 billion mix of federal cuts and unrelated tax increases would kick in January 2 — the result of lawmakers failing to reach a more measure approached to cutting the deficit and keeping the country from going over the so-called “fiscal cliff.”

The across-the-board cuts to the federal budget would equal more than $1 trillion over the next 10 years.

Graham has suggested earlier that he would be open to changes in taxes but repeated Sunday only if Democrats are willing to cut federal spending by scaling back entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security.

“I will violate the pledge, long story short, for the good of the country, only if Democrats will do entitlement reform,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.”

He also said the only pledge that should be made when the country is trillions in debt is to “avoid becoming Greece.”

“Republicans should put revenue on the table,” he continued. “We don’t generate enough revenue.”

However, Graham said he agrees with pledge champion Grover Norquist that tax rates should not be increases and instead suggested generating revenue through capping tax deductions.

Indiana Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, on the same show, acknowledged that his party needs to “bring entitlement reform into the conversation.”

When Politicians like Lindsey Graham use the word “revenue”, it positively chaps my hindquarters.

It’s not “revenue”, Sen. Graham! It is Americans’ hard-earned wages ,which you want to tax the stew out of, in order to continue to fund the out-of-control leviathan known as the United States Federal Government.

The  term “fiscal cliff” refers to

A combination of expiring tax cuts and across-the-board government spending cuts scheduled to become effective Dec. 31, 2012. The idea behind the fiscal cliff was that if the federal government allowed these two events to proceed as planned, they would have a detrimental effect on an already shaky economy, perhaps sending it back into an official recession as it cut household incomes, increased unemployment rates and undermined consumer and investor confidence. At the same time, it was predicted that going over the fiscal cliff would significantly reduce the federal budget deficit.

Grover Norquist, the head of Americans for Tax Reform, summarizes the situation thusly:

Obama’s present demand is that the top two marginal tax rates be increased to 39.6 percent plus the 3.8 percent Obamacare tax surcharge for a top rate of 43.4 percent. The death tax would also jump back to 55 percent, capital gains tax would jump from 15 percent to 23.8 percent, and the tax on dividends would increase from 15 percent to 39.6 percent.

Speaker John Boehner is calling for extending all of the Bush tax cuts for all income groups.

Boehner notes that there are 11 million businesses that pay taxes at the individual level. Obama, on the other hand, is demanding that more than half of small business income be taxed at 43.4 percent rather than today’s 35 percent. This would be a body blow to job creation.

If Obama follows through on his threat and refuses to extend the Bush tax cuts, then there would be an automatic $500 billion tax increase beginning January 1, 2013, that would total $5 trillion over the decade.

…Here’s the thing

Now Obama is trying to conflate these two issues: the automatic tax hike that takes place unless the present rates are not extended as they were two years ago and the automatic spending cuts. They are of course very different. The tax hikes would hurt the economy. The spending cuts would reduce the Obama debt machine and strengthen the economy.

So far, both House Speaker Boehner and Senate Republican Mitch McConnell have both said they would not support any increase in marginal tax rates. They have said they are open to more revenues from economic growth. One fear is that taxes could be raised by limiting tax deductions for home mortgages, health insurance, charitable giving and state and local taxes to raise a great deal of money from taxpayers without technically increasing marginal tax rates.

This would be a bad idea one, because those tax hikes would be instead of spending restraint and second, because reducing deductions now in order to spend more money makes tax reform much more difficult later.

Some had hoped that President Obama would focus on job creation and back off his high tax/stimulus spending agenda that has so damaged the economy. It does appear that four years of failure have taught him nothing.

Obama has not put on the table any specific entitlement reforms and is demanding a total of $1.6 trillion in tax hikes. He is all tax hikes and no spending restraint. Nothing has changed in four years.

Obama, and every politician who decides to jump on his socialist bandwagon and raise taxes during the horrible economic conditions the American Taxpaxers are facing, are playing fast and loose with Americans’ money.

In the business world, that is called poor investing at best, and a con game at worst.

I tell you what, Sen. Graham. Why don’t you and the rest of Hussein Obama’s 40 thieves fix your own fiscal house first, and tighten your own belts, before you force hard-working Americans to pay more taxes to keep you all in the lifestyle to which you have become accustomed.

It’s called being a “good steward” and a “public servant”.

Terms you folks up on Capital Hill seem to have forgotten in the past 20 years, since you signed that pledge.

Until He comes,

KJ