Debt limit raises for dummies

The numbers are a bit dated, but this is still a great way to illustrate to the ignorant just how ridiculous our national debt limit debate is.


January 3, 2007 The day Obama won’t talk about

This was sent to me by a follower of Spellchek. I know it’s been around awhile on the internet, but it’s always good to remind people especially in an election year.

This is just a History lesson.  I am sending it to all regardless of party . I bet I know who wouldn’t read it — those afraid of the truth. It is history and nothing can change it.
The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007, the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.
The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is “Bush’s Fault”, think about this: January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress: The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush’s Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!
Remember that day… January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! THANK YOU DEMOCRATS (especially Barney ) for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment…to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES! (BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie -starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy). Barney blocked it and called it a “Chicken Little Philosophy” (and the sky did fall!) And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress, especially BARNEY!!!!

The Ron Paul foreign policy question

I haven’t spent any time delving into the debate surrounding the foreign policy of Ron Paul, but since election year is upon us now seems as good a time as any. Paul supports a foreign policy based upon non-intervention, not isolationism. Of course, many even debate that, but that is not my focus today. He is on record that America has reaped much of what it has sown by our policy of meddling in the affairs of foreign nations. Thus, he supports no foreign aid whatsoever and no compacts or allegiances either. Then there is the 9/11 debate in which he believes we helped to exacerbate our tragedy by inflaming militant Islam with our interventionist policies.

The answer appears to lie in what importance you place upon the threat posed by radical Islam. We are said to be in a war on terror. This can be true or untrue depending upon your interpretation. So much of the conflict in the world today is all about interpretation. The fundamental challenge for the Muslim world today is the interpretation of the Quran and Islamic beliefs. For not only does the Bible promise the Jews their Holy Land, so does the Quran. The Jihadists of today yearn for days gone by when true Islam ruled. These Islamic Fundamentalists reject the Western culture as well as Jews and Christians who don’t convert to Islam. This is where Paul is wrong on his assertion that adopting a policy of non-intervention will serve to pacify the Arab world and prevent terrorist attacks on the United States.

Islamism rejects our way of life. The very fact that it exists, not just the notion of us intervening in Arab affairs. Paul’s philosophy would be acceptable to a majority of the Arab world. Afterall, as I said earlier, even the Quran itself recognizes the fact that the Jews were promised their Holy Land. Their objection lies in Muslims recognizing and submitting to Jewish rule on their own land. They’ll never do it as we’ve seen that still today they refuse to recognize the State of Israel because of where its border lie. They’ll allow a Jewish settlement in Palestine, but never a State. A Paul non-intervention edict would serve peaceful Muslims well.

Continue reading “The Ron Paul foreign policy question”