In 2011, our Government has provided ” free“give-away phones to welfare clients that has cost you and I $1.6B and is climbing. This Administration is buying votes and allegiances with our tax dollars in accordance with Obama’s October 19, 1998 Loyola College forum on community organizing and policy making speech. In that speech Obama stated that he favored a government redistribution of wealth and more importantly, he viewed welfare recipients and “the working poor” as “a majority coalition” that could be mobilized to help advance progressive policies and elect their champions.
The Barack Hussein Obama Administration is purchasing votes with programs like the “Obama Phones” even though we do not have the tax revenues to pay for these outrages. Consequently, Ben Bernake and his Fed minions have been purchasing as much as 80% of our $16T National Debt associated with these “Welfare Frauds” with increasingly worthless US paper dollars. This monumental US debt accumulation, using Quantitative Easing (Another name for selling/buying US Bonds) will result at some point in the near future in an Inflationary Spiral that will make Germany’s Weimar debacle seem like a cake walk!
The program is called Lifeline, established in 1984, originally created to subsidize landline phone service for low income Americans, funded by government-collected telecommunication fees, paid by consumers.
In 2008, the program was expanded to support cell phones which quickly escalated the cost of the program. In 2008 the program cost $772 million, but by 2011 it cost $1.6 billion.
A 2011 audit found that 269,000 wireless Lifeline subscribers were receiving free phones and monthly service from two or more carriers. Several websites have been created to promote “free” government cell phones, including the”The Obama Cell Phone” website at Obamaphone.net.
Rep. Tim Griffin R-Ark. has proposed a bill to eliminate federal subsidies for free cell phones and has produced a great YouTube videohighlighting the runaway cost of the program. The program has also been highlighted for reform by Senator Claire McCaskill D-Mo.
Pressure to reform the program led the FCC to announce an effort in February to “reduce the potential for fraud while cutting red tape for consumers and providers” by the end of 2013.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.” Elmer T. Peterson
Food Stamps is just one of Barack Hussein Obama giveaways from our “public treasury’ that will eventually cause our Republic to collapse under the weight of his Socialist Programs.
It’s not just the increase in recipients: Obama allows each recipient to receive much more. Can’t blame that on Bush.
One of the least-appreciated reasons for conservatives to dislike former President George W. Bush is that even while the unemployment rate was declining, the U.S. saw a massive increase in participation in the food-stamp programs (Women, Infants and Children, or WIC; and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP). It’s quite accurate to refer, as the Washington Examiner recently did, to the “Great Bush-Obama food-stamp expansion.” But a recent article on the subject of food-stamp costs in National Review didn’t even mention Bush’s name. Firebrand Newt Gingrich, who has tirelessly focused attention on this topic, has been similarly negligent in omitting Bush from the picture.
Yet Obama has done much more than simply oversee an increase in participation.
Obama brings up Bush’s expansion when challenged about his food-stamp record — he has aggressively sought to blame his performance on his Republican predecessor. Here’s what he told ABC News when confronted on this issue:
First of all, I don’t put people on food stamps. People become eligible for food stamps. Second of all, the initial expansion of food-stamp eligibility happened under my Republican predecessor, not under me. No. 3, when you have a disastrous economic crash that results in eight million people losing their jobs, more people are going to need more support from government.
It’s stunning that the Romney campaign is allowing Obama to get away with not mentioning the costs that have no precedent whatsoever in Bush administration records or policy.
Under Obama, 14.7 million more Americans began using the food-stamp program than had been using it under Bush. That’s a whopping increase of 46%, from 31.9 million users in 2009 to 46.6 million today. One in every seven Americans. The WIC program now purchases over half of all infant formula sold in the United States.
But most importantly, the cost of the program to taxpayers has increased by far more than the expected, proportionate 46%.
Under eight years of George Bush, annual spending on food stamps rose from $15 billion to $35 billion — an increase of about $2.5 billion per year. But in just the first two yearsof the Obama administration alone, spending rose from $35 billion to $75 billion — a staggering increase of $20 billion per year, nearly ten times the rate of increase in cost under Bush.
The cost of food stamps under Obama rose from an average of $3.6 billion per month when he came to office to $6.2 billion per month now, a disproportional increase of 72% compared to the 46% increase in program usage. And even that figure is misleading because it is based on averages: the total cost of the program over Obama’s four years in office, as noted above, actually rose by well over 100%, now running in excess of $75 billion per year. If you compare 2007 and 2011, the total cost increase is an astounding 135%.
There are two possible explanations for the wildly disproportionate rise in food stamp costs under Obama: either he’s being much more generous with recipients than Bush ever dreamed of being, or food prices are rising because of his inflationary policies. Earlier this year, the Congressional Budget Office weighed in. They concluded that a combination of both factors was in play — but that Obama’s generosity (with taxpayer money) is the much bigger culprit.
“Ultimately no matter how long and how many years they seem to get away with running up Deficits, running up Borrowing and Spending and inflating, eventually an empire comes to an end because you can not do it. You have to pay it. Any individual or any Country that lives beyond its means will always have to live beneath its means” Ron Paul at2009 New Orleans Investment Conference
Peter Schiff , our foremost private sector FED “Watchman on the Wall”, presents a scathing video of Ben Bernake’s QE3 debacle that promises to place America on the road to Financial Armageddon.
Tea Party activists may keep low profile at first GOP convention
By Cristina Corbin Published August 25, 2012 FoxNews.com
Next week marks the Tea Party’s first Republican convention.
But despite its role in helping the party win the House majority in 2010, the movement is expected to keep a relatively low profile inside the arena, activists say. Some Tea Party groups are deliberately giving the party space to spotlight its nominee, though others claim they’re being snubbed by GOP leaders.
The Tea Party, of course, is composed of thousands of different groups, each with its own causes. A Tea Party scene could erupt in Tampa at any moment. But unlike some other factions heading into the once-every-four-years affair, the Tea Party does not appear to have a concerted agenda.
Gop Platform Emerging Draws Praise and Criticism
Instead, the movement may just settle for speaking roles for favored politicians and shout-outs in the platform.
The four-day convention in Tampa will kick off Monday with speeches from Tea Party favorites, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Senate candidate Ted Cruz of Texas. The party’s draft platform that will be voted on includes many of the conservative policies championed by the movement.
FreedomWorks, a Washington-based Tea Party-aligned think tank started by former House GOP leader Dick Armey, announced Wednesday that nearly all of its “Freedom Platform” has been adopted by the GOP, including a repeal of President Obama’s health care law, an end to tax hikes and an audit of the Federal Reserve.
“They were very open to our ideas and willing to work with us,” FreedomWorks vice president Russ Walker said of the platform-writing committee chaired by Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven and Tennessee Rep. Marsha Blackburn.
The Tea Party’s visibility beyond that, though, may be minimal at the convention, activists say. The expectation has drawn mixed reactions from the loosely organized anti-tax movement.
“They like the work we’re doing, but they’re afraid because they don’t want to turn off independents with the Tea Party brand,” said Todd Cefaratti of the group, TheTeaParty.Net. The group has filed a petition called “Let Them Speak,” urging the Republican National Committee to allow Tea Party leaders to speak at the convention.
“You get these moderate Republicans and they say ‘I don’t want to offend Grandma Independent,’” Cefaratti said. TheTeaParty.Net is a chief sponsor of the “Unity Rally 2012” to be held at a Tampa church on the eve of the convention, featuring speeches by Tea Party darlings and former presidential candidates Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain.
“It’s our response to a lot of our leaders being shut out of the convention,” Cefaratti said.
Another group, The Kitchen Table Patriots, also expressed resentment over the Tea Party’s representation at the convention.
“The amount of effort that the GOP went through to make sure that no Tea Party person went to the convention was unbelievable,” said Anastasia Przybylski, one of the group’s co-founders. “I did not see it coming.”
Przybylski’s counterpart, Ana Puig, claims the GOP in Bucks County, Pa., spent $70,000 to derail her run to become a delegate at the convention. Puig is now paying her way to go as an “honorary delegate,” she said, meaning “I can do everything except vote.”
“What is the convention going to accomplish except that Mitt Romney will formally be the candidate? It’s a shoulder-rubbing event,” Puig said.
Puig, however, said she is happy the Tea Party’s platform has been well-received by the RNC, adding that she’s hopeful “we would see a trickle down effect to the GOP on the local level,” she said.
“I am looking at this trip as a way for us, Tea Party, and GOP to try to mend some fences and move side by side to secure a big win in November.”
But not everyone within the movement believes Tea Party leaders should be on prominent display during the convention.
“This is the Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan show and it should be,” said Sal Russo of the Tea Party Express, one of the most visible factions of the movement. “We don’t have an agenda beyond that.”
“I would consider this an extremely successful convention for the Tea Party,” Russo said, noting that Romney was always among his group’s top three picks for a presidential nominee. “We thought we shouldn’t try and intrude on a convention that we’re happy with.”
Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, echoed Russo’s sentiment, characterizing the convention as “more style than substance.”
“The purpose is to legally nominate their candidate,” Martin told FoxNews.com. “Tea Party Patriots are far more concerned about what laws are going to be passed than what they’re doing at a party in Florida and Charlotte.”
“As long as our values are represented, we are making an effect. What we will be happy about is when bills are signed into law that repeal the president’s health care law, and when the budget is balanced and when we’re on the road to recovery,” she said. “The convention is just a very small step along the way.”
Has an Obama gaffe finally revealed his innermost contempt for America, our Constitution and our traditional institutions? A contempt so deep and so villainous to American Principles and Values that he had to keep it concealed from public view. Hidden lest his villainous ideology be exposed and ruin his wicked plan to destroy America’s most cherished constitutional, social and economic institutions. Every once and a while those seers of our American culture would get a glimpse of his veiled intent and would alert our populous who either would not or could not believe that an American President could be capable of such infamous deeds.Then last Monday night while speaking at a fundraiser in Oakland last, Obama momentarily removed his superficial cloak as he told a mob of supporters that, “Just like we’ve tried their plan, we’ve tried our plan, and it worked. That’s the difference. That’s the choice in this election. That’s why I’m running for a second term.” He thereby, perhaps unconsciously, revealed his ongoing plan to subvert and destroy America.
The Top 50 Obama Short comings-50 reasons not to vote for Obama
2. The failed $850 billion stimulus
3. High, persistent unemployment
4. Gas prices
5. The 2012 budget’s fecklessness
6. Massive deficits each and every year
7. The seizure of GM and Chrysler, the transfer of bondholder wealth to unions, and the dumping of the GM stock at a loss
9. Hostility to Israel, including attack on apartment expansion and icing of Prime Minister Netanyahu in basement of White House
10. Failure to support Iran’s Green Revolution
11. Failure to support Syrian revolution
12. The Libyan Fiasco
13. The incompetent handling of the Gulf Oil disaster
14. The unnecessary permitorium in the aftermath of the Gulf Oil disaster
15. The shutdown of Shell’s Arctic oil exploration by EPA
16. The president’s push for cap-and-tax in the Congress
17. The president’s attempt to unconstitutionally impose cap-and-tax via EPA when the Congress wouldn’t pass cap-and-tax
18. The president’s push for unconstitutional restrictions on free speech on his political enemies while keeping the unions free to spend money on campaigns via The Disclose Act
19. The president’s attempt to unconstitutionally impose The Disclose Act on his political opponents but not unions via Executive Order
20. The president’s use of unaccountable “czars”
21. The president’s refusal to accept Congressional direction vis-a-vis his “czars” contained in the last 2011 Continuing Resolution
22. The president’s verbal assault on the Supreme Court while the members of the Court sat before him in the state of the Union
23. The president and Eric Holder’s politicization of the Department of Justice, including the black panthers case and the refusal to defend DOMA
24. The president’s use of demonizing rhetoric towards his opponents, such as accusing doctors of performing unnecessary surgery for money
25. The president’s hyper-partisan approach to governing including “I won, you lost” in 2009 and the assault on Paul Ryan with Paul Ryan as an invited guest in the president’s April 2011 “deficit speech.”
26. Bowing to the Saudi King and the Japanese emperor
27. Returning the bust of Churchill to Great Britain
28. Removing the missile shield from Poland and the Czech Republic
29. Backing the would-be dictator of Hondorus when that nation’s Supreme Court rightfully removed him from office
30. Failure to push for quick ratification of free trade agreements with Columbia, Panama and South Korea
31. Indecision on Afghanistan surge coupled with announcement of eventual withdrawal.
32. Incoherence on Egypt, most obviously with the dispatch of Frank Wizner and then rejection of Wizner’s advice vis-a-vis Mubarak.
33. Appointment Craig Beck to NLRB via recess appointment
34. Appointment of FCC commissioners who are pursuing “net neutrality” without Congressional authorization
35. Failure to resume full water deliveries to California’s Central Valley because of the Delta Smelt
36. Attempt to close Guantanamo Bay
37. Attempt to try terrorists in New York City
38. Janet “The System Worked” Napolitano
39. Government takeover of the student loan program
40. Cancellation of “virtual border fence” project with no replacement or indeed concern for border security
41. The “Beer Summit” and the attack on the Cambridge Police Department
42. The Department of Justice’s attack on Arizona for that state’s exercise of its sovereign legislative authority on the issue of citizen identification rules
43. The attack on Scott Walker and Wisconsin for the governor’s and the state legislature’s exercise of their sovereign legislative authority on public employment issues
44. Dabbling in basketball brackets while the Middle East fell into chaos and the gas prices skyrocketed
45. Arguing that American exceptionalism was the same as any nation’s sense of exceptionalism
46. Implying that Minnesota bridge collapse was the result of lack of infrastructure funding
47. Inserting himself into campaign for the Olympics
48. Attack on D.C. voucher program
49. Van Jones and a long list of other appointees
50. Teleprompter dependency and the worst run of presidential rhetoric since Millard Fillmore combined with testiness in the few interviews he grants.
April 5, 2012: Rep. Ron Paul speaks in Berkeley, Calif. (AP)
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, doesn’t get his way very often in Congress.
But the House overwhelmingly adopted his longstanding proposal to audit the Federal Reserve Wednesday, in a 327-98 vote.
In fact, Paul had joked with fellow lawmakers about being invited to a leadership meeting earlier in the week to discuss his bill. Paul noted he had never before attended such a conclave in his entire congressional career. That career is just about over, as the 77-year-old lawmaker plans to retire at the end of this year after a quarter-century in Congress and three quixotic presidential bids. And the passage of his Fed bill marks a fitting legislative capstone.
The “audit the Fed” package was a key part of Paul’s larger economic vision
The measure’s consideration on the House floor shows how Paul’s brand of libertarianism has moved from an often-dismissed fringe to the mainstream.
Paul announced in 2011 that he would not seek reelection to his congressional seat while running for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. He ceased campaigning in May and has since returned to the Capitol full-time.
The legislation has no path forward in the Senate. But Paul advocated for increased transparency at the central bank charged with setting interest rates in the same way he has for decades.
“I think when people talk about independence and having this privacy of the central bank means they want secrecy, and secrecy is not good,” Paul said during Tuesday floor debate on his bill. “We should have privacy for the individual, but we should have openness of government all the time, and we’ve drifted a long way from that.”
Meanwhile, Democrats like House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., argued a full audit would politicize the Federal Reserve.
“The Fed, like every other major central bank in the world, is independent and Congress has rightly insulated the Fed from short-term political pressures,” Hoyer said.
Hoyer declared earlier in the week he would advise Democratic members to vote no. Ninety-seven did. But 89 voted yes, ushering Paul’s bill to passage with a comfortable margin.
Paul introduced hundreds of bills during his House tenure — many of them aimed at weakening the Federal Reserve — but rarely built coalitions to bring them to the floor.
But Paul’s crusade to audit the Fed has found its way in major legislation in the past. In 2010, he won a provision in the Dodd-Frank financial regulation overhaul that required a limited audit of the Federal Reserve.
Republicans lauded Paul’s legacy during Tuesday’s floor debate.
“I want to … congratulate Dr. Ron Paul for his tireless work on this issue for many decades,” said Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich.
“I want to appreciate and congratulate Dr. Ron Paul for his tireless pursuit of openness and transparency. Without his leadership, we wouldn’t be at this point today,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.
Mitt Romney, Paul’s former primary opponent, also lent his support.
“Ron Paul’s Audit The Fed bill is a reminder of his tireless efforts to promote sound money and a more transparent Federal Reserve,” Romney tweeted July 18.
House Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson, D-Conn., who opposed the measure, said the bill reflected Paul’s brand of populism.
“I think that a lot of the angst that occurs out there in the public oftentimes is directed at the Fed. Certainly Ron Paul has become an iconic figure and I think a number of people in their districts at public and town hall forums have heard that similar kind of message,” Larson said.
Paul dove into politics when President Nixon eliminated the gold standard for currency in 1971. He had read extensively about the Austrian school of economics, which promotes free markets, individual liberties and currency established by scarce commodities.
He first arrived in Washington after winning an April 1976 special election — but lost seven months later in the general election by a margin of 268 votes. In 1978, he won the seat by a decisive margin.
Paul first set sights on higher office in 1984 when he launched a failed bid for the Senate. Undaunted, he launched his first presidential bid in 1988, running under the banner of the Libertarian Party.
Paul scored only 0.5 percent of the vote.
In 1996, he returned to the House in a newly drawn district that included areas he had previously represented. Since then, he won reelection handily.
Paul sought the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and 2012 with a small but highly enthusiastic base. Although he did not secure the nod in either contest, he had turnout strong enough to demonstrate significant support. He placed second in the 2011 Ames Straw Poll, third in the 2012 Iowa caucuses and second in the New Hampshire primary.
But Paul indicated that he placed higher importance on influencing the debate than necessarily winning outright.
“Politicians don’t amount to much,” Paul once said, “but ideas do
What is the difference between the MassGOP Convention election process and the Florida 2000 presidential election chad recount process? The answer is NONE! It appears that the MassGOP is singing the the Florida tune: We don’t like the election results so we will fabricate a means to make the election go “Our Way.”
“There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.” Elie Wiesel
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Massachusetts Liberty Caucus
17 Liberty Delegates/Alternates have been not certified.
We are disappointed that the Allocation Committee would ignore the Republican
voters of the Massachusetts Congressional Districts by refusing to even
communicate with the delegates after numerous attempts to reach out to the
allocation committee to discuss problems/issues with legality of the affidavit. The
continued arrogant attitudes and clear manipulation of the rules by members of
MassGOP leadership are a perfect example of why almost 90% Massachusetts
residents refuse to be a Registered Republican and active in the Massachusetts
Republican Party. Some elected delegates candidates had less than 40 hours to
review, sign, notarize, and return an unprecedented affidavit with an arbitrary
deadline to MassGOP headquarters. Ultimately, many elected Ronald Reagan
Unity Liberty slate delegate candidates that were just de-certified by the
Allocation Committee had turned in the original, MassGOP affidavit before they
met to make a decisions.
I am more disappointed that still, after last week’s endorsement of Governor Mitt
Romney by Senator Rand Paul, a leader of the Republican Liberty movement,
that the campaign staff of the Romney campaign would take the numerous olive
branches offered by the ‘Ronald Reagan Unity Liberty Slate’, and continue to
snap those olive branches in two, ignoring attempts for outreach and
compromise, and just simply disenfranchising the voters and activists that could
help Mitt Romney win in November’s General Election.
The mishandling of issues regarding the Provisional Ballots, 5th District
Challenge, and Affidavits will only harden the resolve of the Liberty Caucus
supporters, to work with the grassroots activists to re-build the Republican Party
in Massachusetts, and help promote Liberty issues such as Auditing the Federal
Reserve, and requiring Congressional Declaration of War to fund a war. Most
likely, multiple challenges will be filed to the RNC rules committee, as the
MassGOP leadership decides to waste its time and resources fighting with loyal,
hardworking, grassroots activists rather than defeating Democrats.