We want to know who will decide if your taxes increase in just 22 days? A few dozen members of the House of Representatives, that's who.
Cutting taxes for the middle class shouldn't be difficult, especially when Republicans claim they agree with the President on the issue. But some Republicans are still holding middle-class tax cuts hostage simply because they want to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires.
Here's what's going on right now: President Obama is asking Congress to move forward on a plan that would prevent 98 percent of American families from paying higher taxes next year. The Senate has passed that bill, and the President is ready to sign it -- but the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives won't even bring the bill to the floor for a vote. House Democrats have filed a petition that would force a vote if it attracts 218 signatures.
If a bill has enough votes to pass, Congress should vote on it and pass it. It's a pretty simple proposition. And every Member of Congress who hasn't signed on to keep taxes low for the middle class needs to hear from you.
Use the call tool today to reach out to fellow Obama supporters and make sure they contact their Republican representative.
Let's get one thing straight: If your taxes go up, Republicans will have made a conscious choice to let that happen. They'll have missed the opportunity to prevent it, just to cut taxes for the wealthy.
Republicans need to stop using the middle class as a bargaining chip. If they fail to act, a typical middle-class family of four will see a $2,200 tax hike starting in a few short weeks. Middle-class families could face some tough financial decisions simply because Republicans didn't want to ask the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans to pay their fair share.
That's not what President Obama and you campaigned on, and that's not what millions of Americans voted for just one month ago.
We know we can affect change in Washington when we raise our voices together. So pick up the phone and make a few calls. Republicans in the House need to hear from their constituents. You can help:
http://my.barackobama.com/
Thanks,
Stephanie
Stephanie Cutter
Deputy Campaign Manager
Obama for America
P.S. -- Look up your representative in Congress here, then call the switchboard at 202-224-3121 and make sure your voice is heard in this debate, too.
|
| Mr. Patriot Conservative: This week, thousands of Americans picked up the phone to help the President prevent a tax hike on middle-class families. We can't stop now. Republican leadership in the House of Representatives is still refusing to allow a vote on a bill that would prevent 98 percent of American families from paying higher taxes next year. If your taxes go up by more than $2,000 in a couple weeks, there's only one reason: because a few dozen Republican representatives refuse to ask the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans to pay their fair share. You can do something about it. Log on to the call tool today and ask fellow supporters who live in Republican districts to call their representatives now: http://my.barackobama.com/ Voters have already made their voices heard on this issue. As the President said at his first press conference after the election: "If there was one thing that everybody understood was a big difference between myself and Mr. Romney, it was, when it comes to how we reduce our deficit, I argued for a balanced, responsible approach, and part of that included making sure that the wealthiest Americans pay a little bit more.Yet a handful of Republicans in the House of Representatives are still fighting for the same top-down approach that's been tried -- and has failed. Whether you voted for the President or not, he's fighting to keep taxes low for 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small businesses, because he believes we need to grow the economy from the middle out. He's fighting for you. He's got your back. We've got to get his, too. Make a few calls right now. One person reaching out to another is how we re-elected Barack Obama. It's how we'll win this fight, too. Just a few minutes of your time will make a difference. Thanks for doing your part. More soon. Messina Jim Messina Campaign Manager Obama for America P.S. -- If you want to make your voice in Congress heard, too, look up your representative here then call the switchboard at 202-224-3121. |
Obamacare doesn’t have much of a chance of working because of
the wariness of states over the creation of health insurance exchanges,
according to Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
“The exchanges are not going to work because states are wise enough not to go into a relationship when you don’t know what the rules are. You don’t know what the cost is going to be," Perry told Forbes magazine.
States have until Friday to decide whether to create their own health insurance exchanges that will help people learn about how and where to buy insurance. The federal government will step in and run exchanges for states that opt out of creating their own.
Alert: Will Raising Taxes Help or Hurt America? Vote Here!
“The idea that you’ve got a state instituted exchange, but it has to be federally approved. So the fact is the federal government’s going to have to run these. And they don’t have the expertise, nor do they have the money,’’ Perry said.
Perry, who made an unsuccessful bid for the Republican presidential nomination this year, said he believes “wise governors and wise legislatures will say, ‘No, thank you.’
“Medicaid is a broken system. And the idea that we would expand and put more money and more people into a broken system is not unlike putting another 1,000 people on the Titanic. You know how this is going to turn out. And it’s going to be a disaster.’’
Perry said states should be given “the opportunity to innovate, to put in the programs that best serve their citizens . . .
“Bobby Jindal, one of the brightest innovators in the country. Rick Scott over in Florida, who spent his lifetime in health care. And a host of other governors, hopefully Democrat and Republican governors, will put ideas forward, put concepts forward, try them out in their states.’’
“The exchanges are not going to work because states are wise enough not to go into a relationship when you don’t know what the rules are. You don’t know what the cost is going to be," Perry told Forbes magazine.
States have until Friday to decide whether to create their own health insurance exchanges that will help people learn about how and where to buy insurance. The federal government will step in and run exchanges for states that opt out of creating their own.
Alert: Will Raising Taxes Help or Hurt America? Vote Here!
“The idea that you’ve got a state instituted exchange, but it has to be federally approved. So the fact is the federal government’s going to have to run these. And they don’t have the expertise, nor do they have the money,’’ Perry said.
Perry, who made an unsuccessful bid for the Republican presidential nomination this year, said he believes “wise governors and wise legislatures will say, ‘No, thank you.’
“Medicaid is a broken system. And the idea that we would expand and put more money and more people into a broken system is not unlike putting another 1,000 people on the Titanic. You know how this is going to turn out. And it’s going to be a disaster.’’
Perry said states should be given “the opportunity to innovate, to put in the programs that best serve their citizens . . .
“Bobby Jindal, one of the brightest innovators in the country. Rick Scott over in Florida, who spent his lifetime in health care. And a host of other governors, hopefully Democrat and Republican governors, will put ideas forward, put concepts forward, try them out in their states.’’
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/perry-obamacare-exchanges-states/2012/12/11/id/467266?s=al#ixzz2Err0VvIZ
Important: Do You Still Support Obamacare? Vote Here Now!
Report: Communist Party USA backs Obama's position on fiscal cliff
Communist Party USA backs Obama's position on fiscal cliff.
Credits:
Getty Images
According to Minor, Jack Tanner, national vice-chairman of the Communist Party USA, said that Obama's policies of higher taxes and increased spending are exactly what the country needs.
Republicans say that any increases in revenue must be balanced with real cuts in spending. Obama, however, has demanded higher taxes on the wealthy, extended unemployment benefits beyond the current 99-week limit and an additional $50 billion in stimulus spending. He also wants Congress to give up its Constitutional authority on the debt and grant him unlimited power to raise the debt limit.
Tanner calls this a "serious proposal."
“The real economic crisis is a depressed economy including 15 million unemployed. The Obama administration has at least made a serious proposal including ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich, extending the middle-class tax cut, a $50 billion stimulus package next year, no immediate new spending cuts, extending of unemployment insurance and increasing the debt limit,” he said.
In late November, Sam Webb, national chair of the Communist Party USA, called Obama's re-election win "an enormous people’s victory" over racist white people. Earlier, Trevor Loudon wrote that Webb "hailed the election of Party 'friend' Barack Obama, as the 'dawn of a new era.'”
"The Communist Party said a year ago that the 2012 elections would be the main front of the class and democratic struggle, and subsequent events have confirmed that fact," Webb wrote at the Communist People's World in November.
The Independent Voice for Conservative Values telling it like it is!
Less Gov is the Best Gov, Because Less Government is the Best Government!
Thief in the Night
Barack Obama – An Alternative Version of Reality
When Every Word is a Lie
By Scott Rohter, October 2012
This
little analogy of a robber reminds me a lot of Barack Obama. His clever
disseminations during the three Presidential debates look a lot like
those of a thief in the night. They also look a lot like the street
tactics of Saul Alinsky where the only thing that matters is winning, not
how you play the game that counts! (Is that a coincidence or what?)
However Barack Obama does actually have a record for the past four
years, a record that he can either stand or fall on. While it may not be a criminal record, it is still one that is open to scrutiny and public debate. It is a record of dismal failure and numerous Constitutional violations such as when he bombed Libya without seeking Congressional approval beforehand, or when he lobbied for and signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act… or when he signed the National Defense Authorization Act, or when he fails to enforce our country's immigration laws the way they were written and intended to be enforced. And his record on the economy is even worse. So he obviously can’t run on his record.
Barack Obama’s record is so bad that he simply has to lie about it like a thief in the night! He has to offer up an alternative explanation for the events of the past four years, i.e. an alternative version of reality. The real version is just so bad that no one would buy it nor will Americans re-elect him on it. Oh by the way, what is Barack Obama trying to steal? -Just our freedom, our traditions, and the safeguards that are built into our Constitution which were put there to protect us from tyranny. By that I mean those checks and balances that are designed to prevent one branch of government from becoming too powerful.
When someone is caught doing something wrong, or not doing something well enough (like their job) it is not unusual to see them try to blame someone else for their failures. This fault is as old as humanity. It goes all the way back to the Garden of Eden where Adam said that Eve made him do it, and Eve said that the serpent made her do it… The sad truth is that no one made either one of them do anything.
The
blame game is as old as humanity itself. So Barack Obama is just doing
what comes natural to the natural man. He is blaming someone else for
his own shortcomings and for his Administration’s failures. In Obama’s
case he usually blames George W. Bush, but since George Bush isn’t there
anymore to blame, and since he looks pretty stupid continuing to bash
someone who isn't around anymore, he has now resorted to outright lying
about his own Administration’s record and pointing the finger at Mitt
Romney in order to divert attention away from himself.Barack Obama is trying to tie Mitt Romney to George Bush and turn the situation around and blame his detractors and his accusers for all of his problems, instead of himself. That is perfect Alinsky like tactics! But Democrats held both Houses of Congress during the first two years of his Administration, and in those first two years there was no one to blame if he didn’t do what he wanted to do! He can’t blame anyone else for his failure to do what he said he would do in the first two years of his Administration while the Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate!
To be sure I was not particularly impressed with Mitt Romney’s performance in the 2nd and 3rd Presidential debates. I thought he was way too deferential towards President Obama. Everyone in the room including Mitt Romney kept referring to him as Mr. President all the time when it was perfectly acceptable to refer to him as President Obama. By calling him Mr. President it only served to de-personalize him and elevate him even more above everyone else in the room… It was totally unnecessary. No one referred to Mitt Romney as Mr. Governor.
Plus I was not pleased with Governor Romney’s failure to capitalize on the numerous opportunities he had to go after Obama’s failed foreign policy record. Romney wasted almost every opportunity he had to go after Barack Obama on his dismal foreign policy... from Tunisia, to Libya, to Egypt, to Iran! I think he was given poor advice by his handlers and coaches who wanted him to play it safe.. If he loses this election it will be their fault!
I
don’t even know why candidates for public office need to have handlers,
but they all do including Barack Obama, and his handlers did not have
any problem with him being aggressive in his criticism of Mitt Romney or
going after Romney’s record. They didn’t figure it would cost him any
women votes. And I don’t see how it helped Mitt Romney to let Barack
Obama off the hook on all of his foreign policy blunders! I don’t see
how it helped Mitt Romney to say that he agreed with the President’s
foreign policy initiatives. Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, and Iran are all
foreign policy disasters. And we have absolutely no business at all
intervening in Syria’s internal struggles just as we had no business
interjecting ourselves into the middle of Libya’s civil war. We have no
overriding National security interest in either of those two countries.But we do have a National security interest in what goes on in Iran. And when thousands of young Iranians took to the streets about a year ago to protest against their own government, Barack Obama was noticeably silent. He said and did absolutely nothing . We should have at least expressed our moral support for the demonstrators if nothing else. But Obama was absent and unaccounted for and Iran definitely is a national security concern! Libya and Syria are not! Iran has been continuing on down the road to nuclear armament for the past four years while Barack Obama’s foreign policy of economic sanctions has proved totally ineffective. The fact is that no sanctions, no matter how hard or crippling they are, will ever stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. If they could then they would have stopped North Korea a long time ago.
There
is no country that has been more hurt by crippling economic sanctions
than North Korea. Their people are virtually starving, yet those
sanctions have not deterred them from developing nuclear weapons. And
there is no evidence that it has even slowed them down! Our competitors
the Russians know this, and that is why they don’t support economic
sanctions. That is why we need to do more than just give economic
sanctions more time to work, which is Barack Obama’s foreign policy vis a
vis the government of Iran.Barack Obama is lying about virtually everything he says. His foreign policy is a total train wreck. It is a total disaster from Hosni Mubarak, to Benghazi Libya, to Iran and Ahmadinejad. The world is more divided now than it has ever been before, especially in places like Syria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, and even in Iraq. Afghanistan looks like it is headed for failure too, and President Obama has had something to do with all of these things.
Our soldiers are being shot and killed, not in combat by our enemies which they bargained for when they enlisted, but in their barracks by Afghans posing as our friends! “Barracks” Hussein Obama is the Commander in Chief. He is responsible for that just as he is responsible for the murders of our four embassy personnel in Benghazi. Hillary can fall on the sword if she wants to, but Barack Obama is responsible!
Everything
that Barack Obama touches in the Middle East turns into a nightmare and
a bloody mess. I don’t know if it is just his own naiveté or it is by
design. Speculation has it that Barack Obama wants Israel and Iran to
get into a war with each other that neither one of them can win, but
which diminishes both of them and paves the way for Saudi Arabia to
become the new regional power in the Middle East. That would make sense.
After all he did go to Saudi Arabia and bow down to the King of Saudi
Arabia on his very first foreign trip abroad as President. And that was
no mere token bow either! His chin nearly touched the floor. It shocked
many of us back in the States! And both his dad and his grandfather were
Sunni Muslims. The theory is that Barack Obama whose fathers were both
Sunni Muslims doesn’t care for the Shia of Iran any more than he does
for the Jews of Israel, and he thinks he can get rid of both of them so
to speak, and pay obeisance to the custodians of Mecca all at the same
time.
But
Barack Obama would never admit to any of this so it just lies in the
realm of speculation. He lies about everything. His administration does not
have a good relationship with Israel, although he claims that it does.
The Israelis trust him even less than most Americans do. They are
distributing gas masks is Israel right now and preparing their bomb
shelters for immediate use. Whether the next attack on their little
country comes from the Egyptian government of Mohammed Morsi, or the
nightmare that is called Gaza, or from Syria, Lebanon, or Tehran they
won’t know until it actually happens, but when it does come it is almost
guaranteed that it will be because of Barack Obama’s misguided foreign
policies!"A journalist has no better friend than the truth." - Scott Rohter
Column: Obama's weakness left Rice vulnerable
Even after winning the presidency, Obama often chooses to fold rather than fight.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice has become the latest victim of the September 11, 2012 Benghazi terror attacks. On Thursday, Rice withdrew her name from consideration to succeed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. The presumed front-runner for the soon-to-be vacated post told NBC News that she "didn't want to see a confirmation process that was very prolonged, very politicized, very distracting and very disruptive" since it would blunt the momentum of the first several months of President Obama's second term, which is "really the opportunity to get the crucial things done." But by voluntarily withdrawing herself from consideration – or acquiescing to behind-the-scenes White House pressure – Rice may have emboldened those seeking to squelch the second term agenda before it is launched.Rice became the focus of criticism over the administration's explanation for the Benghazi consulate attack that claimed the lives of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens. On September 16, Rice appeared on the Sunday news show circuit promoting the White House line that the attack was a spontaneous reaction to a low-budget YouTube video that defamed Islam, rather than a planned, focused terrorist attack. As this story began to unravel, criticism of Rice sharpened. However, when the ambassador emerged as the front-runner to be Clinton's successor at Foggy Bottom, Obama seemed to take a stand. In his first post-election news conference on November 14, the president bluntly called the attacks on Rice "outrageous" and said that if critics "want to go after somebody, they should go after me." He later reiterated that "when they go after the U.N. Ambassador, apparently because they think she's an easy target, then they've got a problem with me." These pugilistic statements suggested that Obama would go to the mat for Rice. She would never see the underside of the proverbial bus.
But critics were unimpressed with Obama's apparent show of backbone and kept the heat on the ambassador. A month later, it turned out Rice really was an easy target. Obama lamely accepted the ambassador's withdrawal, complaining about "unfair and misleading attacks." But the significant takeaway was not that Rice came under fire from Obama's political opponents, which was to be expected. It was that the president chose not to fight for her after pledging that he would.
Obama's failure to defend Rice feeds the perception that the president may talk a good game, but will cave under pressure. He's a talker not a brawler. As Dan Rather said on MSNBC, it shows that "President Obama can be rolled for his wallet and his watch. He's not a guy that's going to put up much of a fight." Even with the momentum of his reelection, the president refused to back up his strong words with resolute action. When the going gets tough, Obama gets going -- on vacation.
James S. Robbins is a senior fellow in national security affairs at the American Foreign Policy Council.
In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors.
Paula Bunyard
No comments:
Post a Comment