On the facts of Gun Control- UK's Guardian admits NRA is right; sort of.

A very interesting mea culpa by the ultra Liberal gun-bashing  Guardian newspaper of the UK in a stunning admission that gun control advocates demands and rhetoric really don't stand or pass the test of statistics, data, or truth. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/22/gun-rights-supporters-national-rifle-association-nra

This is something that 2nd Amendment supporters have always known and pointed out. Example: This article points out in the face of constant Media disinformation when Americans in a survey are asked if the gun murder rate is better or worse in America over the past 20 years? Most (56%) responded "Worse". The Guardian reported the statistical fact is that since it's peak in 1993, The Gun  and Murder rate is down by 49%!  The Guardian suggests it was for 'reasons yet unknown'. WHAT? down by half??  How can this be?  I, the NRA and it's members know how and why. It's the reason why the Guardian and Gun Control advocates were feigning ignorance for an explanation on the reason(s) why. To quote Jack Nicholson's movie line; "You can't handle the Truth!"

Give the credit for the Gun murder and gun violence drop in fact the overall violent crime drop trend in America, to the NRA. Because of NRA advocacy of right to carry laws for the law-abiding citizenry in past high danger zones like Broward County, or D.C. and other locations, to the NRA Championing and lobbying for the tough mandatory add on sentencing laws and penalties for gun use in violent and felony crimes such as drug trafficking.  Credit also the NRA support of and lobbying for, the computerized instant background check system that has been in place by retailers for not coincidentally the past 20 years or so. Lastly, but not the  least has been the NRA support for and  lobbying to enact tough "3 STRIKES YOU'RE OUT" legislation for violent crimes and criminals that go even beyond gun use.

Ironically, the Guardian still couldn't help itself from serving up some of the usual and predictable Liberal disinformation. By using intentional oversight the Guardian made an intentional and obvious misrepresentation during a  supposed attempt by the article to supposedly 'come clean' on their bias. First by not crediting the NRA for the crime drop,  and secondly by their intentional inference that the NRA and members oppose background checks on "all gun sales"? The Guardian framed that question in that manner using the word "all" deliberately and knowing that nearly 100% of all gun sales are already subject to background checks. That dubious attempt to mislead would be tantamount to asking "have you beaten your wife lately?" They were referring to the so-called "Gun Show" loophole. Most gun show traders are Federal Firearm licensed dealers ( FFL) with lower level, hobbyist type licenses yet they have had their full background checks, fingerprinting, and been through the utmost scrutiny by the Bureau of ATF.  Most shows rules often require licensed dealers to sell only to others with these licenses, or to ones buyers like me, with a Conceal Carry Permit that exempts me from many of the background  checks with my extensive vetting and fingerprinting on file. Gun banners are also referring to burdensome application of background checks and regulation extensions to private sales and transfers between friends and family that everyone knows will be ignored fully by criminals, Effective solutions are not their test or standard for legislation involving guns and crimes with guns. Getting all guns, regardless of who has them legally or use them responsibly, is all that matters. Whether it's through legislation, litigation, or over-reaching regulation, tools used as their means to justify their simplistic end. Their goal? The elimination of Guns. This doesn't match the NRA, goal and mission for it's members, and 2nd Amendment supporters. Their objectives with a proven record of measures and successes are to stop crime  and to keep criminals, the mentally deranged, and Terrorists from killing innocent people. Facts matter. If we look at solutions to reduce or eliminate gun violence based upon facts; we may make more progress than ever and save even more lives.

Michael R. Bednarz


google015480951ea39027.html

Trump Is It? Alrighty Then Lets Do This....

Listen folks, I am just as troubled and apprehensive as anyone with the GOP choice, but our Party and it's voters have spoken. For whatever reason and logic that escapes me they have been willing dupes gulled by and drawn like Lemmings to simplistic marketing slogans like "Make America Great Again" heretofore lacking in any specificity or concrete detail. I am disappointed as are many lifelong Conservatives, but there is obviously some real anger and resentment that has festered and been inflamed like a boil ready to explode and this is now the result. The GOP identified electorate is so angry with the past 8 years of Obama and I believe with some unrealistic understanding of how party leadership has had to deal with it that they don't care if the baby is thrown out with the bathwater. I think just as in the heat of an argument, reason gets lost within rhetoric. Gaining the House without the Executive branch and only having control of the Senate for 2 years raised unrealistic expectations which have obviously not been met by Trump devotees.

We Conservatives in the past have eschewed the folks that backed Ron Paul or were Tea Party Conservatives and some of their actions when they didn't get their way with their Candidate winning. Many of them instead of unifying behind Romney made the intellectually dishonest emotional argument that Mitt would be no different than Obama. I am also sure that many Evangelicals misguidedly withheld their vote for their principles because Romney is a Mormon; regardless of the fact that his faith on Moral and Social issues would have mirrored EXACTLY the same as theirs did. So back in 2012 they took their Ball (Votes) and went home refusing to vote for Romney on principle, or voted Ron Paul as write-in. Collectively, they all likely voted Obama in for 4 more devastating years.

Disgruntled GOP voters burn Voter Cards in protest

Anyone with a capacity for logical analysis knows that there would have been a huge difference in the past 4 years, under Mitt Romney vs. Obama. Lets start a list, shall we? Economic policy. Foreign Policy. Defense/National Security policy. Terrorist policy. Justice Dept. Policy. Immigration Policy. Health Care Policy.Energy Policy. Environmental Policy. Regulatory Policy. Tax Policy. Trade Policy.... AND of course Supreme Court Judicial Appointments. My point is simply this, for those that would flippantly argue casting away their crucial and critical votes for Hillary directly or indirectly either by casting a superfluous 'principled' vote for an impossible write-in failed nominee or candidate choice, or voting her in with a Trump vote withheld. Those considering this path best think long and hard about the consequences of 4 or 8 more years of what the last 8 looked like and brought us. Think about how difficult it will be to reverse our National decline and indebtedness if we lose this year. Yes it is true that Trump is not my 1st choice, probably he would be near my last of all that ran, but I will vote for him and I will support him, not with the enthusiasm of Reagan but I will because in the final analysis, pragmatism and logic will "Trump" my emotions and disappointment in his gaining the Nomination. (oh jeez I think I feel better already, that metaphor didn't hurt nearly as much as I thought it would) I shall temper my disappointment with the realization that while his positions and policies may not entirely reflect my personal checklist; I know with certainty that there will be a terrific difference between Trump vs. Hillary or Sanders on the issues and policies I cited above. The differences will be as stark and mirror my own as they were between Mitt Romney and Obama. Ironically this analogy and metaphor was lost on Romney himself with his recent tirade and ill-advised effort to undermine Trump. We cannot afford to abandon logical pragmatism any more than those that boycotted Romney back in 2012 that we found fault with and likely gave us four more years of Obama and policies that Comrade Hillary and Sanders would double-down on. The stakes are simply too great. Game on.

Michael Bednarz






google015480951ea39027.html

Michael Brown's Death by Consequential Choices

Has a large portion of the American population become so intellectually dishonest and misinformed on the Michael Brown Case that truth means nothing? It seems there is instead a preferential aversion to accept the fantasy and Liberal Goebbels-like repetitive and completely discredited propaganda without any challenge as truth. I don't see how anybody including Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. could or would have come to a different conclusion than the Grand Jury did. (I did review the photos, witness testimony, autopsy, and forensic/physical evidence reports released by the Prosecutor that the Grand Jury deliberated on published by the NY Times).

This whole tragic death and ensuing debacle comes down simply to Poor choices made by Michael Brown. Hardly was Brown  the "Gentle Giant" that MSNBC would have you believe. And every major media outlets reporters and publicity seeking civil rights 'contributor' like Sharpton, or Jackson, are bent on sowing discord on print and TV. From MSNBC to FOX News Channel and the  Alphabet News Networks they are always quick to qualify or frame the opening statement of their stories with "the White officer that shot an unarmed Black 18 year old Michael Brown"  and in some cases refer to it even as disingenuously as the shooting of an "unarmed black shoplifter". Usually the photo shown of Michael Brown is a many years old photo of him at a Chuck E Cheese birthday party. Likely his photo shown here is the first time you have seen a photo of him showing him recently before his death.  Now we even have this loony Congressman for the Ferguson, MO area Rep. Lacy Clay, (D) who is calling for the usurpation of our Constitution by our Federal Government to liquidate the Ferguson Police Department in earnest. The left, Race Dividers and merchandisers along with the Americans that swallow this LameStream media regurgitation all affirm their intellectual dishonesty when they discount and ignore the clear video evidence directly opposite of their minimized and demonstrably false characterizations of Michael Brown and the events that led to his death. Hence we have folks convinced Michael Brown was shot in the back. And NFL Players displaying their stupidity and ignorance to millions on TV with the perpetuation of the "Hands Up I surrender"  protest. 

These "feelings" and positions that many in the minority community have taken after all the rancor and scorn generated by the race-baiting hustlers is disturbing. Facts mean nothing. Just as they didn't in a carefully laid out trial with irrefutable facts against O.J. Simpson for murdering two people in cold blood. Remember when DNA evidence of Nicole's blood on O.J.'s sock being someone other than her's was ONE in TWENTY ONE BILLION?  Yet they chose a slick shysters diversionary tactics to appeal to racial resentments by smearing and slandering the police and detective Mark Furhman in particular by setting up a "framed" defense. Well here we go again....  

Michael Brown was armed. Michael Brown's weapon he wielded was his 6' 4" nearly 300 lb. frame. He used this imposing weapon with a willful discharge of bullying violence against the store owner; and then foolishly doubling down minutes later, attacking Officer Wilson in an even more ferocious and violent manner. (we will just set aside that at no point of Officer Wilson's contact with Mr. Brown, did he ever have an opportunity to search or ascertain to his own mind that Mr. Brown was not armed)

Michael Brown's FIRST Poor choice was the strong arm robbery and assault on the shopkeeper for a $48 dollar box of crappy Swisher Sweet cigars. It was the catalyst and the BIC Lighter for the entire tragedy and chain reaction of events ultimately leading to his death. Mr. Brown might as well have doused himself with Gasoline and lit one of the Swishers with the next poor choices and decisions he was about to make.

Michael Brown's SECOND Poor choice was not complying with Officer Wilson's requests and commands.

Michael Brown's THIRD Poor choice was then sucker punching the Police officer multiple times with a rapid escalation to his next Poor Choice.

Michael Brown's FOURTH Poor Choice (and likely worst) that being his attempt at DISARMING Officer Wilson to ARM HIMSELF with Officer Wilson's weapon. The only reasonable intention and goal of that choice (Certainly in the mind of Wilson or any Police Officer confronted with that action) being to Murder a then unarmed Officer Wilson.

Michael Brown's FIFTH Poor Choice, was upon failing to disarm Officer Wilson, and with a shot being fired that wounded Brown himself superficially; not immediately choosing not to go to the ground, call it game over, and comply immediately with the Officer. Failure to process this serious and deadly escalation and terms of engagement threshold Mr. Brown crossed and forced upon Wilson was clearly a terminal judgement and miscalculation. He still failed to see this as the case.

Michael Brown's SIXTH Poor Choice was to attempt escape for his ARMED ASSAULT AND FAILED MURDER ATTEMPT on a police officer with a deadly weapon. (yes he had a weapon, DNA and Forensic evidence clearly proves his hand was ON the handgun attempting to gain control)

Michael Brown's SEVENTH Poor Choice was then, in addition to not continuing flight, to stop and turn advancing in a threatening and aggressive manner all the while refusing to comply with orders to surrender and stand down, (Please spare me the "hands up don't shoot" accounts of some so-called witnesses proven to be liars by the totality of their testimony. They were all refuted by the forensics and by witnesses that were impartial and whose credible accounts were affirmed by the forensics and physical evidence) but to press his assault until the Officer tragically and reluctantly ended the threat by turning off Michael Browns "Choices Generator".

Michael Brown had at LEAST 7 choices in the chronology of events that HE was in control of. Nobody else had more control over the events concerning his life and death than Michael Brown. His parents and loved ones will suffer because he made poor choices, particularly the first two. Officer Wilson, has to live his life a changed and scarred man because of Brown's choices. A community is shattered with distrust of those sworn in duty to protect and defend- at the expense of their own lives because of Browns choices. Businesses and Shoppers in Ferguson dependent upon their services of commerce and employment; will suffer because of Michael Brown's choices. Racial Unity, acceptance, tolerance, and understanding on a local and National level will suffer because of Michael Brown's choices.

 Will Americans of all races set aside racial motivations and perspectives to look at only the facts? This is what Grand Jury's are asked to do in an earnest fashion. It is what they would do in the case of a Black officer killing a white suspect. That is exactly what they did. For them to do otherwise would be tantamount to convening a Grand Jury under Jim Crow laws to convict an innocent Black man based upon preconceived bias and prejudices, instead of thoughtful consideration and deliberation of the facts and evidence. We are past that, or are we? Are we being asked to reverse the past injustices to assuage the perceived slights and new bias and prejudices that are incompatible with the facts and events and poor choices made by an individual? Mobs whipped into frothy rages and of violence and looting against property and innocents by racial dividers from Sharpton to AG Holder and the President himself with tacit and passive leadership, or shall I say lack thereof.

 Doesn't Officer Wilson deserve the thoughtful presumption of innocence pending the investigation, facts, deliberation and the acceptance of his exoneration that African Americans so rightfully fought for, demanded, and won generations ago? Doesn't the sacrifice of lives, blood, sweat and tears that Leaders like Dr. King, and so many others gave demand that? Or is the price demanded by Sharpton, Holder, Rep. Clay and other present day racial dividers for racial justice and tranquility,  a vengeful lynching of officer Wilson? That isn't the dream that the great Dr. King shared with us all.  I pray for God's wisdom and love to touch all Americans and heal our Nation's Soul.

There is a lesson to be learned here. It's about the choices we make and the responsibility that goes with with them, both Good and bad.


 Michael R. Bednarz




google015480951ea39027.html

Dear Mozilla Firefox- You're Fired!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/04/04/mozilla-chief-learns-if-dont-support-gay-marriage-dont-deserve-job/?intcmp=latestnews

Dear Mozilla/Firefox,

I will, per your wishes discontinue using your browser. You have made it very clear that people that don't tow what you see as your politically correct, approved and sanctioned line are not welcome under your Corporate umbrella. When I started using your product some 15 years ago as my preferred browser along with Thunderbird email, I didn't know there would be a litmus test requiring me to follow what you qualify as approved free speech guidelines. Since I am a Christian that believes in God's design and instruction for marriage between men and women only and that just is not compatible with Firefox, I will be uninstalling your product per your expressed wishes from this computer, my laptop, tablet, and android phone as well as all my businesses computers.  Also, although she supports same sex marriage, but not your intolerance of alternate views and your affront to free speech and expression, my wife has asked me to also remove it from her computer and phone.  I will also be sure per your wishes to let everyone that I know that doesn't share your views on Marriage, or any other subject you deem incompatible, such as those that believe in free speech and the full expression of it, to remove and stop offending your sensibilities. Hopefully Chrome, Dolphin, Opera, Internet Explorer, and the other internet browsers will tolerate users that disagree with their political and moral views and who believe strongly in Freedom of Speech.

Sincerely,

Michael R. Bednarz






google015480951ea39027.html

Bull S!#%.. The New "Truth" In Obama's America

UPI

 http://personalliberty.com/regimes-recovery-con/

My fellow citizens over 800,000 gave up finding jobs and LEFT the labor force in the last report. But instead of reporting this net loss of over half a million workers and jobs, Obama and the Lame-Stream Mainstream Media focus on 280,000 new job hires. What happended to us? What has happened to our front-line major media that requires those without drinking a steady diet of their Kool-aid to see the real truth, and report it? America has become a nation of brain dead Gimmie-Gimmie-Gimmie Lemmings, and it's more than 48% of them now. They are being led by a Main Stream media that has lost all of its adversarial zeal to be skeptical and function as arbiters of truth for us. This is why all the lies matter, ObamaCare matters, Benghazi matters, Fast and Furious matters, the IRS scandals matter, and the myriad abuses of truth and power have to be investigated by Congress and those of us demanding accountability. It is truly a sad and very sobering reality of our new America under President Obama and his Coalition of the Clueless. Our now compliant Media has abdicated that adversarial responsibility that they have fulfilled in the past becoming complicit in furthering the deceit and fraud upon Americans.

Michael R. Bednarz



google015480951ea39027.html

Are We There Yet?

tyranny (ˈtɪrənɪ  ) 

Definitions

noun

(plural) -nies

1. government by a tyrant or tyrants; despotism
2. similarly oppressive and unjust government by more than one person
2. arbitrary, unreasonable, or despotic behaviour or use of authority ⇒ the teacher's tyranny
3. any harsh discipline or oppression ⇒ the tyranny of the clock
4. a political unit ruled by a tyrant
5. (esp in ancient Greece) government by a usurper
6. a tyrannical act
   
   
   

   

Wikipedia defines the word “Tyrant” as the derivative from Tyranny and explains it's historical roots with Plato and Aristotle as this...

A tyrant (Greek τύραννος, tyrannos), in its modern English usage, is a ruler of a cruel and oppressive character[1] who is an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution, and/or one who has usurped legitimate sovereignty. (emphasis is mine) The original Greek term, however, merely meant an authoritarian sovereign without reference to character,[2] bearing no pejorative connotation during the Archaic and early Classical periods, though it was clearly a bad word to Plato, and on account of the decisive influence of political philosophy its negative connotations only increased down into the Hellenistic period, becoming synonymous with "Authenteo" - another term which carried authoritarian connotations around the turn of the first century A.D.[citation needed]
Plato and Aristotle define a tyrant as, "one who rules without law, looks to his own advantage rather than that of his subjects, and uses extreme and cruel tactics—against his own people as well as others" (emphasis mine) .[3] During the seventh and sixth centuries BC, tyranny was often looked upon as an intermediate stage between narrow oligarchy and more democratic forms of polity. However, in the late fifth and fourth centuries, a new kind of tyrant, the military dictator, arose, specifically in Sicily.
  
America is loading up their cars this weekend  with kids, picnic baskets, camping gear, fishing rods, hitting the road for family fun on this holiday to honor those that have fallen in consummation of their oath to defend our Constitution from all enemies. In light of the State of our Union and current events, I ask the age old question likely uttered by children for thousands of years within the first ten minutes of an eight hour trip. Likewise America is now a little over half way into our 8 year trip with President Obama. In light of recent revelations and abuses of power, and given the Webster and Wikipedia definitions;  my question for America begs an answer in regard to tyranny....

 “Are we there yet?"

Michael R. Bednarz

  











google015480951ea39027.html

Have We Forgotten?

Vietnam Memorial- Wash. State Capitol Olympia- Photo by Author

The upcoming Memorial Day Holiday weekend brings many thoughts to my mind as I write this. It means so many different things to so many. For some it's the official kick-off for summer. For kids it's the harbinger of summer freedom with the end of the school year. For others it's about family gatherings, camping, picnics, barbeques, and the Great American road trip. So many good things, and so many things to cherish in our memories that are as American as Hot Dogs, and Apple pie.

But what it's really about is.... Valor. Duty. Honor. Commitment. Freedom. Sacrifice. Reverence. Appreciation.

Just as we lose sight of the true meaning of other Holidays like Christmas, and Easter this day too has been hijacked. It has been diminished and diluted by our lazy indifference for those it purports to memorialize with it's inception to not forget those who gave all. This day has it's own Santa and Easter Bunny to distract us from the perspective and appreciation for it's core meaning and our recognition and celebration of the Heroism and ultimate sacrifice it so rightly glorifies by asking us to remember and honor this day and weekend.

 John 15:1313Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. 

Lets have fun with family and friends, but lets also resolve to remember and take just a moment to consider the hero's that gave their all for our freedom, security, and the way of life we all are fortunate enough to savor and enjoy.  Please say a prayer for them as we break bread, or give a toast as we partake in all the festivities, or just ask all for a moment of silence in memory to honor those that laid their lives down for their friends and fellow citizens.

On this Memorial Day I say to all our Veterans and active duty military members....God bless our fallen heroes, past,  present and future.  Thank you to all who have served and are serving, prepared and willing to do the same as those that gave all for our freedom and to whom we owe an eternal debt of gratitude.


Michael R. Bednarz
  

 








google015480951ea39027.html

Obama's Lack of Veracity, and Economic Illiteracy; A Dangerous Combination for America

What is going on? Could it be the truth is so obvious that the Lamestream media including MSNBC can't even help but report the truth?   How does that old saying go? If you are going to be a good liar; you better have a good memory?  Today I actually see a story by MSNBC or whatever they call themselves now, letting the GOP get the truth and their accurate contention on the impasse out about Obama and his rejection of his own spending cuts plan from nearly two years ago;  The Sequester.

This Sequester plan and solution was all Obama's idea. He came up with the "Super Committee" Plan because he failed to lead. The other fact and hard truth that is becoming painfully obvious to America as we slip into a double dip recession with unemployment increasing and economic growth contracting; is that Obama is an economic illiterate who is Presiding over the largest economy in the Universe. We also have a problem with the veracity of our President. Obama's lack of  veracity plus his Economic Illiteracy,  is a toxic combination for America's future.  Just today he told workers in Virginia at a Submarine building yard.

"These cuts are wrong, they're not smart, they're not fair," he said. "They're a self-inflicted wound that doesn't have to happen."    
 

Seems like the only place we need gun control is the White House, so he doesn't shoot himself in the foot trying to shirk from his responsibility for his plan.

Obama went on  to blame the Republican's for the latest impasse on their unwillingness to consider new revenues and closing tax loopholes. Heard that one before? It's a broken record, Republicans are protecting the Rich, not giving the majority of American's a fair shake, they are going to make airliners crash, and babies will die because of Republicans, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.......

Sequester was Team Obama's solution to getting past the Debt Limit increase nearly two years ago when he wasn't willing to make cuts, or work out compromises with the GOP and Democrats on a framework budget passed and proffered by the House. He also failed to lead his Senate Democrats and Harry Reid to action in coming up with a plan,  or to even finally produce a budget which they have failed to generate or pass for over FOUR YEARS and still counting.

Obama couldn't jeopardize his reelection at the time with his "gimmie, gimmie, gimmie Constituency" so Obama's the one that came up with 50-50% across the board defense and domestic cuts. A ratio that was patently unfair to begin with and one that only an Economic illiterate like Obama could have proposed. The current ratio of spending by the U.S. Government between Entitlements and Defense is 61.9% Domestic to only 18.7% Defense.

The  OMB, (Office of  Management and Budget;  the White House's Accounting and Budget Agency)  chart above clearly shows that cuts will affect our defense and National Security inordinately. Obama knew that, or should have know that but went on with the 50-50 ratio to put leverage almost two years ago on the GOP at the expense of our National Security and Defense. Now he has the audacity and hubris to use our Military members as backdrops and "prop's" for his "Roadshow" selling his Snake Oil solution of tax increases when he threw our brave men and women under the bus all along for the "Gimmie, Gimmie, Gimmie Constituency" that re-elected him.  Ironically even the Sequester cuts do not really "cut" any programs except Defense, below the rate of scheduled increases. The mandatory back-stop Sequester cuts are cuts in growth only, not zero based reductions or real cuts that reduce prior levels of funding. So, there again is a lacking of veracity on the part of Obama, particularly in light of his presentation of spending reductions as cuts on the domestic side. So almost two years ago all Obama was able to do is kick the can down the road and get us a Credit Rating downgrade for the first time in our history and bring us to another chapter of his wait until the last minute crisis management style. 

Well the Sequester and spending can has been kicked to the end of the dead end road and what does he do now?  He starts with revisionist History and disowns and disavows having any part for his own "Sequestration Cuts" backstop to his Super Committee solution that he devised and implemented. At the time the GOP put forth targeted cuts for both Defense and Domestic spending that would minimize the impact and detriment as much as possible by prioritizing need, efficacy, and impacts to social and domestic programs especially to those that needed aid the most, and in the case of the Military, priortizing National Secuirty and the well being of our Service people and their families. Those plans and proposals have been out there for nearly 16 months, awaiting action from the masters of inaction, Harry Reid, Senate Democrats, and President Obama. So now we face arbitrary,  unmangaged,  and unmitigated cuts across the board without the thoughtful  considerations that were put forth by the GOP plan(s) from the House.

By contrast we have a 'plan' by the President that decides the best action is to hit the road in "Campaign Mode" again (doing the only thing he's really good at) deciding to change the paradigm yet again by initiating the tried and true message:  Crisis Plan A) Blame Bush.  Ooops, can't do that now,  only the most banal of Obama supporters would still believe that one.  Hmmm.... OK then initiating:  Crisis Plan B) Blame Obstructionist Republicans in Congress. Damn those wascally Republicans for not working with him and after giving him his tax increases on the rich he wanted and got only two months ago; they defy me by not taxing the smack out of the rich even more now! The record is clear the alternative to the Sequester was to find "targeted" cuts, within all  Domestic and Defense spending to minimize and manage the impact on each and hit the goal of overall cut target amounts. It was not about nor ever was a plan to raise taxes, or to use Obamanomics speak, a "balanced approach". This cuts only Sequester back-stop was your plan proposed and laid out two years ago Mr. President. Now you seek to change the rules and paradigm by putting the goal posts back 20 yards inside the two minute warning?   I can hear his response by imagining I am a fly on the wall during his crisis Sequester Cuts strategy session....."Exactly, Yeah thats the ticket.... I will blame them again and demand action from them to fix it and stop blocking my efforts to solve this!  Fire up Air Force One, lets stir up the Proletariat, call the media to get our message out!

One problem though it's not the truth and the media may not be buying it. Perhaps for the first time the media won't be regurgitating Obama talking points and presenting his dubious word at face value. In fact, maybe they will rediscover their duty to be skeptical, and to be arbiters of truth with a reponsibility and role to be incredulous and confrontational with proffered bull excrement, even if it's from the White House. Perhaps they needed just one person with some Cajones to stand up and call out B.S. as Bob Woodward did from the liberal bastion of  Journalism; The Washington Post and call Obama out as a liar.

So, with the House passing two prior plans of targeted cuts for the Senate and Administration's consideration, within the original framework of the Sequester deal, the ball is in Obama and the Democrat's courts. Boehner said it best in his news conference exerpts from the NBC News video click on sentence to link video.

"We have moved a bill in the House twice," Boehner said at a press conference Tuesday. "We should not have to move a third bill before the Senate gets off their ass and begins to do something."

Kathy McMorris-Rodgers (R) Washington, also made the case stating the obvious with her comments.

"He has traveled over 5000 miles the last two weeks, and we challenge him travel a mile and half and come to Capitol Hill," said Rep. Cathy McMorris Rogers of Washington on Tuesday. "Sit down with Harry Reid and urge the Senate Democrats to take action."

 The refrain of urging Senate action comes from Boehner just four days before the sequestration cuts are slated to kick in.

 The Sequester was the result of Obama's failure to lead nearly two years ago, just as our economy and everything attached to it is failed. Without literacy in Economic matters, and lacking in demonstrable skills and knowledge for Business, Administration, Management, or Leadership; these shortcomings cannot be overcome with his witty charm, toothy smiles, or a Czar for every problem and issue he cares about. Neither will his ability to hit the road in Air Force One and preach to his choir result in tangible results or resolutions to the myriad problems facing America and the World. There are problems that need solutions, and results; critical problems affecting the lives of Millions of Americans and Billions of souls throughout the world. Roll up your sleeves Mr. Obama, put Air Force One in the hangar,  go up the Hill, and kick Harry Reid and the Senate in the Ass,  as Boehner so eloquently put it, and consider the plans passed already by Speaker Boehner, McMorris, and Democrats in the House that are willing and ready to get something done.


Michael R. Bednarz



google015480951ea39027.html

State of the Union? Not secure, Mr. President.

As Iran develops it's Nuclear weapons program, and following North Koreas nuclear test just the day before the Presidents State of the Union address to the Amercian people, it is obvious that the State of the Union's Security;  is not secure. Our enemies are providing clear signals to us as they approach the ability to strike and obliterate Seattle and other cities in the US with Ballistic Nuclear weapons, and it is high time for President Obama to put our missile defense at the top of his agenda.

A Terminal High Altitude Area Defense interceptor is launched from Meck Island on its way to an intercept of a ballistic missile target on Oct. 24, 2012. (Photo: Lockheed Martin)

However, mark my words the President's agenda will be revealed tonight in his State of the Union address to eliminate Nuclear weapons; and he will call for this policy to be initiated unilaterally,  by the United States. Obama will likely not mention one word about our Missile Defense Program,  nor its future and role in securing our safety. Obama could lead us to our demise with his policies and illogical priorities. His first priority should be the defense of our citizens from Rogue nations attack led by an indoctrinated mental midget with the maturity of a teenager, or by Mullah's bent on twisted religious fanatacism to fulfill their evil interpretations and prophesy with Nuclear weaponry and intercontinental ballistic missiles. Security and the nullification of these threats should be Job One; not banning guns, or giving amnesty to illegal immigrants, nor even his bringing women into combat roles.

Since taking office President Obama has defunded and virtually killed our Missile Defense system development. Only with Congressional insistence led by the GOP has minimal funding been preserved to attain the current undeployable capability of the MDA, Missile Defense Agency. It is high time we give this shield originally launched by President Reagan, a priority in funding and development for rapid perfection and deployment. The emerging threats, and the clear and present danger posed by N. Korea, and soon Iran, demand it for the security of ourselves and our allies. The traditional reliance upon the Cold War doctrine of MAD or Mutually Assured Destruction where our massive and fatal retaliatory response to an attack by the Soviet or China arsenals would serve as deterrance to attack  keeping the peace; does not apply with N. Korea or Iran, both of which are absent of any logic or reason and in the case of Iranian Mullahs would only fulfill their desire to see prophetic destruction to enable what they see as an inital prophesied step toward an Islamic Caliphate.

 The Heritage Foundations report concludes this in the final paragraphs as the necessary way forward.

The federal government has a constitutional obligation to defend the American people to the best of its ability. Therefore, the Obama Administration is wrong to subordinate this obligation to commitments it has made or will make to foreign powers to limit U.S. missile defense capabilities. Nevertheless, President Obama did exactly this in his conversation with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on March 26, 2012.

 Further, the Administration’s willingness to slow progress in the U.S. missile defense program appears to reflect a view that the program could impede achievement of the President’s goal of U.S. nuclear disarmament. The evidence for this conclusion long predates President Obama’s exchange with President Medvedev in that the Administration has not adequately funded the missile defense program and has made specific program decisions that hold back progress. (my emphasis and additional added within brackets...remember the video? "Tell Vladimir after the election I will have more flexibility" )

Given the President’s inclination to shirk his constitutional obligation to defend the American people against attack as well as U.S. treaty obligations to assist in the defense of U.S. allies, Congress has an obligation to step in to ensure the federal government does all it can to field an effective defense against missile attacks. This starts with adequately funding the missile defense program. It also requires directing the Administration to take the specific policy and programmatic steps that advance the deployment of a global, layered missile defense system that is as capable as the technology permits.   by Baker Spring for the Heritage Foundation, May 3, 2012.

America could have deployed short, medium, and long range anti-missle defense system shielding America and it's Allies if our Nation and President had prioritized it four years ago. Time is of the essence, delay and the delusion that we don't face an imminent threat could bring a Benghazi type failure in judgement and preparation with consequences for victim deaths counting in the Millions. We must focus on it now like a laser beam, fully fund it and make it a critical priority sooner; not later. We must control and act toward our future security; not react to the twisted agendas of madmen or put our future existence in the hands of our enemies nonexistent goodwill. Write, email, and call your Representative in the House, Senate and the President and insist that they act to secure our safety and future from attack, tell them to support and fund our Missile Defense Agency, or MDA.

This is Job number 1.


Michael R. Bednarz



               

google015480951ea39027.html

Fiscal Cliff Battle, AFTAR (after action report)

Basic Math of our National Fiscal debacle and why it's ALL ABOUT THE SPENDING. It is now and always was a ratio of 90% spending and only 10% revenue. President Obama said "we can't cut our way to a balanced budget", we HAD to raise taxes on the rich to solve the problem. Here is why we have either a completely incompetent President or just a "misleader in chief" in office now for fiour more years. Now with the fiscal cliff deal done, here is how it pencils out.  Our national debt is $16.4 TRILLION. We spend about $3.8 BILLION per day to fund the US government and it's obligations/programs. We are borrowing about half of every dollar we spend. So.... just to STOP THE DEFICIT SPENDING (not adding to the debt, but NOT reducing it either) we need to INCREASE revenues and/or CUT spending by $1.9 BILLION per day. The fiscal cliff deal "increased" revenues by $164 MILLION per day (some economists predict less than half that amount but lets give Obama the benefit of the doubt on it and give him the full amount). OR about 4.5% of total daily spending, lets go ahead and round it up to 5% and apply it all to unfunded outlays. So now our daily deficit spending is "only" $1.736 Billion per day! The new tax increases reduce the total daily deficit spending amount by only 10%!  President Obama and Democrats didn't do anything the GOP wanted to do about spending in this deal. So now our dilemma is this Mr. Obama and Liberals;  YOU got your tax increases on the rich, now to stop the deficit spending and borrowing, we must find 90 cents in cuts for your 10 cents you got in raised revenue JUST to balance the budget. We have to have even MORE than 90% in cuts to start reduction of the massive debt that has been loaded onto the backs of every taxpayer and citizen of the U.S. threatening our economic growth and future. I don't know how to explain it any more simply, and I can't understand why the GOP leadership hasn't articulated it effectively or logically to the citizens of this nation, but basically if this is how things are going to be "fixed" going forward; we are truly in deep trouble as a Nation. It should come as no surprise to anyone why President Obama was demanding Congress give up and hand over to him the Constitutional authority Congress has over spending and debt-limit increases as part of the Fiscal Cliff deal? I don't think even the majority of Democrats in the House would vote for that.

3.8 Billion (Total daily spending amount for U.S. Govt.)
-1.9 Billion Daily obligations FUNDED and paid for by existing revenues (pre Fiscal Cliff Deal)
 1,900,000,000 (1.9Billion is daily deficit spending and is 50%of all daily Spending)

  -164,000,000 164 Million (Fiscal Cliff deal revenues compliments of the Bourgeois class as a daily amt)
 1,736,000,000 1.736 Billion Daily UNFUNDED deficit daily spending  BORROWING (Post Fiscal Cliff Deal)

There must be cuts going forward  in the next few months (lets start working on this in earnest now and not wait until the last minute) as part of the debt limit increase and then the sequestered cuts. Failure to do so and we will deservedly face another Credit rating downgrade and the increased interest of our debt will blow the above formula out of the water. The debt limit MUST not be raised without solid, concrete agreements for spending REDUCTIONS, not cuts in increases, or "goals" as the President tried with the fiscal cliff deal. Legislated reductions and cuts that can be put in place and into law, zero based budgeting cuts should be the standard or no more debt increases. PERIOD. Only a vibrant, expanding, and unshackled economy can increase and grow revenues necessary to undo the straight jacket of mega deficits and debt burdening on our economy that has stymied and sent us into this malaise and stagnation we find ourselves in.

One look at this chart below clearly shows the spending and revenue outlays for the past 20 years illustrating the trends and unsustainable path we are on. 

Click Chart to Enlarge/Enhance Image
 

 

 

This path does not lead to a future of prosperity or security for our Nation and it's citizens. We cannot cast off our responsibility and sacrifice the future of our children and grandchildren condemming them to mediocrity and hardship for the sake of our generations irresponsible spending and inability to make the hard decisions and choices to ensure their futures and our National destiny.

Michael R. Bednarz

google015480951ea39027.html

The Fiscal Cliff for Dummies

Simple Math on the Fiscal Cliff. Forgive my condescending title and tone, but I have to educate a failed Community Organizer/President into the finer points of this math, as he doesn't seem to get it. I am making it my mission to educate and inform him in the popular vernacular of the Dummies book series. Now, are you paying attention Mr. President? Here are some pretty graphs, links and other informative stuff to help you visualize and understand the problem. You see Mr. President, it's not that Americans are taxed too little, it's that we are spending too much. It's spending. It's spending. And oh yeah, it's also spending. We do too much of it as a Nation. You do too much of it as a President. You have been spending like a drunken sailor trying to stimulate the economy, expand government and it's necessity to our lives promising it as a panacea and cure for the economic ills we are suffering, but it just isn't working. Not surprising, spending your way to prosperity hasn't worked anywhere, ever. Mr. President do you see those really long red icicles that go way, way, down to the bottom? Yes sir, I'm sorry those would be your years.

 We spent  $3,600,000,000,000 (that is 3.6 Trillion) According to the CBO figures for fiscal year ended Oct. 2012,  of that about 50 cents of every dollar we spent was borrowed. So that means 1.8 Trillion of deficit spending is added on to the national debt that is now nearly $16,300,000,000,000 (That is 16.3 Trillion)  Lets break such a large number down to size, shall we?  October 2012 monthly spending was the largest single month of spending in our Nation's history. It came in at over $122,000,000,000 (that is $122 Billion)  President Obama do you see how it's only 3  commas for a Billion instead of 4 commas for a Trillion? Ok, and a trillion is a thousand billion dollars or a million million dollars, Capiche? O.K. good.  That breaks down to $3.95 Billion per day. Still with me Mr. President?


( First a little history on the opening negotiating position for Obama)


According to the N.Y. Times.

Nov. 13 The White House confirmed that President Obama’s starting point in budget talks with Congressional leaders would be the 80-page package that Mr. Obama sent Congress in September 2011. The 10-year, $4 trillion plan calls for $1.6 trillion in new revenues. 

 My Emphasis and added comment. (Folks, this is the budget that was presented by Obama and brought up for a vote by the GOP Controlled House, you know those wascally Republican's that oppose and block his efforts?..... So for two consecutive years they put it up and it got ZERO votes, not even one single Democrat, or Republican voted for it in the House. It received Unanimous Bi-Partisan rejection. The same budget went to the Senate controlled by the Democrats, two years running, and again offered up for a vote.  Oooopsie.... again unanimous and ZERO, not one Republican, nor Democrat Senator voted for it.  So this was his serious effort to avert the fiscal cliff? This was his OPENING FRAMEWORK and SALVO?) 

Nov. 29 Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner gave the House speaker, John A. Boehner, a detailed proposal with $1.6 trillion (my emphasis added, Whoa...What happened to the "only" $800 billion over 10 yrs. you campaigned on? Oh yeah, I forgot  you came out of that meeting with AARP, SEIU, and moveON.org, the day after the election and they said you were going to double the whack-job you planned for the Rich in tax increases over 10 years)  $50 billion in immediate stimulus spending, home mortgage refinancing and an end to Congressional control over the debt limit; (my terrified emphasis added)  it also set a goal (my emphasis added, not cuts or reductions, just... goals..uhuh...) for $600 billion in reductions from Medicare and other social programs.

Let me just say Mr. President, if you had to sell cars you would starve. You were asking America to pay MSRP during the campaign before the election. Now you are counter-offering we Americans the car for MSRP plus a doubling of the MSRP?  Wow, thats some second sticker Mr. President. Usually the second offer is lower not double the original asking price! I sure hope you weren't offended by the laughter Geithner's offer was received with by those Senators. Well since then you have "countered" your original offer that was double your campaign offer, down to your now desired New Years tax increase on the "wealthy"  of  "only"  $1.4 Trillion from the 1.6 Trillion you sent Secretary Geithner to offer on Nov. 9.   Now Mr. President, can we tell Americans this is your final answer? For now it is? Ok, well I guess we will have to go with that. (Man I sure hope you didn't let Geithner use Quicken Turbo-Tax to figure all this out) So lets not add your increased spending request, or figure there will ever be a reduction with your use of the word "goals' in your proposed entitlement spending savings. By the way great job keeping your media buddies in the mainstream media mum on the hefty Death Tax increases and your proposal to reduce the taxable estate value more than two-fold. Those are slipping right under the radar thanks to your cozy media relationship I don't think anyone will notice or cry foul until the family farms and businesses are liquidated to pay those taxes when their loved ones pass on and by then it will be too late.

O.K. but I digress... lets stick with October, 2012 Budget/Spending figures and do the math.

 So we have $3.95 Billion per day of spending. If Congress agreed to the latest Obama offer and increased taxes $1.4 Trillion over 10 years that would break down to $140 billion per year in additional tax revenue, and that breaks down to a daily amount of $383 million per day or if you will,  less than 10% of our daily spending amount of $3.95 Billion per day. Remember half our spending is borrowed money. So assuming we now have 10% of daily spending handled that still leaves a 40% gap to close just to get to non-deficit spending.  We will not even have begun to pay down the over 16 Trillion in National Debt, Six Trillion of which, you alone Mr. President have packed on since you came into office.



Your insistence on raising taxes on the top earners and producers in America, flies in the face of all economic logic and reality ignoring the economic impacts and recent precedents of disincentivizing success. You make no provision for those about to be crucified to invest differently or divest accordingly in self-preservation of their hard earned wealth and income. You ignore the possibility that raising rates on the top earners would not follow the recent experience and precedent of increasing taxes on the wealthy in the U.K. which resulted in a reduction of revenue by 60% from the prior year after they taxes on top earners up to 50% (10% increase) on the "Rich".   Well you are special so you certainly will be immune to such precedent don't you think?  Just in case though, start your "campaign" speech and talking points now if you have to hit the road and explain to Americans how you will have to raise taxes on everyone to fund the shortfalls from your ill-conceived action.

So Mr. President, what is your plan to close the gap after you nail the Rich guys? How do we get there? Tell us, please. You haven't provided one single concrete proposal for a budget cut, reduction, or elimination of any Federal spending outlays, programs, entitlements, military cuts, or discretionary budget spending cuts. You offer instead "goals" instead of cuts and then have the audacity to propose new stimulus spending and programs!  Well your "goals" are not legal tender in these United States anymore Mr. President. We have drawers full of  IOU's with your portrait on them that say "In Obama we Trust"  that promised all the Green Jobs, all the Shovel-Ready jobs. You promised us Stimulation of the economy from your Stimulus Program, and that worked like Ex-Lax ten years past the pull date. Thanks but no thanks, keep your goals. We want action, we want serious efforts and purpose to cut the bleeding that is killing America, our economy, and our future. Our National debt is in excess of 100% of our annual GDP, it was in the 70% range when you took office. This is unacceptable, you were elected to fix it. Raising taxes and pounding your chest gets us 10% of the way there, we need 40% more. Now, I have armed you with an education on Fiscal Cliff 101, so quit being such a fiscal Dummy. Oh forget it! Just follow the lead of Congress, like Bill Clinton did and do the deal with loophole eliminations, accept the GOP recommended cuts, then take the credit for their solution like the fondler-in-chief did and lets get this economy moving again.


Michael R. Bednarz





google015480951ea39027.html