Our Most Machiavellian President Ever?

Famous posthumous portrait of Niccolò Machiave...

Image via Wikipedia

When I read how former Bill Clinton advisor Dick Morris theorized that President Obama and his crafty political operatives had devised a strategy to manufacture the issue of birth-control and paint Republicans as being against something that virtually everyone in America, even Catholics, are in favor of I was skeptical. I know Obama built his entire career with the Chicago style of politics, and merely took out his opponents as a primary strategy. But this scheme seemed too Machiavellian even for him. This morning…I’m convinced. Obama has made the whole country fight each other over birth control where previously no argument existed.

Remember when ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked Mitt Romney what seemed like a bizarre question about banning contraception during the New Hampshire Presidential debate?

Romney was so taken aback by the question he literally didn’t know how to answer it. And yet…Stephanopoulos persisted demanding that Romney take a stand on whether states can ban contraception. As one who has watched all the debates since August I can tell you it was one of the most diligent pursuits of an answer I’ve seen a moderator perform. And only now we can realize why. The former Clinton aide was doing the work of the Obama Administration and trying to get Romney to step into the trap. Fortunately, Romney avoided the trap skillfully.

Some weeks later Obama announces his directive to require all churches and church run organizations to include free contraception and the abortion pill in all health care coverage they are now required to provide all their employees. It was such a blatant violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment it seemed like Obama had really stepped in it. The fact that Obama’s announced accommodation one week later removed the requirement that churches pay for the contraception didn’t remove the fact that Catholic churches, in particular, were still required to provide insurance covering for their employees what the church considers a grave sin.

Of course in a choreographed defense of the Obama strategy Democrats of many stripes jumped in to turn the matter away from the only subject for which anyone was objecting, religious rights, and turned it into a defense of contraceptive rights. The left-wing media has fallen into line and began chasing down old quotes from Catholic Rick Santorum, taken them out of context, and painted the GOP Presidential candidate as anti-contraception.

The left and the mindless who fell in love with Obama in 2008 either ignored or were ignorant of his background. Obama got elected to the Illinois State Senate by underhandedly finding some technical loophole to have his opponent in the race declared ineligible. He did nearly the same thing in the race that got him elected to the U.S. Senate. There his underlings found unflattering details about his GOP opponent in his opponents long-ago divorce papers. Obama leaked the stories to the press and his Christian family values Republican opponent was suddenly looked upon as a sexual degenerate and a hypocrite. Obama slid into office.

The straw the tipped me into the broken camel’s back category came this morning during my morning workout. While on my exercise bike and watching MSNBC (my gym doesn’t provide FOX News) Luke Russert asked his visiting journalist panel for their “shameless plugs”. A woman, a journalist supposedly, said she was going to go out and join the “contraception rights” rally taking place in New York. And she pumped her fist as she said this. As if there really is some fight going on.

Attention Democrats!! Attention! You’ve been bamboozled again! You’ve been deceived. Not surprisingly you all seem to be falling for it. Now hear this…Now hear this…THERE IS NO FIGHT OVER CONTRACEPTION! NO ONE, NOT REPUBLICANS, NOT ANYONE IS TRYING TO TAKE THE PILL FROM YOUR FERTILE LITTLE HANDS. This fight is manufactured by a President who can’t stand on his record and needs to create controversy and division among Americans where no controversy or division exists.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

If you find this blog interesting please Share it. TY

Related articles

February 17, 2012
Categories: National Politics . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: Comments Off on Our Most Machiavellian President Ever?

Whatever happened to Consequences?

Bank of America Plaza

Bank of America Plaza (Photo credit: Frank Kehren)

It used to be that when you did a bad or a stupid thing you suffered a negative consequence. The end result being those making bad or stupid decisions would learn from their previous actions and avoid such foolishness in the future. “Learn” being the operative word in the previous sentence. Ultimately one could look back on previous mistakes and turn them into a positive.

Increasingly, thanks to the liberal mindset in this country, nobody deserves consequences. Nobody should suffer negatively for doing a bad or stupid thing. Everyone is forgiven or rehabilitated, or saved. There are no consequences.

con·se·quence

[kon-si-kwens, -kwuhns]  noun

1. the effect, result, or outcome of something occurring earlier: The accident was the consequence of reckless driving.
2. an act or instance of following something as an effect, result,or outcome.
3. the conclusion reached by a line of reasoning; inference.
When the Obama Administration announces a $25-billion deal with the big banks to finalize and settle the lawsuits in the mortgage foreclosure crisis the lack of any deterrent effect, result or outcome from banks having foolishly lent too much money to those who couldn’t afford to pay it back is obvious. And the resulting actions are predictable. “Hey….we’ve got ALL this money to play with and risk. It’s not ours. But let’s be as risky with it as possible. After all, if we lose it, the government will pay us back. Just like before.” 
English:

The soon to be announced settlement would pay those 750,000 whose homes were foreclosed upon $2000. It would also reduce the principal by $20,000 for those 1,000,000 underwater home owners who owe more than their homes are currently worth. For those who did the right thing and didn’t borrow against their home’s equity for trips or new cars or upgrades, didn’t miss mortgage payments, and still lost tens-of thousands, even hundreds-of-thousands of dollars in their home’s equity…you get bupkis.

When a business operates a company selling a product for less than it costs to make, it used to be that that company would not be long for this world and that it’s owners and executives would find themselves losing money, stature and reputation for so foolishly trying to run such a company. But in the Obama world companies like Solyndra get $500-million loans which don’t EVER have to be paid back. And

Image representing Solyndra as depicted in Cru...

Solyndra Executives have the President of the United States praise them as forward thinkers in the new green economy right before skating off with bonuses in the millions of dollars and closing the doors on the worthless company.

GM logo

Car manufacturers give in to oppressive unions and agree, amongst other things, to pay laid off workers 80% of their salaries while they don’t work. The companies make cars that break down far too frequently compared to their foreign competition. They create cars that people don’t want. They go bankrupt. And the government gives them $14.1-Billion which they never have to pay back. Reminds me of the old line from Humphrey Bogart‘s “Treasure of the Sierra Madre“. “Consequences? We don’t need no stinking consequences!”

Wouldn’t it be nice if all these mistakes made by individuals who bought too much home or borrowed against their equity and had no cushion when prices fell actually started again, saved their money, bought homes again in a few years and paid down their mortgage…like our grandparents used to do?
Wouldn’t it be nice if banks returned to being a safe place to put your money and a place you could count on to be there through the tough times, instead of risk takers with our money devoid of any conscience? A partnership with a bank less interested in growing its riches and more interested in growing the community it serves.
And wouldn’t it be wonderful if American car companies made vehicles we all wanted and that were affordable and didn’t break down inordinately. Learning how the market trends and meeting the market’s needs. And in doing so we could return to Henry Ford’s way of thinking to pay his workers a decent wage and price his products so that his workers could afford them.
We all learn from our mistakes provided our mistakes come with negative consequences. With no consequences we’re all equally likely to go traipsing down the same road that got us into this mess to begin with.
Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.
If you find this blog interesting please Follow and please share. TY.

February 9, 2012
Categories: National Politics . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: 2 Comments

Where will it Stop? Obama has crossed the line.

“The growth of government occurs in direct opposite proportion to the decrease of individual liberty.” ~ Ronald Reagan, 40th President of the United States of America

Barack ObamaIt’s a simple concept Democrats never seem to grasp, and this week the line drawn in the sand representing “TOO DAMNED FAR” has been moved once again. It is becoming standard practice for this line to be moved every few years.

In a letter to churches around the country the Obama Administration informed them that not only does the new Obama care health care law require them to provide medical insurance coverage for all their employees in every church, and archdiocese around the country but that coverage MUST include contraception coverage. Not going far enough the dictum from our new overseer says that such contraception coverage must be free, with no co-pay charge to the recipient, and it must include the so-called “morning-after” pill, RU486, which abort any fetus up to five days after unprotected sex leads to conception.

English: a catholic cross Français : une croix...

It’s bad enough that our government led by Nanny-in-chief Barrack Obama feels we MUST buy healthcare coverage from private industry vendors and the only qualification for such a requirement is that you are breathing. Now his continued attack on Christians, and Catholics in particular, is abusive and nasty and seemingly hateful. Catholicism is the religion practiced by more Americans than any other religion. And it’s teachings are that contraception is wrong and that abortion is murder. And before all you Pro-Choice advocates get your panties in a bundle settle down. I’m not advocating for Pro-Life, contraception, Pro-Choice, or any other life decision. I’m telling Obama to get out of my face and more specifically my religion.

English: cross catholic Pontevedra Français : ...

The first amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads as follows:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
             The anti-religious zealots have had a remarkable time reveling in the very first phrase in the most important of all amendments. But they continuously overlook the second phrase which I have put in bold. In establishing Obamacare and in interpreting the law to require Catholics to provide contraception to their employees President Obama and his team of “I know better than you” is telling the Catholic Church, “we don’t care about your free exercise of your religion. We’re telling you what we believe and YOU will follow.” It’s clearly unConstitutional.
              Those many of you who blindly defend all things Obama realize this, if Obama can require Pro-Life, or Catholic employers to require that health insurance provide contraception, including RU486, what’s to stop a future Conservative Pro-Life President from prohibiting contraception from being offered? 
President Bush signing the Federal Funding Acc...

Bush signed Patriot Act, Obama renewed it.

Just like the Patriot Act violates our right to privacy and our right against illegal search this step by the Obama Administration goes way to far into violating our liberties and our right to self-determination. The Patriot Act was enacted by President George W. Bush as an over-reach following the horrible terrorist attacks of 9-11. But as I feared at the time it’s now become standard and practiced law in this country. Obama renewed the Patriot Act, leaving it increasingly likely it may become permanent.

               To all Democrats I beg you. Stand up to your chosen leader and lets help roll back these government intrusions into our liberties, our rights, our beliefs, and our ability to pursue happiness. For if you turn a blind eye towards another man or woman’s injustice, the next injustice, the next infringement might be against you. Move the damned line back!
Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.
If you like the blog please honor me by sharing it. Thank you.

February 2, 2012
Categories: National Politics . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: 3 Comments

A History Lesson on the Republican Party.

Loved this video and proud to have it on my blog.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

If you liked this blog please share it. Thank you.

February 1, 2012
Categories: National Politics . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: Comments Off on A History Lesson on the Republican Party.

The more I look, the More I like Mitt.

English: Governor Mitt Romney of MA

Our next President?

I thought (and wrote) that the Washington Republican caucuses for President of the United States would come and go this March 3rd with a GOP nomination fully secured for Mitt Romney and that my choice would be largely irrelevant. My home state rendered largely irrelevant again. And while I still think Romney will win the Republican nomination to take on Barrack Obama, I’m less sure. Newt Gingrich‘s win in South Carolina and his surge in national polls, irregardless of Florida, have me thinking I must take a stand, make a choice, and help my choice win.

While I’m not ALL there yet, I do like Mitt Romney more and more. I like Newt Gingrich too. And for the record I increasingly like Rick Santorum. But I’m probably going to vote for the former Massachusetts Governor.

Newt’s bombast is not a turn off for me the way it is for so many others. I was raised with a strong and often angry father, who yelled and was not afraid to show that he was upset. So I’m quite used to this character trait of Gingrich that turns off too many people and will probably be his undoing in the remaining nominating contests. I like Newt’s big ideas, and I like that he pisses off mainstream politicians of both parties. Wouldn’t you agree that going away from the politicians of Washington D.C. is not a negative?

But I said a couple of years ago that I’m not a one issue voter, but if I were, the one issue that is most important to me is ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. So much of what challenges us as Americans today is completely wrapped up in this one issue: race relations, jobs, drugs, terrorism. We absolutely must secure our borders. As best I can tell Mitt Romney comes the closest to my views on this subject than any of the remaining candidates. For instance, I do agree with him that if you make it nearly impossible for illegals to get jobs, and you remove so many of the other magnets that draw these people to illegally cross our borders many will return to their own homes. Why wouldn’t they? Why would they stay if they can’t feed themselves or their families.

And as a side note, don’t believe Barrack Obama for a second when he positions himself as tough on this subject. In the State of the Union he claimed there were fewer illegal border crossings now than there had been in years. True or not that has nearly nothing to do with anything he or his administration have done. It has more to do with the economy. Why illegally come to the U.S. now? There are no jobs to be had (which further advances Romney’s assertion that no jobs means they will go home).

Secondly, I like Romney’s plans to waive the Capital Gains tax for those making under $200,000. This idea was panned when it was first introduced. Romney’s opponents claiming that such a tax is not paid by people making under $2ook, but instead by people like him. Wrong! I know. I’ve had to pay this tax and I didn’t like it one bit. I wrote a check to the Federal Government for $12,000 after selling my families first home, which we had moved from and kept as a rental for 7 years. The threat of having to pay it again was the primary reason we sold our second house after keeping it as a rental for nearly 3 years. It is a disincentive tax for me and for many other potential investors. I think less-so for those with higher incomes.

Eventually I’d like to see the high-end Capital Gains tax equal the high-end income tax rate. Because it is wrong for wealthy people to pay a much smaller rate than what the rest of us pay. And since they make a large majority of their income through capital gains rather than through salary, naturally they will pay the lower tax rate. When Ronald Reagan reformed taxes in 1986 he agreed with Democrats to make the Capital Gains tax rate 28%, equal to the highest income tax rate. Like Gingrich has said, I’d rather see the income tax lower and expanded to more people than raise the level of the Capital Gains tax rate.

Lastly, if you consider the only negatives on Romney are that he is wealthy and that he is a “flip-flopper”, you really seriously need to re-examine your priorities. After all when making an argument isn’t the idea to bring people to your way of thinking? And for Conservative Pro-Lifers hasn’t Mitt Romney come toward your way of thinking? Isn’t that a good thing?

So those are my reasons. My mind could change. But for now I’m with Mitt. What are your reasons?  Who do you support and why?

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

If you find this blog interesting I would be honored if you would share it. TY.

Related articles

January 30, 2012
Categories: National Politics, Washington State . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: Comments Off on The more I look, the More I like Mitt.

« Previous Page — Previous page Next page — Next Page »