Today the House is expected to vote on H.R. 45 – To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) in the Health Care 
and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.
Regardless of what the Democrat-controlled Senate (53 D’s, 45 R’s, 2 I’s) does with it, at least Americans can see that their representatives in the House are listening to them.
The DOL’s weekly update shows the unemployment rate fell .1 to 7.5%. This was not as a result of more people working however. It was a result of 835,000 people dropping out of the workforce.
This is a case, as it has been since Obama became President, what looks like good news really isn’t. The labor participation rate, the number of people in the country that are working, is at 63.3 percent. That’s Jimmy Carter territory.
Labor unions today have unknowingly fulfilled a self-fulfilling prophesy. By leveraging unfair practices upon workers to build union 
membership, they did such a good job that they have lost their only reason to recruit. Now they are left with ancient history, the mid twentieth century, to fall back on. And for the most part, no longer have a reason to exist.
BIG LABOR advocates say “Without America’s labor unions, we wouldn’t have many of the protections and benefits that we have today.” That’s a true statement. It was true 30 years ago too! Thanks to the ‘wake-up call’ delivered to employers by organized labor decades ago, which was “treat your people right or lose,” the labor movement has successfully put itself out of business so to speak. Their usefulness has diminished due to their earlier success as shown by their decreasing member rolls.
By his own standard, President Obama did not pay his fair share in taxes. He paid $112,214 in taxes for 2012, putting his effective federal tax rate at 18.4 percent. Curiously, he didn’t voluntarily pony up to the 39%, and then some, that he expects of the other one percenters.
Things are tough for the President in 2012. A victim of his own making. Being on a fixed income, he managed to earn less in 2012. This, due to decreasing sales in his books. Who knows, maybe everyone who is going to buy one, has one now? Maybe people know that his hope and change, along with his campaign rhetoric, is a bunch of BS now? Maybe a little of each? Who cares now anyway? But it does fully explain the never-ending campaign.
President Obama had no insignificant role in the creation of the sub-prime mortgage meltdown with Fanny and Freddie via the Community 
Reinvestment Act. That worked so well, if crippling the economy was the goal, that he’s at it again.
Link: Obama administration pushes banks to make home loans to people with weaker credit
But you know, it only makes sense for this administration. Here’s the lead Democrat Gun Bill sponsor that doesn’t know squat about 
firearms. Thinks clips and magazines are a single-use accessory. more . . .
Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette, the lead Democratic sponsor of a federal bill to ban high-capacity magazines . . .
I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now, they’re going to shoot them. So if you ban them in the future, the number of these high-capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time, because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.
The reason it only makes sense is because we have a community organizer for a President who has never run a business, but got elected twice to run the country and take over 20 percent of the economy in the form of nationalized health care. One could expect that the proposed gun control legislation will work as well as everything President Obama has done to create jobs, grow the economy, and increase the quality of health care for everyone while covering 30 or 40 million more people, all while lowering its cost. How’s that working for you?
Note: No offense to the visually impaired is meant by the title. People who are blind see things better than this politician.
h/t Bluegrass Pundit
If taken on his word, you should be feeling that everyone that wanted a job now has one. And over 14 percent unemployment (U-6) is the new normal. That’s because President Obama told us how he would not rest until that was done.
He has been under a lot of criticism for his many vacations and golf outings over the course of his first term. Living the high life while people are losing their jobs and moving back home with their parents. His second term isn’t any better. In fact, it’s worse. It is this “in your face” arrogance that Barack and Michelle have exhibited that reminded me of a term that I had not thought of or heard said in a long time, while The White House (the people’s house) has to be closed for lack of money, that seems to fit this President.
I consulted the urban dictionary on this and half expected to see Obama’s picture there. For all who are quick to yell “racist,” you should know that this term is not race-specific. It describes the behavior, not the skin color. They, by any way you want to measure it, come in all colors. OK?
Links: Urban Dictionary, Nigger Rich | The First Family enjoys FOURTH vacation in three months
If you think increasing spending on education is just “for the children,” you would be mistaken. No 
matter what the figure you see published about the spending per student is, you can add about $1000 to that, per student, if you include teachers pensions. Regardless of whether they are funded or unfunded. Can you say “transparency?”
There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of economists that will tell you that if you want to see where we are headed if we don’t fix our 
fiscal house, all you have to do is look at Greece, Europe, and the EU. Just as many will also tell you that the “fix” for our exploding national debt and debt to GDP ratio will be harder to swallow the longer we wait for this “not immediate” crisis to become immediate.
How hard? Let’s look at what Cyprus is considering for their $7.5 billion EU bailout. They want to dip in to the checking accounts of depositors, charging them a tax on their insured deposits. Can you say “run on banks?”
Cypriot banks are holding $88 billion in deposits, including $49 billion in accounts of more than 100,000 euros. A “huge amount” for a country of 1.1 million people. Many of the biggest depositors are foreigners, including rich Russians, (Russian Mob money). President Putin is not happy about it.
Do you believe something like that could not happen here? Right now, there are ‘tax and spenders’ trying to figure out how they can get away with a “wealth tax.” Others have their eyes on your 401K and other retirement plans. Cyprus has their version. Don’t think for a minute that something like this isn’t on Mr. Fair-Share-Redistribution-of-Wealth-Social-Justice Obama’s mind. Why else would he say we don’t have a spending problem and instead have a revenue (not-enough-taxes) problem?
As part of the EU’s bailout, here’s what Cyprus is considering . . .
Those with under 100,000 Euros in their accounts are slated to receive a 6.6% haircut while those with more than 100,000 Euros in their accounts will be docked 9.9%.
Europeans know that the welfare state they made for themselves has become unsustainable. The fix for them now is causing rioting in the streets. There aren’t too many Americans still alive that remember the run on banks and the depression that followed. But if we’re not careful, if we don’t turn this ship around, we have a good chance of seeing history repeat itself.
Link: The EU Crosses the Rubicon | Cyprus president in desperate bid to prevent run on banks | Watch Out: Your 401(k) Is Being Targeted | Gartman Warns Cyprus: One Does Not Steal Russian Mafia Money And Get Away With It | Cyprus closes in on E.U. bailout, U-turn on levy
Fascinating interview this on the March 17, 2013 edition of ABC’s “This Week” with House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), on two counts. 
First is the headline, “House Speaker John Boehner says he ‘absolutely’ trusts Obama, trying to bridge differences.” I guess the qualifier is the “trying to bridge differences” part. But I’d really like to hear Boehner define that in his own words. For example, what basis do you have to trust President Obama after he said that the Affordable Care Act would not add one dime to the deficit and to the national debt? It was the president himself who said that he would not sign the Affordable Care Act if it would add a dime to the deficit. That’s just two examples, but there is a laundry list of similar cases where the words are 180 degrees from reality. Just where does this basis of trust come from Mr. Boehner?
Next in the theater-of-the-ridiculous is that Obama and Boehner agree that the country doesn’t have an immediate debt crisis. Boehner says a debt crisis does loom in the years ahead because entitlement programs are not sustainable if they aren’t changed. Once again, I guess it all depends on what the meaning of “immediate” is. The Associated Press apparently doesn’t have a clue, or independent thought on the subject either. They just report what “some conservatives” say. What it means to each of these two is the crisis won’t happen until I’m out of office (if not Speakership) so it may as well not exist. It also means that they, unlike House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan, don’t have the balls intestinal fortitude to tackle the problem before it becomes a crisis. When the fix will be more painful. The lack of leadership in both of them is astounding. I am reminded of a line that James Carville said about then presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and candidate Obama; ‘if Hillary gave [Obama] one of her balls, they’d both have two.’