Consider Time’s first listed protester – The Arab Spring:  The scenes that I most remember were of killing, rape (ask the American reporter who was repeatedly raped during the Arab Spring – Lara Logan).  Once the Arab springers were free of oppressive rule they celebrated by killing hundreds of Coptic Christians.  Any guess at which “religion of peace” wielded the murder weapon?  The “secular” Muslim Brotherhood won power in the free elections and things have gotten much better unless you consider their desire for war with Israel or perhaps their taunts toward testing Obama’s mettle…

“The latest sign of a crackdown in Cairo is the holding back of seven U.S. citizens, including the son of a U.S. cabinet member. Elise Jordan talks to trapped American Sam LaHood. “

 Add to that the “protests” or as most of us would call them…riots in the rest of the Arab world their brutality even made me feel sorry for Mohmar Quadaffi.  Jamming a razor knife up his rear is nothing to celebrate let alone a movement to dedicate a magazine cover.

Consider next – their Athens Protesters:  Greece or as I frighteningly call it “America’s future,” provided a graphic illustration of what will possibly happen here unless drastic changes are made.  What happens to a country that spends way more than they earn (i.e. steal through taxes) and those who pay the bill are no longer around.  Like the babies they are the citizen (i.e. union) protests erupted in Athens as the “adults” initiated austerity measures (i.e. cutting all of the “free” stuff).  I see direct parallels to the union actions here in Wisconsin, Indiana, and Ohio.

Next on our list are the wonderful, the glorious, the mighty unwashed – The Occupy Wall Street:  If you have ever ridden a toboggan down a steep slope you can understand my view of the Occupy folks.  Hurtling down a slippery slope without much guidance or direction and gaining reckless momentum…oh and is generally done on someone else’s property.  Look at the costs.  Look at the property damage.  Look at the evictions.  Look at the riots.  Look at the crime.  Look at the rapes.  Look at the success – okay there is not any success unless you consider prepie, urban camping a success.  Please give me one reason why this movement should be celebrated, but CNS posted a poem about the movement that is worth reading at this link.

What a weird world when the most true protest  - Moscow.  Thousands of Muscovites took to the streets to protest Vladamir Putin’s attempts at taking back power.  I don’t think he ever lost power, it just wasn’t official.  These folks were protesting against socialism/communism as they have found that they love their freedom.  These people even braved the cold and didn’t run home to Mommy and Daddy like the occupiers here.  True to form, Time put their cause on the bottom.

Conspicuously absent was the TEA Party protesters.  True that they had most of their protests prior to 2011, but with the swearing in of majorities of Republican legislators in 2011 they certainly had an impact on the world.  Time like most Democrats, mainstream media, progressives, and even Republicans would like to forget about the TEA Party.  Sorry, but they/we aren’t going away.

Obama quietly signed a Dept. of Defense authorization bill to provide funding for our military.  Attached to the legislation was a provision that,

“Section 1031 of the NDAA bill, which itself defines the entirety of the United States as a “battlefield,” allows American citizens to be snatched from the streets, carted off to a foreign detention camp and held indefinitely without trial. The bill states that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” faces indefinite detention, but no trial or evidence has to be presented, the White House merely needs to make the accusation.”

In public Obama claims to not want the provisions and, of course, would never use them, but this video of DEMOCRAT Senator Carl Levin puts the lie (lawlessness) to Obama’s claim. 

The legislation was signed by Obama.  Where were the Republicans?  Why wasn’t this stopped.  You may believe that Obama is not “Big Brother”, but at some point we will have one and the tools will all be at his disposal. 

The second event was Obama’s way to scuttle Republican attempts to appoint people to posts.  Republicans have been blocking certain appointments using the same tools that Democrats used against George W. Bush.  Clinton, Bush, and Obama have used “recess appointments” to get their guys in while Congress was out of session.  I remember cheering when Bush appointed John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations.  The appointments only last the year.  The typically spineless Republicans devised a strategy to prevent Obama from making recess appointments.  The never had recess.  They were able to keep Congress “in session” by having events every few days.  This wasn’t a new strategy, but Obama decided that any day he could just make a lawless recess appointments.  It’s going to take decades to undo the damage this Administration has done to our country.

As usual Charles Krauthammer deserves the last word. 

Chevy Volt featuring an exploding battery

“Pennsylvania’s legislature passed the $27.15 billion FY2012 state budget on June 29, 2011. The FY2012 budget reduces spending by three percent from FY2011. Gov. Tom Corbett signed the budget with 15 minutes to spare on June 30, 2011, giving the state will have its first on-time budget in nine years. The budget does not include any tax increases. It reduces education funding by approximately $860 million and also made cuts to human services. Pennsylvania has a total state debt of approximately $147,788,481,000…”

 Pennsylvania’s governor and legislature made some tough decisions and for the first time in nine years passed a budget on time (Under former Governor Rendell – Democrat – a state budget was never passed on time). It was curious to me as a resident and taxpayer of Pennsylvania to read that the state is going to spend $1,000,000.00 to install charging stations along the Pennsylvania Turnpike at some of its rest areas. The turnpike, who recently raised tolls again, is kicking in an additional $500,000.00 for the stations. While we have become somewhat decencitized to the amounts government spends and this spending is a small percentage of the total budget, but the “investment” seems like it is more for form than function.

The government is spending roughly 0.005 percent of its budget on a type of vehicle that has only sold in the low thousands meaning vehicles that no one wants. Unless something has changed about the range of these vehicles (roughly 40 miles between charges) they’ll need charging stations every 40 miles. Even with a rapid charge it would take by my estimate over 15 hours to make the five hundred mile trip from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh (avg. speed of 60 mph, 20 minutes/charge, 10 min/charge set up). Think about the time if you need a four-hour charge. It is hard to believe that the use of that much money is more than window dressing.

I pass by this natural gas fueling station frequently (probably 45 times since it was built) and have only seen a vehicle in it one time. I actually got “excited” about it until I realized that the vehicle was not fueling, but carried the photographer and what I surmised was a reporter who were doing a story about the station. This facility was built by a local gas company with private money…hopefully. I think there may actually be more natural gas vehicles than electric ones.

The funny thing about both the electric and natural gas cars is that there are concerted efforts to place severe limits on both electric generation (mostly coal-fired plants) and the extraction of natural gas. That’s the irony of the environmental movement…use electric cars, but also eliminate the source of the majority of the electricity…use natural gas vehicles, but place moratoriums on natural gas productions.

Perhaps it is time to buy stock in more natural means of transportation like horse-drawn carriages. It is low tech, but probably would still get you to Pittsburgh faster.

UPMC didn’t like the fact that Highmark, the insurance company, was treading on its turf and told Highmark that it would not longer give preferential rates for its patients once the current contract runs out in June 2012.  Funny thing is that UPMC also provides health insurance.  This seems like the pot calling the kettle black to me.  I have an obvious concern as my employer offers Highmark insurance and not UPMC insurance, but all of our family doctors are UPMC.  There are thousands of us who will be entering 2012 with a large cloud over our insured heads. 

The fued has even spilled over into the world of television as paid political advertisements have been popping up though mostly from UPMC.  The ads are not “political”, but deserve that tag as they really do not, in my opinion, tell the whole story.  In a nut shell UPMC got mad because Highmark is getting into health care service on their turf.  Highmark for some reason decided to piss off its biggest service provider, perhaps because UPMC ventured into the insurance business.  The only real loser on the horizon are the residents who have Highmark insurance and live in western Pennsylvania.  In other words a lot of us.

Many politicians are weighing in (i.e. sticking their noses in) which may mean legislation that will on the surface seem to benefit citizens, but will in the long run really screw us through higher rates or poorer service and most likely both.  Highmark is relying on political ends to achieve its goal.

“Highmark continues to support efforts by both the Pennsylvania General Assembly and the Corbett administration to get UPMC back to the table to negotiate a new contract so we can preserve for all Western Pennsylvanians affordable access to community assets that were funded by and supported by taxpayer grants, local philanthropy and subscriber premiums,” Highmark spokesman Michael Weinstein said. UPMC refuses to negotiate because it says the combined insurer-health system would have to steer customers away from UPMC and toward West Penn Allegheny. It prefers what has been called an orderly divorce from Highmark.”

Bad thing is that UPMC and probably Highmark have liberally hired lots and lots of former politicians who have friends who are still politicians.  I favor a more free market solution to the issue.  UPMC has every right to decide not to renew its contract with Highmark just as Highmark has a right to buy West Penn Allegheny health system.  Let them duke it out!  However, if they want to act like free market corporations they should be treated like free market corporations.  You see both UPMC and Highmark are “non profit” entities and pay no property taxes.  The article linked above (blue highlighted text) reported that UPMC has $9,000,000,000 in revenue and owns 20 hospitals.  That’s a lot of money and a lot of tax-free property.  I don’t know Highmark’s numbers, but my guess is that it is substantial too. 

There are a lot of municipalities who are hurting for revenue and could use the boost they would realize if these corporations would pay their property taxes like other corporations.  The mayor of Pittsburgh tried to get this a few years ago, but was more or less beaten down.  Skip the legislation and get out the auditors if these players won’t play.

When elephants duel the only ones who really get hurt are those poor souls unlucky enough to be between them.

“When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”

– Benjamin Franklin

I am not lamenting the existence of safety nets, but they should be temporary. I know a guy who works at a local fast food restaurant drive thru that I also ran into working at WalMart. We started talking and I found that he had lost his well-paying job and had to get two jobs to meet his obligations. He is probably sixty years old and exemplifies how one should behave in a free society.

“I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”

– Ayn Rand – Atlas Shrugged

Besides the life-long entitlement dependents we all have heard stories of how easy it is to scam the system and we all feel the same anger when we see how government control over the use of our tax dollars is so lax. Every once in a while someone is made to be an example of strict oversight, but many of these are probably just a little “meat” to satisfy our desire for justice. I read an Associated Press story yesterday that I expected to be the same.

The story was about “food stamp trafficking” where retailers give recipients lesser amounts of cash for their food stamp benefits. The retailers obviously get reimbursed by Uncle Sam for the higher dollar amounts and the recipients get cash to spend without the controls over what they can buy. It’s a win-win for them…not so much for us. You might be heartened to note that the USDA is cracking down on the retailers and last year 931 stores of the 234,000 authorized were dismissed from the program and 907 “sanctioned.” We all like when fraud is stopped, but the article did not expand on what “sanctioned” means and I wonder if there are lesser amounts of fraud that do not get you banned from the system.

When I finished the AP article I was a little confused be what some might describe as the “elephant in the room” that seemed to be ignored. I skimmed the piece and then reread it to make sure that I didn’t miss anything and looked at again as I write this. The Associated Press did not mention banishment or sanctions for those recipients who also defrauded the government.

It does take two to tango after all. Some individual sold their benefits for cash and they should also be dismissed from the program. Perhaps the oversight was just poor reporting by the AP (no surprise there), but I suspect that the reason for the article was more PR for Obama. The last paragraph gleefully stated,

“Even though food stamp spending has ballooned from $22.7 billion to $64.7 billion since 1995, the misuse of benefits has dropped from four cents to a penny on every dollar spent”

That sounds great, but that is still $647 million dollars of fraud. I prefer to call the “misuse” fraud as that is what it is. I also love how the AP went back to 1995 (Bill Clinton was president) for their beginning point of the “ballooning” spending.  It is very disingenuous to spread the “ballooning” over such a long period when it clearly distorts the fact that under Obama spending has skyrocketed, nearly doubling under Obama’s two years in office.  The data isn’t that hard to find so the only reason for the AP to do it is to cover for Obama.

First I’d like the Republican presidential candidates to suspend their campaigns for a month, maybe 45 days.  No more endless debates, no more Cain bimbo eruptions, no more Perry gaffes, no more Romney (actually vanilla-flavored Romney has pretty much been quiet), Newt can still zing the media.  Let’s no longer give the media fodder so they can avoid and provide cover for what should be the big story on every night’s newscast.  Second let’s forget about Kim Kardashian’s fake marriage and all other Hollywood drivel.  Third let’s ignore anything with the word “occupy” anywhere in the title. 

Fourth let’s shine some light on perhaps the biggest story of corruption and cover up of all time.  No not the pay-to-play green energy scams.  I am talking about how Obama’s Justice Department through Eric Holder allowed, no facilitated, the illegal transportation of guns purchased in the United States (possibly with Stimulus money) to Mexico where many many humans were killed with the weapons including a U.S. border agent, Brian Terry.

You may have heard of it as ”fast and furious” or “project gunrunner” or “project gunwalker”, but most likely you had never heard of it.  Beyond what is quickly becoming the worst implemented cover up in Washington history the media is showing their bias by not covering the story.  Imagine a crime committed by a high ranking official leading to the death of a citizen then the crime covered up by the White House. 

This makes breaking into an opponents campaign headquarters look like jaywalking.

This makes staining a blue dress in the Oval Office look like dishonoring the office of the president.

This SCREAMS Pullitzer Prize for some honest journalist, but none from the major network news outlets seem to want to cover the story or better yet dig into it.  This is pathetic. 

There is some hope about increased scrutiny since murdered agent Terry’s family have broken their silence after Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, recently responded that he could not be responsible for all of his employees and did not feel responsible for Terry’s death.

“Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt contended that the president has not broken his promise on

The accusation has to be particularly hurtful to Obama since it came from their long-time pubic relations firm, The New York Times.  If you factor in “liberal-speak” there is a missing word in the quote from Obama’s spokesman and that would be the word  “directly.”  Once the money is bundled and rebundled and given by lobbyists, but from their personal accounts it’s all mixed up.  Who could follow it.  You would have to be as naive as a mass media journalist to believe that lobbying money doesn’t make its way into Obama’s coffers. 

Besides what’s the big deal about lobbyists money?  It is just money from people representing special interests.  Is that really any different from money from unions for special favors like pushing card check or NLRB pushing the union agenda?

“Since 1990, labor unions have contributed over $667 million in election campaigns in the United States, of which $614 million or 92 percent went to support Democratic candidates. In 2008, unions spent $74.5 million in campaign contributions, with $68.3 million going to the Democratic Party. Already, unions have contributed $6.5 million to the 2010 elections, and $6 million has gone to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics in Washington, D.C.”

Or different from money from Wall Street firms?  How sleezy to take quietly take their money while haranguing them to the common folk.

“That would include the man who is arguably Wall Street’s biggest detractor and an OWS sympathizer—Barack Obama. A study by the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation’s Influence Project finds that Obama has received more in campaign donations from the financial sector than any other politician in the last two decades.  So far, the president has received $16 million in Wall Street contributions. The amount, which accounts for 20% of Obama’s total campaign funding.”

Or different from money from trial lawyers?  Obama was able to siphon off one of John Edward’s cash cows as trial lawyers supported Obama and what did they get in return?

“AAJ [trial lawyers association] President Anthony Tarricone wrote, “I am very pleased to report that the health care bill is clear of any [such] provisions. … While there is a provision for demonstration projects, it provides an absolute opt-out clause for plaintiffs at any time.”  In other words, now plaintiffs effectively get even more power because they can pick and choose whichever system they think is most likely to get them the most cash. The demonstration projects – for ideas such as specialized “health courts,” where expert panels replace random juries – therefore become not a real alternative that levels the playing field, but instead just one more tool in the lawyers’ arsenal.  Here’s more from Mr. Tarricone’s letter: “Here are some of the highlights of AAJ’s efforts and the obstacles we overcame: In the House, AAJ defeated tort-reform amendments that were offered in all three committees that amended the original bill. … In the Senate, 28 tort-reform amendments were defeated in the two committees that marked up the bill. On the Senate floor, AAJ decisively defeated a cap on attorneys’ fees.”

Or different from money from big health care?  Perhaps big health care and pharma have done well supporting Obama?

“President Barack Obama has raised more money from the health care industry than Republican candidates, according to an analysis conducted by the Center For Responsive Politics published in National Journal.  Obama has raised $1.6 million from the health sector, more than the $920,000 raised by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and the $494,000 raised by Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Pharmaceutical companies gave Obama $230,000 versus $161,000 for Romney and $43,000 for Perry.  Drug companies won more protections for brand-name drugs against cheaper drugs in Obama’s health care reform law. Proposals to have Medicare negotiate drug prices and to allow importation of drugs from Canada did not make it into the final bill. An estimated 32 million new Americans with insurance also means more business for pharmaceutical companies.”

Or money from other countries?  One website suggests that the lax nature of Obama’s online donation site would permit illegal donations from other countries.

“Palestinian brothers inside the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip are listed in government election filings as having donated $29,521.54 to Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign.  Donations of this nature would violate election laws, including prohibitions on receiving contributions from foreigners and guidelines against accepting more than $2,300 from one individual during a single election, Bob Biersack, a spokesman for the Federal Election Commission, told WND in response to a query.  The contributions also raise numerous questions about the Obama campaign’s lax online donation form, which apparently allows for the possibility of foreign contributions.  Last week, the Atlas Shrugs blog outlined a series of donations in 2007 made to Obama’s campaign from two individuals, Monir Edwan and Hosam Edwan, totaling $29,521.54.  In an online form on Obama’s campaign site, the Edwans listed their street as “Tal Esaltan,” which they wrote was located in “Rafah, GA.”  Rafah is not a city in Georgia. The Atlas blog immediately raised concerns that the money may have been donated from the Gaza Strip town of Rafah.”

How clever to use the name of your city and claim it is from an American state.  One has to wonder if there were donations from Tehran, Idaho, Caracus North Dakota, or Havana Pennsylvania.  Everyone gave money to Obama because he was the presumptive winner over a lackluster John McCain.  Bet on the winner and your rewards will be reaped.  Gibson guitars donates to Republicans and they get rewarded by armed federal agents storming their factories while their competitors who donated to Democrats fared much better.  Nor should we forget the campaign bundlers who got so much tax money for “green energy” [green perhaps because they get sooo much of our tax dollars as a return in campaign contributions...allegedly] projects like Solyndra, Fisker, or SolarReserve.  There is still no proof that Mexican drug cartels donated money to Obama for guns in the Gunrunner scandal. 

If we had no lobbyists where would former politicians get jobs after they “retire” or decide not to run to “spend more time with their families?’

The framers wrote the Constitution to provide for a separation of powers, or three separate branches of government. Each has its own responsibilities and at the same time they work together to make the country run smoothly and to assure that the rights of citizens are not ignored or disallowed. This is done through checks and balances. A branch may use its powers to check the powers of the other two in order to maintain a balance of power among the three branches of government. The three branches of the U.S. Government are: Legislative, Executive, Judicial

For this system to work and in turn ensure that we all enjoy our freedoms each branch is expected to battle to maintain their power to balance the power of the other branches.  What will happen when one branch absorbs more and more power at the expense of another branch with little or no balance from the other branch?  Until recently the answer to that question has been one of theoretical discussion, but now we are seeing a seemingly concerted effort to increase executive power while most of Congress bickers seems oblivious to the usurping of power;

The passage of Obamacare had numerous reasons for us to dislike it and since it was passed we have gotten a good look at what’s in it (thanks Nancy Pelosi) including giving almost unlimited power to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.  Sebelius used that power to cut an Obamacare program to provide long-term health insurance coverage for Americans.  This followed on the heels of her WARNING to health insurance providers not to blame increased premiums on Obamacare or in other words forgo their constitutional right to free speech.  By the way the health insurance premiums for Americans rose 9 percent this year.  You’ll be able to keep your health insurance plan…if it still exists AND you can afford it.  Another unusual perk that Congress gave the executive branch in Obamacare is a pre-approval of billions of dollars in spending circumventing the constitutional provision of an annual budget passed by the House of Representatives.  Why would Congress give the executive branch such power?

One of most bizarre (and pathetic) pieces of legislation was the Dodd/Frank financial bill; a bill written by arguably the two most culpable actors in the 2008 economic meltdown.  Part of the legislation created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)which was described by opponents as,

“This is a regulatory agency with unparalleled powers, including consolidated and expanded regulatory authority over credit and debit cards, mortgages, student loans, savings and checking accounts, and most every other consumer financial product and service. Essentially, all consumers’ money falls under bureau purview unless it’s under a mattress…With a battalion of bureaucrats at the ready, and a budget of $500 million, the CFPB is busily gathering intelligence on most every type of financial firm and preparing regulatory sorties under existing laws.”

– Diane Katz –

The CFPB’s actions have ZERO Congressional oversight provisions, in other words Congress can take no action to reel in the agency.  In fact the budget for CFPB is not even controlled by Congress, but rather it is controlled by the Federal Reserve which you ought to know is not a government entity.  To paraphrase we now have an agency with unlimited powers over the banking agency without any responsibility to report to elected officials, oh and we pay for it.  Why would anyone give the executive branch this kind of power?

How about Obama’s extra-Constitutional use of “Czars” to push his agenda?  In October Judicial Watch released a report about Obama’s czars;

 ”Many of these ‘czars’ are unconfirmed by the Senate and are largely unaccountable to Congress. Further, their activities are often outside the reach of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), creating a veil of secrecy about their precise role in the administration…Czars appointees have seized unprecedented control over major aspects of government policy and programs. In some instances, unconfirmed czars have authority, in seeming violation of the U.S. Constitution, over certain Senate-confirmed officers…A number of the czars have been linked to scandals, thefts and kickbacks, flagrant and offensive statements, conflicts of interest, and radical leftist political ideologies and policies…Barack Obama’s unconstitutional use of czars to help run his administration is at odds with republican, limited, and accountable government. Obama has simply installed his radical leftist allies in various positions of power while thumbing his nose at Congress and the American people. As we document in this report, too many of these czars have proven to be corrupt or radicals (or sometimes both). No wonder the Obama administration fights tooth and nail to allow these czars to operate in secret. Nevertheless, Judicial Watch managed to develop this comprehensive list of czars as part of efforts to ensure government accountability.”

The Obama administration seems to have taken the motto, ”If at first you don’t succeed in Congress, legislate from the executive branch through the agencies.”  The most recent example is regarding his most recent stimulus program (which he misnames the Jobs Bill) and his failure to gather support for the plan.  Fox News reported Obama’s comments that he was,

“instructing his staff to move forward on job-creating initiatives without congressional approval where possible. The White House announced steps to speed environmental and other regulatory approvals for 14 public works projects across the country.  ‘We’re not going to wait for Congress,”

This follows actions by the House to reign in Obama’s EPA and their actions to implement Cap and Trade even though passage of the legislation was soundly defeated in Congress.  The House voted (Republicans and even 19 Democrats) to ban the EPA’s passage of greenhouse gas regulations.  There has not been any action in the Senate as Harry Reid seems to be willing to give the executive branch more power even though this legislation has broad bipartisan support.  Why would anyone give the executive branch this kind of power?

President Obama ran his 2008 campaign on ending the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan; not “winning” the wars, just ending them.  Here we are nearly three years into his term and the conflicts, if anything, are getting much worse as our enemies seem to be energized by Obama’s lack of commitment to winning.   The anti-war presidential candidate has turned into the war president with additional military action in Libya.  Admittedly he has some authority to take action when America is threatened, but must get Congressional approval after 90 day.  Even Obama’s PR network, MSNBC, seems perplexed by this stance,

“Obama’s stance is striking: not only hasn’t he addressed the question of congressional authorization, but acting without it appears to be at odds with what he stood for when he ran for president.  ‘The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,’ Obama told the Boston Globe in 2007.  Obama has not argued that Gadhafi is “an actual or imminent threat” to the United States, only to the Libyans who oppose him.”

And more recently he is sending more troops to “advise” in Uganda…because our national interests are at stake there.  It turns out he is not against the use of force, just using force where we actually have national interests.  Yet Congress sits by and by virtue of their silence gives the executive branch more power.

The American Thinker listed a number of predictions regarding what Obama would do when he faced a Republican majority in the House and most of them agreed that he would work through the federal government’s bureaucracy,

 ”John Fund believes that Obama 2.0 will rely on executive orders and rule-making to circumvent Congress. Fund sees signs of this approach in a new Labor Department plan to make life even more miserable for business through a variety of means not resorted to by previous administrations, Republican or Democrat. Conversely, monitoring of unions will be weakened by transferring the responsibility for whistle-blowing investigations from OSHA to a department charged with scrutinizing unions. Given the added workload from OSHA, union-monitoring (how union leaders spend workers’ dues, for example) will inevitably be weakened.

Charles Krauthammer foresees that Obama will also exercise his control over the fourth branch of government — the bureaucracy, the regulations, and the rules it lives to proliferate — to power his agenda for the next two years. Obama the poker player has already tipped his hand. He is using bureaucratic edict to advance card check, bypassing a Congress that resisted union demands to bring about card check via legislation.

That strategy is tailor-made for Obama. Rules accumulate stealthily under the radar screen. They are incomprehensible, and most people’s eyes glaze over them anyway. Even many of the politicians responsible for passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) admitted that they did not bother to read the bill. Business groups might fish them out, but these will be portrayed as greedy people who want to exploit workers, despoil the environment, and plunder the nation to line their wallets.

The rules and regulations are going to come fast and furious.  We are laboring under a massively expanding regulatory regime that has extended its tentacles into numberless nooks and crannies across our nation (and the playing field has widened with the takeover of two car companies, ObamaCare, and the new rules-laden Federal Regulations Bill). Big Brother has become Big Bully.  Obama focuses his regulatory imperialism on labor and environmental issues, defying the will of the people. Last year, he warned Congress that if it did not pass cap and trade, his EPA would bring it about via rules and regulations — Congress be damned…”

Actually we’re damned…Vladimir Putin must be impressed.

WHERE IS JOHN GALT?

Keys to the perfect candidate:

1. Mitt Romney’s hair:  That’s his best feature physically, intellectually, conservatively, etc. though his campaign finances are quite attractive too.
2. Rick Perry’s thumbs up:  Perry comes across as a very down-to-earth guy and this sells well though he may be a little too much like “W” for many people’s taste.
3. Herman Cain’s Brain:  You have to love Mr. Cain’s wit, wisdom, and willingness to smash through the veil of political correctness barriers.  He speaks to the people as a person.
4. Newt Gingrich’s brain:  Newt may have the best “one-liners” from the debates and I would love to see him oppose BHO in presidential debates.  He would dismantle the man.  We still need Mr. Cain’s brain as Newt’s sometimes drifts left.
5. Chris Christies’s mouth:  What conservative would not LOVE to see Gov. Christie take on the national media.  Just think of the money we’d save by not needing a press secretary.
6. Chris Christie’s finger wag:  Gov. Christie’s mouth’s best accessory when dressing down some ill-informed liberal.
7. Not Pictured – Rick Santorum’s spine:  Sen. Santorum takes a licking and keeps coming back.  He doesn’t hide his faith and freely expresses his opinion to the detriment of his campaign. 
8. Not Pictured – Michelle Bachman’s “guts”:  Viciously attacked by the left she keeps coming and fighting back.  Her conservative bonafides are first-rate.
9. Not Pictured – Ron Paul’s nerves:  Rep. Paul’s impression of the Energizer Bunny as he continues his good fight for sound fiscal policy in America is needed.  We do want the ability, however, to shut him off when he goes off about other issues.
10. Not Pictured – Jon Huntsman’s…well I just cannot think of anything that Mr. Huntsman brings to the table except perhaps his father.

Now we have Herman Cain fresh off of his win at the Florida straw poll.  Cain presents a bit of a problem for the media since he is, as Rush Limbaugh calls him, authentically black meaning his can trace his roots to American slavery.  There has to be care in criticisms of Cain lest they go too far trying to paint him as an “oreo” and risk the anger of the black community.  I even saw an interview with a black woman who used the “oreo” term to describe Mr. Cain.  It is still early in the race and he could sink his own ship like Bachman, but so far he is creating a buzz and excitement in conservative circles that Perry and Romney can only dream of.

One of the foundations of his campaign is his 999 Plan;

• Business Flat Tax – 9% (Gross income less all investments, all purchases from other businesses and all dividends paid to shareholders and empowerment Zones will offer additional deductions for payroll employed in the zone.)
• Individual Flat Tax – 9%. (Gross income less charitable deductions and empowerment Zones will offer additional deductions for those living and/or working in the zone.)
• •National Sales Tax – 9%. (This gets the Fair Tax off the sidelines and into the game)

Herman Cain combines a compelling personal story, a successful career outside of politics, a refreshing disregard for political correctness, a strong message, a strong presence, an infectious message, and he is neither Mitt Romney nor Rick Perry.  A writer for the Washington Examiner put together his favorite Herman Cain quotes:

• “Stupid people are ruining America!” – Cain encouraging supporters to stay informed on the issues.
• “If Obamacare had been fully implemented when I caught cancer, I’d be dead.” – Cain on Obama’s health care legislation.
• “Well, first of all, I doubt if Morgan Freeman, with all due respect, who is a great actor, has ever been to a Tea Party.” – Cain responding to Morgan Freeman’s comments about Tea Party members being racist.
• “I’m listening to all this bull***t that he’s talking about, ‘fairness’ and ‘balanced approach’ to get this economy going.” – Cain on President Obama’s rhetoric on class warfare.
• “It will be a twenty foot wall, barbed wire, electrified on the top, and on this side of the fence, I’ll have that moat that President Obama talked about. And I would put those alligators in that moat!” – Cain on his illegal immigration plan.
• “America has got to learn to take a joke.” – Cain, when asked about his alligator moat to stop immigration.
• “They called me racist too, because I disagreed with a President who happened to be black.” – Cain on racism.

Mr. Cain is making this race interesting and I’m loving it!