campaigns (4)

 

By Oscar Y. Harward

 

SC Sen. Lindsey ‘Flimsy’ Graham says he believes that the Republicans may be “in a demographic death spiral”.  Sen. Graham, the only ones that may apply are Moderate to Liberal Republicans In Name Only (RINO) like you, Sen. Lindsey ‘Flimsy’ Graham (R-SC) who are attempting to redirect our Conservative South Carolina and other states to a more-Liberal Democrat Party. 

 

You, Liberal Democrats, and RINO members of your ‘Gang of Eight’ want to add an additional $6.38 Trillion of National Debt to (y)our children, and their children, just to subsidize and grant ‘Amnesty’ to 11 Million ‘illegal immigrants’.

 

Sen. Graham was the Majority Senate Manager in President Bill Clinton’s Impeachment trial in 1999 for his removal from office; however, Sen. Graham was ‘ineffective’ in swaying some of his fellow Republicans and most Democrats; ending as a failure of removal on a 50 to 50 vote.  SCOTUS did later find President Obama guilty to ‘lying’ under oath; denying him to ever act as an attorney in the US Supreme Court.

 

‘Flimsy’ Graham verbalizes that he is ‘pro-life’; however, ‘Flimsy’ Graham makes it clear how he votes contradictory to his own words, as he votes in support of President Obama’s two most left-wing, anti-Christian, Pro-abortion SCOTUS nominees ever, and others.  Wasn’t it ‘Flimsy’ Graham who said in support of President Obama’s nominees, “Elections have consequences,”

 

South Carolinians have a lot of good ‘old-fashion’ ‘common-sense’; an ‘element’ lacking in ‘Flimsy’ Graham.  Giving credit where credit is earned, ‘Flimsy’ Graham is usually reliable in supporting our US Military, but isn’t he on that payroll, also?

 

There is serious concern asking ‘Flimsy’ Graham and others as to why should the USA send and/or provide our men and women of our US Military, any military equipment, financial resources, or anything else for either member side in the ‘civil war’ in Syria; whereas, both sides in this war ‘openly’ hate the USA and everything America is supposed to represent?  Americans and/or our other resources should not be sent anywhere in the world, just to die. 

 

It is apparent that being a US Senator must be a very easy job.  With an assembly of taxpayers’ paid staff, ‘Flimsy’ Graham spends a considerable amount of time ‘chasing’ TV Media cameras.

 

South Carolina has many potential 2014 GOP Senatorial nominees who will be more respectful to their citizens, their political values and their principles.

Read more…

 

By Oscar Y. Harward

 

SC Sen. Lindsey ‘Flimsy’ Graham says he believes that the Republicans may be “in a demographic death spiral”.  Sen. Graham, the only ones that may apply are Moderate to Liberal Republicans In Name Only (RINO) like you, Sen. Lindsey ‘Flimsy’ Graham (R-SC) who are attempting to redirect our Conservative South Carolina and other states to a more-Liberal Democrat Party. 

 

You, Liberal Democrats, and RINO members of your ‘Gang of Eight’ want to add an additional $6.38 Trillion of National Debt to (y)our children, and their children, just to subsidize and grant ‘Amnesty’ to 11 Million ‘illegal immigrants’.

 

Sen. Graham was the Majority Senate Manager in President Bill Clinton’s Impeachment trial in 1999 for his removal from office; however, Sen. Graham was ‘ineffective’ in swaying some of his fellow Republicans and most Democrats; ending as a failure of removal on a 50 to 50 vote.  SCOTUS did later find President Obama guilty to ‘lying’ under oath; denying him to ever act as an attorney in the US Supreme Court.

 

‘Flimsy’ Graham verbalizes that he is ‘pro-life’; however, ‘Flimsy’ Graham makes it clear how he votes contradictory to his own words, as he votes in support of President Obama’s two most left-wing, anti-Christian, Pro-abortion SCOTUS nominees ever, and others.  Wasn’t it ‘Flimsy’ Graham who said in support of President Obama’s nominees, “Elections have consequences,”

 

South Carolinians have a lot of good ‘old-fashion’ ‘common-sense’; an ‘element’ lacking in ‘Flimsy’ Graham.  Giving credit where credit is earned, ‘Flimsy’ Graham is usually reliable in supporting our US Military, but isn’t he on that payroll, also?

 

There is serious concern asking ‘Flimsy’ Graham and others as to why should the USA send and/or provide our men and women of our US Military, any military equipment, financial resources, or anything else for either member side in the ‘civil war’ in Syria; whereas, both sides in this war ‘openly’ hate the USA and everything America is supposed to represent?  Americans and/or our other resources should not be sent anywhere in the world, just to die. 

 

It is apparent that being a US Senator must be a very easy job.  With an assembly of taxpayers’ paid staff, ‘Flimsy’ Graham spends a considerable amount of time ‘chasing’ TV Media cameras.

 

South Carolina has many potential 2014 GOP Senatorial nominees who will be more respectful to their citizens, their political values and their principles.

Read more…

By Oscar Y. Harward

 

Do you know what Capitol Hill Democrats are doing to you?  Are you aware of Senate and House Democrats’ efforts to add more government debt on you and I as well as more taxes from your take-home pay, and/or leave more owing debt to (y)our children and their children; for them to pay?  Republicans have offered a list for cutting $2.5 Trillion spending.  Capitol Hill Democrats reject almost all spending cuts.  Why does Capitol Hill Democrats refuse to cut out-of-control spending to balance the budget?  Repeal of ObamaCare, alone, would save Hundreds of Billions of dollars for Americans’ working taxpayers.

 

What does Americans know about ObamaCare?  Importantly, a current Rasmussen Reports finds that 54% think the U.S. Health Care System will likely worsen over the next couple of years. 

 

What Americans do know, they do not like.  Regardless, Senate Democrats continue to ‘cram ObamaCare down (y)our throats’.

 

On March 22, 2013, the US Senate voted on a Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) Amendment for full repeal of ObamaCare.  The Amendment is totally clean: ‘To establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to provide for the repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 and to encourage patient-centered reforms to improve health outcomes and reduce health care costs, promoting economic growth.’

 

With all of these and more barricades harming Americans and our US economy, on a March 22, 2013 Roll Call, the US Senate Democrats rejected ObamaCare repeal.  All 45 Republicans voted “YEA” to ‘repeal’ ObamaCare.  All 52 Democrats and 2 Independents who usually vote Democrat (Exception- Lautenberg (D-NJ)-No Vote) voted “NAY” on repealing ObamaCare.

 

Based on the Congressional Budget Office, ‘ObamaCare is still projected to have a gross cost of over $1.6 trillion from 2013 to 2022.’  Reports now say Americans’ consumer costs under ObamaCare will double their current insurance costs.  With a failing economy with more and more Americans losing their jobs under President Obama’s economic hardship, how will our people survive? 

 

Who is responsible for paying ObamaCare for ‘Illegal immigrants’?  On March 23, 2012, Senate Democrats rejected new legislation that would have prevented ‘illegal immigrants’ granted legal status and federally subsidized health care.  All 44 Republicans except Sen. Murkowski (R-AK) voted “YEA” to stop ObamaCare from insuring ‘illegal immigrants’.  All 52 Democrats and 2 Independents who usually vote Democrat (Exception- Lautenberg (D-NJ)-No Vote) voted “NAY” in allowing ObamaCare to insure ‘illegal immigrants’.

 

The Hill says, ‘Comprehensive immigration reform could make millions of people suddenly eligible for assistance under President Obama's healthcare law, assuming a final deal paves the way for undocumented immigrants to receive papers.’

 

In most states, owners/operators of most cars, trucks, and other motorized vehicles driven on our public roads and highways are required to maintain liability insurance.  The liability insurance costs are based on his/her vehicle(s), their personal and/or hazardous lifestyle, their personal history, their driving record, and/or other histories, etc.  Each individual’s liability insurance cost is reflective to the individual and their vehicle(s), and each person must pay accordingly.

 

Under ObamaCare, the more “good living and healthier lifestyle” individuals are “penalized” and “forced to pay” the excessive costs for the “not so good living with a more different, and, perhaps, dangerous lifestyle” individual.  Regardless of anyone’s age, sex, personal, and/or hazardous lifestyle (illegal drugs, alcohol. etc.), and/or any other reason, all individuals and their costs are treated exactly the same; just as others in Socialists and/or Communists countries.

 

The Wall Street Journal reports, ‘Central to ObamaCare are requirements that health insurers (1) accept everyone who applies (guaranteed issue), (2) cannot charge more based on serious medical conditions (modified community rating), and (3) include numerous coverage mandates that force insurance to pay for many often uncovered medical conditions.’

 

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) says, “Defunding Obamacare would save the government a few billion dollars."  Beyond that, Huelskamp said "it will help millions of Americans keep their current employer-sponsored health insurance, it will stop HHS (Health and Human Services Department) from continuing to implement a very unpopular law that's driving up premiums."

 

Repeal of ObamaCare will benefit all working Americans personal budgets while helping to create and expand more jobs leading to an American economic recovery.

 

In today’s society, there are folks who ‘work for a living’, and there are folks who ‘vote for a living’.  These prior listed motives include and are revealing as to how President Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats are playing Santa Clause spending (y)our taxpayers’ money on countless ‘giveaways’ to others who ‘vote for a living’ as well as on issues to ascertain ‘illegal immigrants’ in voting on elections, if approved.  Are there any uncertainties?

Read more…

OBAMA AND DEMS WITH ADVANTAGE?

Last Sunday morning, as I basked in the sunlight outside a coffee shop with the New York Times, I came upon an op ed piece entitled "Big Money's Alarming Political Edge."

The occasion for naming a new Supreme Court Judge has rekindled the liberal bitterness among some in the media over the Court's Citizens United ruling in January which gave freedom of speech protections to corporations, unions, and non-profits.

Theuse of the word "Alarming" in the article title no doubt meant that theauthor felt republicans would benefit more from the Court's decision.

Any doubts were erased when the article was read.

According to the author of this piece, due to the ruling the US Chamber of Commerce was putting into action its "most aggressive drives ever" to raise money "to favor mainly republicans" in 50 races this fall....

..."most aggressive drives ever" the piece said, while unions were merely "working to keep pace" for their democrat favorites.

Really? Merely "working to keep pace?"

According to data on OpenSecrets.organd provided by the Federal Election Commission as of March 21, 2010,union donations to democrat candidates and causes have amounted to morethan "working to keep pace."

Since 1990, those unions rated in the top 50 of industry donors as ranked by OpenSecrets.org have donated $636 million to democrats while donating $52 million to republicans (92% vs. 8%).

ServiceEmployees International Union President Andy Stern said, "We spent afortune to elect barack obama." To which Joe Biden would later reply," we owe you."

Republicans enjoy no such huge advantage from any industry in OpenSecret's top 50 rankings.

Nosingle industry group on the list donated more than $333 million torepublicans over the same time period when unions were investing over ahalf billion to democrats.

Even the oil and gas industrydonations fell short of the unions while donating a paltry $186 millionto republicans such as Bush/Cheney since 1990.

The writer of the NY Times piece suffers from the same misconception of republicans and big business donations and lobbying efforts as most of the public.

APew Research Center Report in February 2010 found that commondescriptions of the republican party were, "for the rich, corporateinterests and greed."

Democrats were seen in the same report asthe party that "stands for the average person, the middle-class and theworking class."

Asked which party is more influenced bylobbyists and special interests, 40% of respondents said thatrepublicans were, while 32% chose democrats.

Thus, it is not surprising from this report that many across the U.S.A. would incorrectly figure that the Citizen's United ruling would favor republicans.

Excludingunions from the OpenSecrets top 50 industry list, we find that since1990 total industry donations to political campaigns/causes/lobbying ofdemocrats equals $3.959 BILLION, while the same source of donations torepublicans over the same period totaled $3.954 BILLION....virtuallyeven but democrats with slight edge.

If you add the unions backinto that mix, then totals to democrats go to $4.595 BILLION, whilerepublicans increase to $4.006 BILLION (53% VS. 47%), a larger edge todemocrats.

Since Citizens United was the political action groupresponsible for this ruling, let us look at how liberal groups andconservative groups compare over the last 20 years in supporting theirrespective causes/candidates.

Democrat/liberal groups, such as MoveOn.org,have since 1990 donated or invested $141 million in political races andcauses, while republican/conservative groups, such as Citizens Unitedhave given $106 million to their side...again, a slight edge todemocrats.

If we look at just the top 10 industry groups whichhave donated to political causes/campaigns over the last 20 years(includes biggies like lawyers/law firms, securities/investment, realestate, health professionals, insurance, and oil and gas industries),we find that dems lead this top 10 group with $2.45 billion compared tothe $1.99 billion received by republicans...edge to democrats.

Non-profits?

Since1990 non-profit organizations have donated $47 million to democratswhile only $15 million has gone to republicans...edge to democrats.

Thismisconception about big business being in the pocket of republicans isperpetuated by ignorance and false rhetoric from the media and thegovernment.

Chris Good writing for the Atlantic (Jan. 21, 2010)said: "as the pro-business party in US politics, republicans have had aclose relationship with business than have democrats."

Right.

CNN's"legal expert" Jeffrey Toobin said on Mar. 15, 2010: "The politicaleffect of, if not intention for, the decision was clear: Citizens United looks to be a big win for republicans, who are the likely beneficiaries of the newly lubricated corporate largess."

Uh huh.

Democrat Senator Arlen Spector called the Court's decision, "conservative activism."

The Slate'sNathaniel Persily was silly in writing on Jan. 25, 2010: "Corporationmoney will flow in great amounts towards ads supporting republicancandidates. Union money will flow as well, but not as much, so democrats and their causes might be at an disadvantage."

But not as much. horny.gif

A New York Times (Jan22, 2010) story said about the Court's ruling: "A conservative majorityhas distorted teh political system to ensure that republican candidateswill be at an enormous advantage in future elections."

Reporting for the Washington Post (2/17/2010), reporter Dan Eggan stated: "Corporations have traditionally favored republicans in their contribution patterns."

Really?
Read more…