Obama Nixed Voucher Program Loved by Black Parents

Last week I articulated a nice post on school choice, and how Nancy Devos is good for the poor, especially black poor. She wants to create educational policies, like school choice, that would allow black parents to send their kids to the same schools the rich people go to.

Did you know that Washington D.C. had a school voucher program? Black parents loved it. They were able to send their kids to the same schools the rich people sent their kids to. They were able to send their kids to the same school Obama chose to send his kids to.

Do you know what Obama did the moment he was inaugurated in 2008? He got rid of this program. Black parents were livid. Why would Obama do this? Well, we know why he would do this: he wants poor kids to be trapped in poverty. That way they continue to vote for democrats, who they think will get them out of poverty, or at least support entitlement programs to help them (which ultimately keep them trapped in poverty).

He did it because he had to please the teacher's unions, who donated a lot of money to him. The teachers unions are opposed to school choice because they need students so their teachers can continue to make money.

There is another reason, though. They want to be able to indoctrinate kids. They want to control thought. They want to turn kids into good little liberals. That's the bottom line here. That's the only thing that makes sense about this.

I do not want republicans to move to center and negotiate with the party that lost, as Obama suggested to Jimmy Fallon

So, Donald Trump is the 45th President of the United States. Hillary Clinton lost. Obama's agenda was repudiated. Still, there are those who champion for the Trump administration to move to the center and to negotiate with democrats.

Before the election a democratic friend of mine wanted me to watch a video of Obama on the Jimmy Fallon show.

Fallon: "Do you think the republicans are happy with their choice? 

Obama:  "Um, we are! But I don't know how they're feeling.  That was too easy. But, the truth is, actually, I am worried about the republican party... But democracy works, this country works, when you have two parties that are serious and trying to solve problems. And they've got philosophical differences, and they have fierce debates, and they argue, and they contest elections. But, at the end of the day, what you want is a healthy two-party system. And you want the republican nominee to be somebody who could do the job if they win. And you want folks who understand the issues, and where you can sit across the table from them and you can have a principled argument and ultimately can still move the country forward. So, I actually am not enjoying, and I haven't been enjoying over the last seven years, watching some of the things that have happened to the Republican party, 'cause there's some good people in the Republican party. There are wonderful Republicans out in the country who want what's best for the country and may disagree with me on some things, but are good, decent people. But what's happend in that party, culminating in this current nomination, I think, is not actually good for the country as a whole. It's not something Democrats should with for. And my hope is that, once we get through this cycle, there's some corrective action, and they get back to being a center-right party and the Democrat party being a center-left party, and we start figuring out how to work together. 

As soon as the video was over, I said to my friend:

"That's exactly what I don't want. I don't want more government. I want them to oppose democrats. I want them to reject their agenda. I don't want every time there's a problem to solve it with more government. More government is the antithesis of what the founders wanted. They wanted limited government. More government takes away liberties. I want republicans to oppose new laws, new regulations, and new taxes. I don't want more regulations. I want to get rid of the department of education, not add to its power. I want to give education back to the states so that parents and teachers can decide what kids learn, as opposed to eight liberals sitting in a room in Washington. I want to get rid of the IRS. I want to take power away from government agencies like the EPA so we can get rid of regulations based on global warming hoax that is burdensome to the economy. I don't want to move the liberal agenda forward, I want to stop it. I voted for republicans to stop Obamacare, not negotiate with democrats so it can keep functioning. I want them to cut funding for it. I want them to place bills on his desk repealing Obamacare. I want them to place bills on his desk getting rid of global warming regulations. But they don't do that. They do move to the center. Rather than opposing amnesty, they come up with their own amnesty program. The bottom line: I'm tired of that. I want them to oppose the party whose agenda has caused all the problems our country faces. So having someone like Trump IS actually good for the country as a whole, someone who calls a liberal a liberal and a liar a liar and who wants to stop the liberal agenda at all costs to make America great again... to take it back to where it was before Obama succeeded in fundamentally transforming it, moving it forward from a capitalistic nation to a socialistic-like nation."

I was on a roll. And as I went on my friend sat stiffly on the couch, crossed his arms, puckered his lips, and pretended to ignore me. I guess I offended him, as he was convinced I would agree with Obama about moving to the Center.

New World Order: What would it mean for us?

So, there are talks that the goal of progressives is to downsize America, and get rid of it's borders and sovereignty, with the ultimate goal of creating a New World Order. If they got their way, what would this mean for those who currently consider themselves America -- or us? 

If a NWO were created, it would mean that a Super Government would probably be created somewhere in Europe, such as Brussels or Prague. Or, I suppose, it could be head quartered by the United Nations in New York.

The people running this Super Government would be considered the smartest people in the world. Whatever they believed would be forced on the rest of us. Considering they are the experts, they know what's best for us. So, it wouldn't matter what we thought, we would be forced to accept the edicts, the regulations, the laws they set forth. 

It wouldn't matter if you didn't believe that the theory that man is the cause of global warming was a hoax. You wouldn't even be able to state your opinion, because you would probably be put in prison if you insisted on stating it. Or, at the vary least, your opinion would be minimized. There would only be three or four TV stations, and all of them would be run by the state. The government would be able to promote what it wants, and put down whatever it wants. 

This Super Government would set up a World Court, and this court would supersede anything written in the U.S. Constitution. This would mean that you are not necessarily proven innocent until proven guilty. It would mean whatever the justice experts decided it meant. And you can imagine that these experts would all be progressives and not conservatives. Conservatives would all be silenced or killed. They would be the majority who sit in prisons. Or they would just be killed if they continued to act out. This would be similar to how it was prior the the United States. 

A Security Council would be created by the defense experts. They would decide who went to war and with whom and when. They would decide the rules of war. They would decide who won the war. They would decide who had what weapons. They probably would decide to take all the weapons from the people to make sure there was not public revolution against the desires of the state. A state militia would control the people and keep the peace. It would also take care of anyone who spoke out against the Super Government. 

But this would be their Euphoria. This would be the world where everyone has a job, a home, a car, an iphone, the Internet, cable television (or whatever was made available), food, and healthcare. And you can easily see what we would be giving up in order to enjoy life in this so called euphoria -- our liberties. 

In the past, both George W. Bush and Bill Clinton were willing to wage war against the United Nations when they decided to create a World Court, on the grounds that they were not willing to have rights currently protected under the U.S. Constitution absconded by government. However, Obama doesn't seem to have such qualms. 

What is Communism?

Americans have traditionally viewed Communism as the antithesis of upward expansion and liberty. Liberals, on the other hand, believe the basic tenets of Communism will work if the right people are put in charge of it with a sufficient amount of money. So what is the reality of Communism?
Let's start with a quote from Chris Cuomo.  His is the son of the former liberal governor of New York, Mario Cuomo.  He traveled with Obama to Cuba as Obama became the first sitting U.S. President to visit Cuba since Calvin Coolidge did it in January of 1928.

Alisyn Cameroto asked Chris: "Hey, Chris, we can't help but notice your culturally appropriate garb that you're wearing. Tell us the history of your shirt."

Mario said: 

"My guayabera? This shirt belonged to my father. It was given to him by Fidel Castro. It marked conversations going on decades ago that were the same as those today. The concern was the freedom of the people. What is the point of this communist regime if it is not to truly make everyone equal, not at the lowest level, not by demoralizing everyone, but lifting everyone up. My father, generations of politicians have been fighting this. So I wear this shirt as a reminder of that."

Obama coddling Raul Castro, a totalitarian, dictator thug.
Castro called for an end to the Embargo,
and Obama asked Congress to end it.
Castro blames poverty in Cuba on the Embargo,
not on the failures of Communism.
We are the only country that doesn't trade with Cuba,
still, our embargo is blamed for their failures.
And liberals believe this stuff. 

So, what does this mean? It means that Cuomo has a positive view of Communism. What he said is probably representative of the liberal view of Communism. It makes sense, as liberals often speak glowingly of the Soviet Union system, and opposed Ronald Reagan in his efforts to stop it. They often speak glowingly of Castro, despite the Cuban embargo signed by Democrat John F. Kennedy on Feb. 3, 1962.

Obama even called on Congress to end the Embargo. claiming that normalization "is a long journey." The embargo was intended to be in effect until Cuba reduced its alignment with Communist powers. Obama began the journey to normalize relations a year ago, and he promised not to visit Cuba until freedom and liberty had been was improved on the island. Yet none of these stipulations have been met by Cuba, nor are there any signs that they will be met.

So it appears that liberals must indeed believe that Communism can elevate people up out of poverty, and that Communism is about freedom and liberty. Obama must already believe this about Cuba, otherwise he wouldn't have gone gone to Cuba.

They hold out hope that if only the right people were in charge of it with a sufficient amount of money that it would work.

To understand this you have to understand where liberalism and Communism come from. I described it in my post "What is Fascism?"  Here is a snippet of what I wrote:

"Fascism, commonly known as Marxism, is a form of government whereby the state is worshiped as a religion, and experts in the state make rules that attempt to prevent many of the flaws of men. The police-state then enforces these laws, and the end result is an ideal world or euphoric world where everyone has a job with equal pay, and everyone has health care, and there is world peace. Fascism is a movement that began around the turn of the 20th century, and it grew roots in nearly every western nations. What form it took depended on what country it was formed in."

Early forms of it entailed progressivism in the United States, Communism in the Russian Soviet Union, Socialism in Italy, and Nazism in Germany. Modern versions of it are European Socialism and Liberalism. Modern liberals even refer to themselves as progressives, or as Democratic Socialists.

It makes sense that modern liberals would deny any link to Carl Marx, as Hitler's version of it, and Stalin's version of it, and Mussolini's version of it soured the image of Marxism. It therefore has traditionally been viewed as anti-American, anti-Capitalism, anti-Freedom, and anti-Liberty. It was viewed as a form of government the traps people in poverty and only allows upward expansion for those running the government.

It was viewed as a form of government that forced people to conform to policies established by government. Those who spoke out against it were prosecuted, imprisoned, or even executed. It was a form of government that caused many to want to escape, and to prevent this walls were built, such as the Berlin wall in Germany.

Because they are all of the same ilk, liberals held out hope that Communism was the best hope for sameness, equality, and equality of outcomes. They believed that because Communism was initiated in nations that were not burdened by the U.S. Constitution, and therefore they hoped to see it prosper; held out hope that it would.

They tell kids in schools that it's about individual freedom, economic prosperity. They tell them that everyone will enjoy it, because everyone is doing their best. They sell it as everyone is being the same, with the same opportunities and the same outcomes. They sell it as nobody losing, no competition, and total freedom.  They tell kids that they can do whatever they want and the state will make sure that everybody ends up with a lot.

They tell kids that Communism is how you get to utopia. Utopia is where everybody is happy. It's Heaven on Earth. It's where everybody gets what they want. It's where there is no crime because everybody is happy. It's where there is no terrorism and no wars because everybody is happy.

What kid wouldn't want that?

So the best way to get kids to see Communism for what it truly is is to teach the truth about it. Show them that, once people learn what Communism is, they have to build walls to keep people in. Many people have defected Cuba to the United States, and the reason is because they hate it. People are put in jails and executed for opposing it. So they are forced to conform.

And forcing people to conform means forcing them to abdicate their freedoms and liberties. It means forcing them to give up their Bibles and their rifles. It means forcing them into public schools that are completely run, and completely controlled, by the elite. You cannot be free if you are forced to be the same as everyone else. And you will not be happy. And you will not be rich. And you will definitely not be elevated.

They say their ideas will lift people, elevate them out of poverty. But there is nothing in socialism, nothing in liberalism, nothing in Communism, nothing in ISIS, nothing in dictatorships, nothing in monarchies, that will elevate people. You cannot be elevated if everyone is the same. In order to be elevated, you need people to be unique, which they are. When people are allowed to be unique, that's where you get ideas from that help to elevate people. You don't get that from sameness.

This system on its face fails because it assumes everyone is the same and can be the same and can be treated the same. It assumes every outcome can be equal. It assumes the every person in a country can be upper middle class.

It fails because everyone is not the same. Every person has different opinions, values, morals. Every person thinks differently. Every person is unique. And for this reason, the utopia that some people believe can be created via socialism can never, has never, will never, work. It's designed to make everyone poor. It's designed to make everyone the same. It's designed to make everyone miserable. It's designed to provide a system whereby the leaders are the only ones who have what they want.

If that's what you consider utopia, then that's what you'll get if you support Communism. The only Utopia can be found in Heaven. Anyone who reads the Bible knows that.

People have to be taught the Communism will not result in upward mobility because it is impossible in the Communist system. The only people who have any chance of bettering their lot in lives are those running government and their friends and family members. This is no better than what 99.9% of governments offered prior to the United States. Most governments prior to the U.S. were totalitarian dictatorship governments where only the ruling class lived well That's exactly the type of system Marxism wants to revert back to.

Communism has never worked.  The U.S.S.R. lasted from 1922 to 1992. That was 70 years. And yet it collapsed because, since everyone made the same amount of money no matter what they did, no one had an incentive to work. There was plenty of food, but no one was willing to pick it, put it in trucks, and ship it to stores. So there were people starving. Because the nation was so economically deprived, it could not keep up with the United States. The U.S.S.R collapsed. Down fell the Berlin Wall.

Communism has been given 50 years to work in Cuba. It has been an abject failure. Communism, Socialism, liberalism, progressivism, whatever you want to call it, never works. Every time it's been tried, every place it's been tried, whatever form it takes, it fails. In fact, if Communism in Cuba works so well, then why are people constantly trying to flee it, often risking their lives for a small chance at liberty? Why are people constantly defecting Cuba for America? Why would anyone want to abandon such a paradise?

Communism, socialism, fascism, progressivism, is based on good intentions, and it keeps getting a free pass even though it never succeeds. Look in the United States where it's been tried. Look at the war on poverty. There are just as many people in poverty today as when it started. Yet it's hailed as a success. Then look at Capitalism. If it's not perfect, if one person falls through the cracks, it's hailed as a failure.

So now you understand why so many people continue to worship Communism. Now you understand why Obama went to Cuba to lend credence to a Communist, totalitarian dictator thug who imprisons and kills people who disagree with his form of governance. That's the modern day Democratic Party.

Further reading

• Rush Limbaugh: Obama lands in Cuba: One small step for man, one giant leap for Marxism
• Newsmax: 10 reasons Cuban Embargo should not be lifted
• ABC News: Here's what happened the last time a U.S. President visited Cuba
• Articulating Ideas: What is liberal fascism?
• Naples Herald: Coast Guard: 9 Cuban migrants die, 18 rescued of Marco Island

Why does Obama use ISIL and not ISIS like everyone else?

George W. Bush warned about pulling out of Iraq. You can check out the video here. He warned a group far worse than Al Qaeda would result. He said:

“To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States,” Bush cautioned... “It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to Al Qaeda. It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean we’d be increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.”

Everything Bush said there has come true. And the group that has come out of Iraq after the pullout of U.S. troops by Obama has resulted in the creation of a group of people wishing to force Sharia Law on the rest of the world, and the will and ability to kill those who fail to accept it.

The name of this group is Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). This group consists of the states the radical Islamic terrorists are hiding in. However, in order not to offend Israel, Obama refers to this group as Islamic State of Iraq and Levant.

He does this because "Levant" is a modern term referring to a group of states in the Eastern Mediterranean, mainly Cyprus, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and Turkey.

Why does he refer to them as ISIL? Because this includes Israel among the states the terrorists may be hiding out in. It is simply an acronym that Obama believes does not offend Islamic nations in the region. Because God forbid, that Obama actually call it radical Islamic terror.

So, the reason Obama uses the acronym ISIL and not ISIS is because ISIL is an all-inclusive term: using it is Obama's way of agreeing with Islamic nations like Iraq who claim that Israel is a nation of occupiers and is not a legitimate nation. It's his way of pointing the metaphorical finger at Israel.

Obama spins economic news, again

So, Obama held a presser telling us how well the economy is doing. He announced that 160,000 new jobs were created in April 2016. This is good news, he says. People who do not ask questions will accept Obama's affirmation of this economic news. But, I ask, is the economy doing better after 7.5 years of Obamanomics? Here are the statistics. You can decide for yourself.

1. A majority of those 160,000 jobs are part time, mainly because Obamacare forces people who have too many full-time jobs to pay for health insurance for those workers, and they can't afford that, so they just create part-time jobs. For more on this, read "The truth about Obama's economic numbers."
2. The 160,000 new jobs supposedly created in April is the fewest announced created jobs in seven months.
3. The number of American workers not working is 94.04 million. There are 210,220 working age people in the United States, so that means the unemployment rate is 40%.
4. People's incomes are not rising!
5. People do not have more disposable income. 
6. People do not have more liberty and freedom with their money.

Without rising productivity, you can't have rising wages, and you can't have increased salaries. You just can't have it.

Those 95 million Americans not working have to have their livelihoods paid for by someone. Someone has to pay for the food on their table, or beer in their refrigerator. Someone has to buy their cars and pay for their gas. Someone has to pay for their iphones and service. Someone has to pay for them when they get sick. 

So those who are working are flipping the bill. And small businesses are paying for the not working rather than creating jobs for the not working. 

So not only is the government spending more and choking more, it is making the economy where the American dream languishes, smaller. Yet here you have Obama at a press conference speaking of how much the economy has improved. Millennials fall for this because they have never seen a robust economy. To them, this is robust. 

We are not the cause of terrorism

There is a headline in Politico: "Why do they hate us?" It is in reference to the terrorists attacks by ISIS in Brussels. The media cannot understand why terrorists would attack Brussels. They are flabbergasted why this would happen. 

Brussels is the headquarters of European Democratic Socialism.  It is where peace talks occur. It is where all the elites who decide how all the people in Europe are going to live organize. It is where the European utopia is designed. And they truly believed they had created a utopia in Europe, and then this happens. How could it happen, they wonder? What did we do? 

They are just so sadly blind, and they will never solve this problem until they open them. ISIS is mad. They are terrorist thugs who have no respect for life. Their God teaches them to conform people to their religion, and all who refuse to conform must be killed. They pretend to be a religion of peace, but they are a religion whose God teaches to kill and maim non-Muslims.

They terrorized France. We finally caught the ringleader. And this angered them and they attacked Brussels. And liberals around the world are shocked that Brussels, the birthplace of European Utopia was born and honed, was attacked. They are shocked by this. They just cannot fathom why anyone would do this. So they ask the question, "Why do they hate us so much?"

They blame themselves. They blame America. That's who they are blaming here. Phooey on blaming the people who did the attack; it must have been something we did that ticked them off, prompted them to attack us. So what is it? What did we do? 

They are so ignorant. I am sorry to say it, but they just don't get it. You have these radical religious groups that have been around for years, centuries even, and they still don't get it. They still do not want to believe there are people who do not want any form of peace that does not involve the Muslim Caliphate. They cannot believe this. They are in complete denial. 

Look, the West is not the cause of terrorist. Europe is not the cause of terrorism. America is not the cause of terrorism. But if European and American politicians continue to keep an open border policy that continues to deny radical Muslim terrorism, it will continue to thrive. The only way to end it is to keep them contained, and to kill them -- the radicals I mean. 

But they won't do this. They won't because they naively think there is something they did, we did, to tick them off. They naively think that they can ignore them and they will go away. The naively think they can negotiate (see Iran deal) their way to peace. 

We will not call them out. We will not call them radical Islamic terrorists. Our president will not call them terrorists. To him they are just random acts of terror. We are doing everything to show them that we do not blame them, and so they just keep doing it. And then our elites ask, "What did we do wrong?"

Our liberal leaders don't call them out. They call terrorism work place violence. They call it random acts of terror. They do not criticize the terrorists. They just ignore the terrorists. Obama ignores the terrorists. While in Cuba, at a baseball game, he talked for 52 seconds about the terrorist act in Brussels.

Here is what Obama said:

The thoughts and prayers of the American people are with the people of Belgium, and we stand in solidarity with them in condemning these outrageous attacks against innocent people. We will do whatever is necessary to support our friend and ally, Belgium, in bringing to justice those who are responsible.

What will we do? What did we do when there was a terrorist attack on France? What did we do when there was a terrorist attack in San Francisco? Nothing! We didn't do anything. So why are to believe we are going to do something this time around?

All we do is ignore terrorism. I think this is the Obama strategy.  It think this is the socialist/ progressive way to utopia; to world peace. They think that if we ignore our enemies, this sends a signal that we mean peace; that they don't need to attack us. Then they will be peaceful.

Then they attack us again anyway. And we continue to ignore them.

Then they open up borders, let anyone in who wants. They let Muslims in, even if they might be terrorist thugs. We let them in because, to liberals, this is a sign of peace. Ignoring the problem, to liberals, shows peaceful intentions. Then they blow us up anyway.

We keep ignoring them, they keep attacking us. This is so stupid!!!

Then Trump comes along, says we can't keep doing this. We need to close our borders. We need to resolve this problem. And he's called dangerous.

Keep this up, and they will just continue on their unhappy way.

Obama continued:

And this is yet another reminder that the world must unite. We must be together regardless of nationality or race or faith in fighting against the scourge of terrorism.

How do you unite with terrorists? How do you unite with people who want to kill us? The problem is that we are united in our approach to terrorism, and it's being united behind an ideal approach that is supposed to create world peace and utopia. It's being united behind a naive view that ignoring and appeasing our enemies will somehow make them like us and not want to kill us.

They think that by Obama showing sympathy that that will solve terrorism. They think that by putting colors over your Facebook picture, that that shows sympathy; that that shows you care; that that shows we are united; that we are opposed to racism. They think opening our borders and letting anyone in who wants to come in shows we are not bigots, that we are not racist. Then among them come the radical Islamist terrorist, and they blow us up from the inside and from the outside. That's how they respond to our calls for national unity.

So, we are not the cause of terrorism. The Western way of living was not to blame for what happened in Brussels. What happened in Brussels happened because of the open border policy in Europe. Brussels happened because Europe stopped controlling its borders and did not require people coming into Europe to assimilate. This resulted in Europe giving up its sovereignty. It gave up its cultural identity, and now it can't do anything to control its borders because those who invaded the nation now control it.

And if we don't close our borders, the same will happen in the U.S.  And you have a guy named Trump who is the only one willing to openly criticize the current system, and he's called dangerous. Maybe the people who are dangerous are the people who want to keep our borders open. 

Note to elites: Radical Ismamic Groups do not want peace: they want to kill all of us unless we conform to their religion. They want a Muslim Caliphate. Period. If you don't realize that soon, they are going to annihilate us all. Then we will all be unhappy. Then we will have our liberties denied. We will not be free. We will all be miserable. You can't help thinking that's what these liberal elites want. So long as they get to keep their cushy jobs. I don't know. This is just sickening. 

Barack Obama: The dismal statistics

Some people claim Obama was the worst president in U.S. history.  Here is a collection of statistics (and related information) from various sources during the Obama administration to confirm this claim (along with links to their sources).

1. Wages down 23% since 2008
2. Obama on track to surpass Obama outings
3. Record $2.6 trillion tax revenues
4. Government runs 460 billion deficit that our children will have to pay for.
5. Total debt rises to $18 trillion; up 70% under Obama. Our children will have to pay for this too.
6. Feds take record $341,591,000,000 in tax revenue and spend most of it on entitlement programs for the me generation. We used to be concerned about us, and we are now concerned about me, me, me, me, me. "What will the government do for me? What free stuff will I get next? What bathroom should I get to use? 
7. 51 million immigrants in 8 years; 82% of U.S. population growth. We don't know where most of them are, and when they are caught Obama's policy is to let them go. No background checks, means some of them may be criminals and terrorists. They do not make any pledge to assimilate, and this was why immigration was shut down from the Coolidge through the Johnson administration. If we don't do something we will lose our sovereignty like Europe has. 
8. Record 20% of American Households on Food stamps in 2013. This might help explain how the 94 million working age Americans who are no longer looking for work are eating. 
9. Loss of full time jobs in favor of part time jobs, and claiming net job gains. This is a direct result of Obamacare, which forces companies to pay a fine if they have more than 50 employers and don't offer them free health insurance. Part time work counts as full time work in Obama's economic numbers. For instance, Obama reported 160,000 jobs created in June of 2013. However, if you look closer at the numbers. 162,000 full time jobs were lost that month, and 322,000 part time jobs were created. You see, they give you the numbers, but don't tell you what they mean, so people just assume things are getting better when they are indeed not. 
10. Median household income in 2013 was $51,900, according to recent reports from the US Census Bureau, 8% lower than before the recession began in 2007.  So, 2008, the last year of Bush and all of Obama's administration. Median household income has fallen about 8%.
11. Economy slows to halt in first quarter of 2015: Grows at measly 0.2%
12. 1 in 5 elderly dies broke
13. 1 in 5 Americans on Welfare. Again, this is what the 94 million no longer in the workforce are using to support themselves and their family. They are sitting around watching game shows while the rest of us pay for it. This is another example of the me generation.
14. Home ownership suffers 20 year low; blacks suffer most
15. $2,446,920,000,000: Federal Taxes Set Record Through June... while only 50% pay taxes
16. $16,451 in taxes per U.S. worker
17. Under Obama, the U.S. has a post-Depression era record high number of citizens living at or beneath the federally-defined poverty line
18. Under Obama, the U.S. has a record high number on the federal welfare foodstamps/SNAP program
19. Under Obama, the U.S. has a record low workforce participation number. It has been around 94 million.
20. Six-and–half years into the Obama presidency the economy has set yet another new statistical low.
21. 46.7 million in poverty
22. Immigration population hits 42.4 million -- record high; most are not immigrants, they are invaders (those who cross the border illegally are not immigrants, they are invaders). 
23. Record 94,610,000 not in workforce; labor force participation rate lowest since 1977, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
24. 56,646,000 women no longer in workforce
25. 63.2 million non-English speaking residents, a record number. You see, they are not assimilating. They are not becoming Americans. We are losing our sovereignty. 
26. We've run up close to eight trillion additional national debt dollars since 2008, since Obama was inaugurated, and there hasn't been any concern for it expressed in the Media. Actually, when Obama took office the debt was $10 trillion. It is now (as of June, 2016) up to $10 trillion. Despite this, he brags how he brought down the national debt and reduced spending. 
27. 17% of jobs now held by immigrants. This causes a spike in the number of workers and drives down wages. Due to low wages Americans can't afford to take these jobs, even if they need work. 
28. 94,103,000 not in labor force. That's 27% of Americans not working. That's a 27% unemployment rate. But it's reported as 5.5%. Go figure. That 27% doesn't even include the 5.5% who are not working and still looking. So, when you total the two, you get close to a 40% unemployment rate. That's pretty bad, considering 24% was considered bad in 1930. Since these folks are on food stamps, are on welfare, and living in comfortable homes, you don't see them in long food lines like you did in 1930. So, for this reason, we get no public outcry. Even with these poor economic statistics, Obama continues to claim the economy is improving. When you look at the actual numbers, we are in an economic depression worse than the Great Depression. We are in a Great Depression. 
29. Over 43 million Americans living in poverty, which is up over 8 million since Obama became president, according to Census Bureau.
30. 43 million Americans on food stamps, which is 12 million more since Obama took office, according to USDA. This is one explanation for not seeing soup lines.
31. 1 in 5 families do not have a single person in the workforce, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics.
32. 1 in 6 men between the ages 38-34, prime working years, are either incarcerated or out of the labor force. They are either in jail incarcerated or living with their parents. This is according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
33. The death rate from drug overdose more than doubled from 1999 to 2013. This is typical of a depression. When they don't work they lose their self-esteem and feeling of self-worth. Suicide rates are typically higher in a depression. Yet the White House continues to talk about the economy as though it's getting better.
34. 58% of Americans feel like strangers in their own country. This isn't all Obama's doing, although he has made the problem worse by refusing to build the wall that was already approved by Congress under the Bush Administration. He has also made it easier to enter our country illegally. He also refused to enforce immigration laws on the books, which would easily solve this problem. Of course his amnesty program encourages more to come in too. 
35. First president not to see a single year of 3% economic (GDP) growth. This makes Obama the forth worst on record. This is sad, because "The rate of real economic growth is the single greatest determinate of both America’s strength as a nation and the well-being of the American people."
36. Home ownership falls to third lowest on record. It's amazing how the economy is doing so great yet people can't afford to buy homes. 
37. By the end of his two terms, home ownership was the lowest it had been in the past 51 years, according to the Census Bureau
38. Despite the Feds collecting a new record of $2,139,254,000,000 in taxes, deficit, the debt is $407,099,000,000
39. The number of U.S. police officers shot deat increases 78% in first half of 2016 alone. 
40. Second quarter of 2016: Economy grows at a measly 1.2%
41. Recovery weakest in post WWII era, or weakest recovery since 1949. The real gross domestic product growth averaging 2.1%. At 7 1/2 years and counting, it is also among the longest on record. But it hasn’t packed much of a punch. Cumulative growth of 16.5% since the trough is well shy of the 38.4% increase during the 1982-1990 expansion and 42.6% from 1991-2001, according to the Wall Street Journal.
42. U.S. Debt up 122% under Obama
43. 700 inmates have been released from Gitmo -- more than 200 have returned to the fight
44. Crime increased 10% in 2015, and violent crime increased almost 4%. It's true crime rates have been higher other years, yet this is spike was the result of beurocrats preventing police officers from doing their jobs. It's also the result of an economy that is not as good as Obama says it is. During recessions and depressions, crime rates tend to rise. 
45. 66% of kids 15-29 living with parents. That's up 6% between 2007 and 2014. 
46. By the time he leaves office, the United States will have acquired more debt than all 43 presidents before him combined. 
47. His Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and he ignored 600 separate requests for added security at the embassy in Benghazi, and all of them were ignored. This resulted in four Americans being killed in an act of terror. 
48. Not necessarily a stat, although he told Americans they would save $2,100 per year under Obamacare, but the complete opposite happened: millions of people lost their doctors, millions lost their healthcare plans, Obamacare premiums surged by double digits. On average, since Obamacare went into place, there has been a $4,100 increase per family. 
49. He signed the Iranian Nuclear Deal. This gave the world's #1 state sponsor of terror $150 billion and the ability to spin their nuclear centrifuges. 
50. He let people from countries who do not support our values, and who did not pledge to support our values, into our country. He let people from nations who do not support women's rights and gay rights. They also don't respect other Faiths, especially Jews and Christians. 
51. African Americans under Obama saw 58% increase in food stamps, according to USDA.
52. African Americans under Obama saw an 18% increase among those not in the workforce, according to Bureau of Labor and Statistics. 
53. In 2016, from January to November, Chicago saw 3,817 African Americans have been shot, according to the Chicago Tribune. 
54. Since 2009, since Obama has been President, 3,656 people have been murdered in Chicago, and 75% of those victims were African American, according to the Chicago Police Department.
55. Our educational system is failing, especially in inner cities
56. High school graduation rates are 9% lower than the national average, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.
57. High school dropout rate for African Americans in 2014 was 7.4%, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. This is higher than the national average. 
58. As of November, 2011, the U.S. is ranked 4th in the world among developed countries, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 
59. The U.S. is ranked 4th in the world on per pupil spending, and that comes to $11,600 per student. Despite this, the U.S. is ranking among developed countries is 17th in reading, 19th in science, and 26th in math, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. 
60. During the 8 year presidency of Obama, the democrats saw the number of democrat members of the U.S. Senate declined by 10.2%, democrat members of the U.S. House of Representative declined by 19.3%, democrat members of state legislatures declined by 20.3%, and democrat governorships declined by 35.7%. This shows a complete rejection of the democratic party agenda as a result of the Unconstitutional agenda of Barack Obama. This is according to the Washington Post. 
61. In fact, after the election of 2016, democrats were only left with control of the Governorship and State House in only four states, or five states if you include Connecticut where there is a tie and the tiebreaker goes to democrats (compared to 25 for republicans). The four states are California, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Oregon. In this way, democrats now hold the fewest number of state legislatures in history (republicans hold 4,170 seats and democrats hold 3,129). 
62. Worded another way, since 2008, democrats have lost 11 seats in the Senate, 60 seats in the House of Representatives, 14 governorships (in only 5 of 50 states do democrats have control of the governorship and the state House). Democrats have lost 900 state legislative seats across the country. They have also lost mayor's offices and city councils.  Compare this with republicans, who have 33 state Governors and full control of the governorship and state legislature in 25 states.
63. Or, worded yet another way, during Obama's tenure, and despite his popularity, democrats lost over 1,000 seats. This includes the presidency, including a loss in U.S. Senate seats from 55 to 46, a loss in the House of Representatives from 256 to 194, a loss of governorships from 28 to 16, and a loss of 958 state legislative seats. The net loss was a total of 1,042 state and federal democratic seats. 
64. To add to this, Republicans today hold 31 out of 45 lieutenant governor offices, they hold 31 of 50 Secretary of State offices, and they currently remain at 69 of 99 legislative chamber majorities – an all time record for the party. GOP control of 69/99 of the state legislatures (Nebraska’s is unicameral) is an all-time high, Beginning in 2017, republicans will have thoe most state-elected lawmakers in office since 1920.
65. In 2008, Rush Limbaugh said, "I hope he fails." He was referring to Obama's policies. Obama succeeded, and that's why he was completely repudiated in 2016. 
66. Life expectancy drops for first time in a decade, particularly among citizens less than 65 years old. This is an indicator of the overall well-being of a nation, so this is not good. This could also be an indicator of the rise in suicides, which usually goes up during depressions. The death rate tends to rise when the people see that there is little hope that things will improve. So, this is yet another indicator of the failed policies of Barack Hussein Obama.
67. According to The Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Federal Register now exceeds 75,000 pages with over 90,000 regulations and from 2016 alone. In fact, on one day in November 2016, Obama handed down a whopping 527 pages of regulations, which made his total number of regulations the most of any U.S. President. In 2010, he created 81,405 pages. This was the old record, which has now been exceeded by a whopping 235 pages.  They are made on the premise that they will make people safer, although the true purpose of most of them is to make a few lobbyists and corporate interests richer and the American people poorer. 
68. Americans businesses have paid over $873.6 billion in regulations. This has paid a significant tole on the economy. When potential employers have to pay these regulations, they have to do so at the expense of creating jobs. Many do not even open their doors because of the high burden of regulations. There was also $344 billion in EPA regulations alone. In total, Obama has created over 2,988 new regulations. 
69. He failed to gain control of wage stagnation. People like your author here went four of Obama's year's in office without getting a raise, and his pay is now $4 below the market average for a respiratory therapist. 
70. Democratic voter turnout dropped in 2010, 2012 and significantly in 2014. 
71. Despite unemployment being at 4.7%, the number of working age people who have given up for work and are no longer considered unemployed is a record 95,102,000. This is up 18% since Obama took office in 2009. This is your proof that his economy is failing people. To all those who are not working, it is called a depression.
72. Obama may have broken racial barriers when he became the first African-American president of the U.S., but his election did nothing to improve race relations. In fact, a majority of Americans (54%) say that race relations deteriorated under Obama, according to a recent CNN/ORC poll.
73. He has refused to use the term "Radical Islamic Terrorism." There have been many random acts of terror on U.S. since Obama took office in 2009, although he continues to say there have been none. He has been naïve to terrorism. If we don't call it what it is, the problem will never be resolved. He calls terrorism things like "workplace violence." And, rather than going after the organizations responsible for their radicalization (such as ISIS), he has chosen to champion for stricter gun laws for law abiding citizens. So, basically we get punished because of the actions of a few nut cases.
74. Trade deficit climbs to 6.8% in November, 2016
75. Obama gave his final speech on January 11, 2017. He claimed the economy is good, and that race relations have improved. However, according to a Washington Post poll, 65% of Americans believe race relations have gotten worse. That's up from 48% in the spring 2016
76. So, Obama gave his final speech on January 11. He claimed the economy has improved. He did not mention any of the above dismal statistics. He did not mention that we are experiencing the lowest home ownership rate in 51 years, He did not mention over 11 million Americans are on foodstamps since he became President (which explains why the 94 million no longer in the workforce are making a living, and why they quit looking for work). 
77. In his farewell speech, Obama did not mention that over 43 million Americans now live in poverty, nor that 1 in 5 American families do not have at least one person in the labor force. He did not mention that 1 in 6 men (18-34) are either incarcerated or out of the workforce. He did not mention that he accumulated more debt than all other presidents combined (over $20 trillion). He amassed $9.3 trillion in debt over 8 years. While Obama brags about how many jobs he has created, America has lost over 301,000 manufacturing jobs, In 2016, America had a global trade deficit of over $732 billion. 
78. Obama said you can keep your doctor. He said if you like your insurance you can keep it. Obamacare did the exact opposite. Millions of people lost their doctors and lost their health insurance, and were forced to pay more for Obamacare. In 2017, Obamacare costs are increasing by 25% on average. 
79. Obama said average American family would save $2,500 a year. The exact opposite happened. In 2008, the average healthcare cost for families was $12,680. In 2016 it was $18,142. This was an increase of 42%. Deductibles are so high for most families they can't even use their plans. 
80. The number of healthcare providers are evaporating. Many people buying on the exchanges have just a single doctor to choose from. 
81. Many insurers are pulling out of the Obamacare exchanges because they are losing money. So not only are there fewer doctors to choose from, there are fewer insurance agencies to choose from. This was actually the intent when Obamacare was created. Obama wanted this to happen so people would crawl to government asking for it to bail them out. If Hillary would have been elected, this would have been an ideal time to transfer Obamacare over to the universal healthcare system Obama has wanted all along. 
82. He gave Iran, the world's #1 sponsor of terror $150 billion. Lord knows what they are going to do with this money. 
83. The CDC reported that 33,091 deaths resulted from opioid overdoses in 2015. 
84. The $9,334,590,089,609.44 that the debt increased under Obama as of the close of business on Wednesday (January 20, 2017) is more debt than was accumulated by any previous president. It equals nearly twice as much as the $4,889,1000,310609.44 in additional debt that piled during the eight years George W. Bush served as President. This equates to approximately $75, 129 for every person in the U.S. who had a full time job in December (of 2016).
85. After Obamacare was passed in 2010 by a straight-line democratic vote, the 2012 mid-term election saw 23 of those legislators lose their seats. 

List of Obama scandals

Here is a list of Obama scandals:

1. Mexican gun running
2. SEAL Team 6
3. State Dept. lying about Benghazi
4. Voter fraud
5. The Military not getting their votes counted?”
6. The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else
7. The of drones in our own country without the benefit of the law
8. Giving 123 Technologies $300 Million and right after it declared bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese
9. The president arming the Muslim Brotherhood
10. The IRS targeting conservatives
11. The DOJ spying on the press
12. Sebelius shaking down health insurance executives
13. Goving SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 months later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it
14. The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else
15. The president’s ordering the release of nearly 10,000 illegal immigrants from jails and prisons, and falsely blaming the sequester
16. The president’s threat to impose gun control by Executive Order in order to bypass Congress
17. The president’s repeated violation of the law requiring him to submit a budget no later than the first Monday in February
18. The 2012 vote where 115% of all registered voters in some counties voted 100% for Obama
19. The president’s unconstitutional recess appointments in an attempt to circumvent the Senate’s advise-and-consent role
20. The State Department interfering with an Inspector General investigation on departmental sexual misconduct
21. Clinton, the IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress
22. 65 million voters who don’t pay taxes and get free stuff -- like Obamaphones -- from taxpayers

Obama plans to build shacks next to nice houses

Liberals believe the way to make the world better is by doing battle with society's moral defects (real or perceived).  This is why they started wars, such as the war on poverty and the war on drugs.  Now they are trying to start a war on suburbia.  Obama has saved this war for last because he knows darn will it will not go over well.

So what is it? Liberals like Obama believe it is not fair that wealthy white people have moved out of Detroit and into suburbs where their are zoning laws requiring certain types of homes. This is to prevent shacks from being built next to really nice homes.

Obama thinks this is not fair.  He thinks that it's not fair that these wealthy white people living in the suburbs get to go to nice schools that provide good educations, while the impoverished (mostly blacks) have to live in shacks and go to inferior schools.

So he aims to do something about it by doing battle with suburbia.  What he did was create the Affirmative Further Fair Housing Rule (AFFH), which give the government leverage to re-engineer every American neighborhood. preferably arranging the so that they are a mix of racial and ethnic compositions.

This rule allows the White House to decide what percentage of a neighborhood is female, black, white, Indian, Mexican American, or whatever.  Rather than the people in these neighborhoods deciding for themselves, the government gets to decide.

This rule allows the federal government to trump local communities.  For instance, if Obama wants to make a suburb more balanced racially, he can overrule any zoning laws.  He can then create un-elected federal bodies to force local communities to create new laws that require organizations like HUD to come in and build cheap, affordable homes next to wealthy homes.  This allows poor people from inner cities (mainly minorities) to build shacks next to nice homes.

Worded another way, what he or some other government official will do is, for cities that receive federal funding that are deemed to have a greater than a 50% white population, pressure them to change zoning laws to allow construction of more subsidized housing.  Inner city minorities will then be relocated to more affluent communities.

The noted goal of all this is to make it more fair for minorities and poor people to live in nice neighborhoods and to attend the nice schools. However, the real, unstated goal is to make these communities so that they are less likely to vote for conservatives and republicans.

They actually succeeded in trying this in Westchester County, New York.  The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) came in and trumped all their zoning laws and force the local ordinances to create low income housing.  The community had to pay for this at their own expense in order to create more of a balance.  In other words, it allowed shacks to be build next to nice houses.

When this all started Westchester was a completely liberal area. When the people of Westchester got wind of this, they booted our all the liberals and elected conservatives.  Now the town is run by conservatives.

The problem liberals don't see is that none of this is fair to people who have worked hard to get ahead and live in a nice neighborhood, and this includes both blacks and whites.  They see it as unfair that Obama wants to put impoverished people who can't afford to wash their clothes, can't afford to keep up their homes, and don't cut their grass, and don't watch their kids, in their nice neighborhoods.

A better approach is to encourage inner city folks to elect republicans.

Of course now Obama wants to do this for the entire country.  Will their be a public outcry?

Further reading:

1. National Review: AFFH: Admission of Stealth Caught on Video - Stanley Kurtz
2. National Review: Massive Government Overreach: Obama’s AFFH Rule Is Out - Stanley Kurtz
3. Daily Beast: America’s Last Politically Contested Territory: The Suburbs
4. RushLimbaugh.com: This is Obama's War on the Suburbs - 07.15.14
5. RushLimbaugh.com: Obama's Plan to Eliminate Suburbs - 08.02.12
6. Flooding the zones: Obama plans to integrate neighborhoods by class  - 07.13.15
7. Obama administration to unveil major new rules targeting segregation across U.S.
8. Paul Sperry: New York Post: Obama's collecting personal data for a secret race database
9. National Review: Attention America's Suburbs: You have just been annexed

Obtaining a colorblind society for everyone

I live in a colorblind society. That means that where I live you don't notice people's race. It doesn't matter. It doesn't trigger things. There is no automatic bias or prejudice. When people are hired, it's "assumed" they were hired on merit, and are treated as just another peer.

In a colorblind society, people are treated according to how they treat you, or how good they perform their work. They are treated accordingly, with race not even being a factor.

That's not to say racism doesn't exist in the minds of some of my peers, although if it exists I do not see it.  If any of my peers are racist, they do not let it show.  And that's also not to say racism doesn't exist to a greater extend in other areas of the world, because Lord knows it does.

That said, there are some who just assume people are racist without just cause.  For instance, I have been called a racist just because of my conservative views, and because I'm a Christian.  Some say I'm a racist on the grounds that I usually vote republican.

To them I say that it is conservatism that has championed for a colorblind society, while liberals have championed for treating different groups of people differently.  Republicans want to create an environment where every person has an opportunity to rise up, while democrats only want certain groups to rise up.  Democrats have created entitlements that have trapped many black people in poverty (and trapped them in a political party), and 30 years of democrat control of Detroit, New York, California, and Baltimore has pretty much proved this.

You have groups of people sitting around and waiting for any excuse to riot. They broke out in Ferguson based on the myth of "Stop!  Don't Shoot!"  Now they started a riot in Baltimore because a black man died under police custody, although we still don't know why he died.

Yet these groups of people just assume it was racism, while most of the reasons for the riots are written off as mere myths.  For instance, half of the city council in Baltimore consists of blacks, and half of the police force consists of blacks, and the Mayor of Baltimore is black and so too is the Baltimore police chief.

Speaking of the Mayor of Baltimore, her name is Stephanie Rawlings-Blake.  In response to the race riots she said:

I've made it very clear that I, um, work with the police and instructed them to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their, uh, right to free speech. It's a very delicate balancing act because while we, uh, try to make that they were protected from the cars and the other, y'know, things that were going on. We also gave those who wished to destroy, space to do that as well.

She did call a state of emergency and did call in the national guard, yet why in the world would she give rioters space to destroy things?  That's just crazy.  She didn't make effort to try to stop them, just gave them space to destroy.

Obama has blamed the riots on a republican Congress not willing to invest in urban cities, although Obama's party had complete control of Congress for more than a few years and he didn't solve the problems of urban cities.  Likewise, every single member of the Baltimore Council is a democrat, so there is plenty of government involvement.  This proves that government is not the solution.  In fact, it proves that government is the antithesis of the solution.

You see, you have to realize that it was republicans who worked hard to free the slaves, while democrats opposed it. It was republicans who worked hard to get the Civil Rights Act passed in 1962, while democrats opposed it.  It was republicans by opposed affirmative action so that black people could be hired based on the merit of their knowledge, and the content of their skills, and not by the color of their skin, while democrats opposed it.

While the people on the left say they want a colorblind society, they don't want it.  What they want is for people to see people by the color of their skin, to trap them in poverty, and to use them as pawns in their efforts to get elected over and over again. And their strategy has worked, as a stunning majority of blacks continue to vote democrat.

Yet has this solved any of their problems.  Democrats started the war on poverty in the 1960s, and after 50 years of spending money to help end poverty, there are more people in poverty today as there were then.
If you add all the money spend on the War on Poverty, Great Society, and food stamps, $22 trillion worth of tax dollars* have been spend on ending poverty, and yet it still exists.  African-Americans are stuck in inner cities like Baltimore and Detroit, and they see no way out.

So then Obama was elected, and they started salivating. There must have been so much hope among the African-American community when Obama was elected.  Yet now that Obama has had six years to work his magic, nothing has improved for African-Americans, unless you consider more on food stamps, and more on welfare, as progress.  And many of these African-Americans are not working, and it's for this reason they have time for peaceful protests that turn into riots.  People who are working have better things to do that loot and riot.

Yet conservatives don't measure progress by how how many people are on the government dole, they measure it by how many are able to get off the government dole and find success on their own. Conservatives measure success by how many African-Americans are able to get jobs that pay well so they can choose where they want to live, and choose the schools their kids go to, and so on and so forth.

So now African-Americans have an African American president who was supposed to end racism in America, he was supposed to make things better for them, and he's made it worse. Yet rather than blaming him and his political views, they blame republicans.  Rather than blaming failed government programs, they blame capitalism.

These groups of people waiting for excuses to riot are angrier than ever, and they have everything they ever wanted.  They have complete democrat control of their city, and they have Obama.  Yet they are angrier than ever.  This is more proof that government is not the solution.

It's time for African-Americans to stop voting for people who say they have empathy for them, and create programs that the hard working people in this country are forced to pay for even though they know they won't work.  It's time to stop voting for people who take from the rich to give to the needy.  Instead of calling the rich greedy and punishing them with high taxes, we need to teach people to become rich.  Instead of creating programs to trap people in poverty, we need to get them out of the way so that there are no obstacles in the road to succeeding in life.

The time is now for blacks to start voting for republican solutions to establish the colorblind society I live in for everyone.  It's time to elect people who yearn to create an economic environment where everyone can rise into a better economic status. It's time to elect people who offer better solutions that the same ones that keep failing.

*That $22 trillion is three times more than all the wars in this country, and yet democrats continue to say we need to cut the defense budget to gain control of the out of control national debt.

Further reading:

• Baltimore riots explode left race myths
• Republican Congress won't invest in urban communities
• Is it time for Black Americans to vote republican?
• The war on poverty after 50 years
• Not news: Baltimore mayor says 'protesters' who wish to can have 'space to destroy'

USDA wants us to eat stale food

The Obama Administration's United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has now started an initiative to encourage people to stop wasting food.  The goal is to get people toughen up, even if it requires holding their noses, and eat expired and stale food.  In other words, they want us to be just like cows and horses who are often forced to eat months-old bales of hay.

The initiative was started because the USDA claims that as much as 36 pounds of food is wasted per month. While we are wasting food, there are people who are starving in the world.  While we are wasting food, there are entire nations -- like Ethiopia -- that are starving.  So the solution to this, rather than teaching these people how to get food, is to tell us that we are spoiled, rich, greedy people who eat more than our fair share and waste too much.

Have you ever made macaroni and cheese for kids?  That stuff tastes good, and so that's what kids want to eat.  So you make a box, and then your kids eat two bites and decide they are done.  When I was a kid my parents would make me sit at the table until my food was eaten.  But I don't do this, because I think all that does is encourage poor eating habits.

So then you have leftovers.  But have you ever eaten leftover macaroni and cheese?  My kids hardly ever do, and I never do. Why? Because it tastes terrible.  So now you have this new Obama initiative that wants us to grin and bear the nasty taste of food, regardless of the expiration date; regardless of taste.

What good does this do anyway?  What does it accomplish?  How many starving kids are going to be fed by me not wasting food?  How many degrees of global temperatures are going to be cut by me eating yucky food that I don't want to eat?

Look, there is plenty of food in this world for every person to eat twice over. The problem isn't that there isn't enough food, it's that people don't know how to access the food.  For instance, in the United States, where capitalism exists, people have an incentive to grow and produce foods. The incentive is they can make a profit helping others.

Then you take a country like Ethiopia that is run by a totalitarian dictatorship, and most of the people are starving.  It's not that there isn't enough food in that country, it's because they don't know how to gain access to it, or they can't afford to grow it.

Liberals like Obama see the solution to this kind of problem as blaming the spoiled rich people of the world who eat more than their fair share and waste it.  But if I eat all my food, what good does that do the people of Ethiopia?  What good does it do for the hungry anywhere?

The real solution is to teach capitalism.  Where capitalism exists people don't go hungry.  Where capitalism exists people have an incentive to grow and manufacture food, and they can afford to gain access to it and to get it to the people.  Where capitalism exists people can afford to buy food.

The real solution is to get rid of Michelle Obama's school lunch program, which feeds kids food that looks and tastes terrible, causing kids to just toss it in the trash and go hungry.

Surely, even in the world's richest nations, people are still going to be poor and go hungry.  There is never going to be this euphoric world where poverty and hunger are all conquered.  That kind of stuff only happens in progressive dreams.

Still, where capitalism exists, when government removes obstacles -- such as high taxes and regulations -- from their paths, the greatness of people shows.  Right here in Ludington, Michigan, food is collected every day from good people to help feed the hungry at food shelters.  So no one should go hungry in Ludington.

But that's not good enough for the Obama Administration.  They saw a problem of hunger, said they had empathy for the hungry, and then came up with a solution that involved their experts telling average Americans how to run their lives.

The truth is that it is not a solution.  This is just another way for them to micromanage people's lives.  It is just another way for them to feel good about themselves while accomplishing absolutely nothing.

You see, this is the kind of stuff that just makes people mad.  We don't want to be told what to do.  But you have people in Washington, mostly progressives, whether they be republicans or democrats, who think they know what's best for us.

So they come up with these ideas whereby we are told what we have to do because we are too stupid, or to insensitive, or too greedy.  They say we are profligate wasters, and so we need to be told by the government to eat all our food, even if it is expired, stale, tasteless and gross.

So, what comes next?  I mean, this is the nanny state who decides they know what's best for us.  In California they are telling people already how long they can take showers.  The goal is to do this for all of us. The goal is to force us to live the way they want us to live, whether we believe in their theories or not.

It's already started.  They want to ration healthcare, ration medicine, ration water, ration food, ration gas, and force you to eat stale food (mush).  This goes right along with forcing people to comply with rules and regulations in the name of man made climate change because we're too stupid to see it as a fact.

And you wonder why kids in this country are sad and depressed.  They are told what to believe, and how to act.  They are forced to eat food they don't want.  And told if they don't do as they are told, they too will be contributing to the destruction of the planet.

They've even created an app that helps people better calculate how long after the expiration date food can still be safely eaten.  I mean, this is all fine and dandy if it's something you want to do.  If you want to save money on food by making your food last longer, so be it.  I'm a free choice guy.

Other than that, there is no benefit to eating mush.

Is it time for black Americans to vote republican?

Here's something I would like to see some serious debates on: is it time for African Americans to start voting for republicans?

After the Civil War, after blacks were given the right to vote, nearly 90 percent of them voted for republicans.  In fact, by 1912, republicans were still receiving 93 percent of the black vote.  Then, beginning with Woodrow Wilson, blacks started to vote with increasing frequency for democrats, and now about 90 percent of blacks vote democrat.

During the Great Depression blacks suffered hard, and it was at this time that they started to vote for democrats.  They were told by the Roosevelt administration that they would be better served by progressive handouts than the capitalistic programs doled out by republican.  Considering most blacks needed assistance at the time, they started voting for democrats in huge numbers.

In 1936, only 25 percent of blacks voted for FDR.  However, by 1936, 75 percent of blacks voted for democrats for the first time in history.  Since then democrats have voted for democrats and their progressive agenda ever since.  So, the question of the day is, how has that fared for the black community?

Recently, Stephen A. Smith, a black commentator for ESPN said the following:

I have often said that from a political perspective what I dream is that for one election, just one, every black person in America vote republican.  Do you know that since 1964, black America hasn't given the republican party more than 15 percent of its vote?  Here's what that means.  What that means is that one party... the black folks in America are telling one party, 'We don't give a damn about you!'  They're telling the other party 'You've got our vote!'  Therefore, you have labeled yourself disenfranchised because one party knows they've got you under their thumb.  The other party knows they'll never get you and nobody comes to address your interest.

This has spawned an interesting debate.  Here are some more statistics to add into the discussion.

1.  A majority of blacks want school choice, and democrats oppose this while republicans support
2.  We have 50 million Americans on food stamps
3.  We have 92 million Americans not working
4.  We have 45.3 million Americans in poverty
5.  The Obama Administration has accumulated more debt that every other president combined
6.  50 percent of black teenagers can't get a summer job
7.  There are 20 million more Americans on food stamps and in poverty after 7 years of Obama
8.  We have the lowest labor participation since 1978
9.  Median income is down $4,000 under Obama
10.  In 2008 there were 7.5 million black on food stamps, now the number is 12 million
11.  Black teenage unemployment has gone up
12.  Labor force participation has gone down
12.  Black home ownership has dropped
12.  Black unemployment rate hovers around 12 percent in America
13.  The voting rights act of 1965 passed because of efforts by republicans (was not on LBJs agenda)
14.  The civil rights act of 1964 passed because of efforts by republicans (was not on LBJs agenda)
15.  Reagan signed a 25 year extension of the voting rights act
16.  GWB signed a 25 year extension of the voting rights act
17.  Obama's policies have failed all Americans, and especially hit hard are black Americans
18.  The poverty rate in 2014 was about 14 percent, and this was basically the same as it was in 1967 when LBJ started his war on poverty.
19.  Since black teenagers can't get a job, that means they are hanging around with their friends, and this is how they get into trouble.

So, the question to ask is: how are black Americans better off under democratic leadership?  The overall consensus of voters was that having a black president would make things better for blacks, and the evidence suggests that this has happened?  

It's better for blacks to be working and have opportunities, and this, I think, has not happened under democratic leadership.  Or has it? If there are statistics that show blacks are better off under democratic leadership, I haven't seen them.  Have you? If so, please post in the comments below.

Further reading:

1. Why African Americans Should Vote Republican
2. The War on Poverty After 50 years
3. Why did black voters free the republican party

Will Obama force people to vote

At the City Club in Cleveland, on March 15, Obama toyed with the idea of passing a law requiring mandatory voting. He said, "“In Australia, and some other countries, there’s mandatory voting. It would be transformative if everybody voted. That would counteract money more than anything.”

Of course it would also mean taking away the right not to vote, which would mean that Americans would be giving away one more freedom.

For a country that is the leader of the free world, no person should be forced to do anything. No person should be forced to by health insurance, and no person should be forced to vote.

A person has a right to make bad choices, though. For instance, if you choose not to have health insurance, a hospital should have a right to refuse to treat you if you are not willing to pay for whatever procedures you need.

That is my opinion. I don't believe that a free nation should make any law forcing people to do things they don't want. However, that does not mean that a nation should make laws that take away personal accountability for one's actions either.