<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>RadioActive Chief &#187; Obamunism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.radioactivechief.com/?cat=67&#038;feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com</link>
	<description>Stronghold of the VRWC in northwestern Moody County, South Dakota</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 06:48:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Obamacare Blues</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2850</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2850#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 02:18:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA["The law is an ass!"]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Mania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Health Care Law 63% Favor Repeal of National Health Care Plan Support for Obamacare continues to slip: Support for repeal of the new national health care plan has jumped to its highest level ever. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 63% of U.S. voters now favor repeal of the plan passed by [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/health_care_law">Health Care Law</a><br />
63% Favor Repeal of National Health Care Plan</strong></p>
<p>Support for Obamacare continues to slip:</p>
<blockquote><p>Support for repeal of the new national health care plan has jumped to its highest level ever. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 63% of U.S. voters now favor repeal of the plan passed by congressional Democrats and signed into law by President Obama in March.</p>
<p>Prior to today, weekly polling had shown support for repeal ranging from 54% to 58%. Currently, just 32% oppose repeal.</p>
<p>The new findings include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal of the health care bill and 25% who Strongly Oppose it.</p>
<p>While opposition to the bill has remained as consistent since its passage as it was beforehand, this marks the first time that support for repeal has climbed into the 60s. It will be interesting to see whether this marks a brief bounce or indicates a trend of growing opposition. </p></blockquote>
<p>What happened to all those assertions from ObamaPelosiReid that once the bill passed and people knew what was in it that it would magically become popular?  Oooops! </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2850</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Economic Recovery?  Really?</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2828</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2828#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 May 2010 05:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[National Insecurity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business/Econ.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Econowatch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2828</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Remember, the economy is on the way to recovery.Â  B.O. says so! Stock market time bomb? Even the world&#8217;s most savvy stock-market giants (e.g., Warren E. Buffett) have warned over the past decade that derivatives are the fiscal equivalent of a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) &#8211; potentially lethal. And the consequences of such an [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Remember, the economy is on the way to recovery.Â  B.O. says so!</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/10/stock-market-time-bomb/">Stock market time bomb?</a></strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Even the world&#8217;s most savvy stock-market giants (e.g., Warren E. Buffett) have warned over the past decade that derivatives are the fiscal equivalent of a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) &#8211; potentially lethal. And the consequences of such an explosion would make the recent global financial and economic crisis seem like penny ante. But generously lubricated lobbyists for the unrestricted, unsupervised derivatives markets tell congressional committees and government regulators to butt out.</p>
<p>While banks all over the world were imploding and some $50 trillion vanished in global stock markets, the derivatives market grew by an estimated 65 percent, according the Bank for International Settlements. BIS convenes the world&#8217;s 57 most powerful central bankers in Basel, Switzerland, for periodic secret meetings. Occasionally, they issue a cry of alarm. This time, derivatives had soared from $414.8 trillion at the end of 2006 to $683.7 trillion in mid-2008 &#8211; 18 months&#8217; time.</p>
<p>The derivatives market is now estimated at $700 trillion (notional, or face, value, not market value). The world&#8217;s gross domestic product in 2009: $69.8 trillion; America&#8217;s, $14.2 trillion. The total market cap of all major global stock markets? A mere $30 trillion. And the total amount of dollar bills in circulation, most of them abroad: $830 billion (not trillion).</p>
<p>One of the Middle East&#8217;s most powerful bankers conceded recently that even after listening to experts explain the drill, he still does not understand derivatives and therefore doesn&#8217;t trust them and won&#8217;t have anything to do with them.  And when that weapon of mass destruction explodes, he explained, &#8220;Our bank&#8217;s customers, from all over the world, will be saved from the disaster.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Keep those numbers in mind as you consider this:</p>
<blockquote><p>Today&#8217;s massive new derivatives bubble is driving the domestic and global economies, far outstripping the subprime-credit meltdown.</p>
<p>Hopefully not belatedly, Congress is considering legislation to curb the use of derivatives and other methods that artificially boost returns. But 13 members of Congress or their wives used derivatives to magnify their daily moves.</p></blockquote>
<p>&#8220;We have met the enemy and he is us!&#8221;</p>
<blockquote><p>And one measure proposed by Sen. Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas Democrat, would bar banks from trading in derivatives. This, in turn, would push almost $300 trillion beyond the reach of regulators. Derivatives would become still more opaque. Some say abolish derivatives trading in the U.S. and push it offshore.</p></blockquote>
<p>Possible results?</p>
<blockquote><p>The now-bloody Greek tragedy over its debt crisis is echoing through the Federal Reserve and the halls of Congress. Greece&#8217;s public debt exceeds 100 percent of its economy versus 90 percent (at $13 trillion) for the United States. If you add unfunded U.S. liabilities for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the long-term shortfall is $62 trillion, or about $200,000 for each American. At least that&#8217;s the estimate of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. And Peter Peterson himself says he&#8217;s now in the business of promoting awareness about public borrowing.</p>
<p>With probable trader error plunging the Dow Jones into a 1,000-point tailspin and back up in 16 minutes, economic and financial prognostication made astrology look respectable. Could Greece be a harbinger of ugly things to come for the rest of the world? Prominent investor Marc Faber, hedge fund manager Jim Chanos and Harvard&#8217;s Kenneth Rogoff told Bloomberg China&#8217;s economy will slow and possibly &#8220;crash&#8221; within a year as the nation&#8217;s property bubble is set to burst.</p></blockquote>
<p>Meanwhile the economic recovery continues apace, with the unemployment rate moving back to 9.9%, or 17.1% if ALL of it is counted.</p>
<p>This sort of progress can easily result in recovering the experience of the 1930.</p>
<p>Maybe that&#8217;s what B.O. means.Â  Isn&#8217;t Obamunism marvelous?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2828</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamacare: Costly Error</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2779</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2779#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Apr 2010 05:47:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Mania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2779</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Report: Health overhaul will increase USA&#8217;s tab President Obama&#8217;s health care overhaul law will increase the nation&#8217;s health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation. A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-04-22-health-care-costs_N.htm?csp=24&#038;RM_Exclude=Juno">Report: Health overhaul will increase USA&#8217;s tab</a></strong></p>
<blockquote><p>President Obama&#8217;s health care overhaul law will increase the nation&#8217;s health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation.</p>
<p>A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama&#8217;s aim of expanding health insurance â€” adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls.</p>
<p>But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president&#8217;s twin goal of controlling runaway costs. It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15% of hospitals into the red and &#8220;possibly jeopardizing access&#8221; to care for seniors.</p>
<p>The mixed verdict for Obama&#8217;s signature issue is the first comprehensive look by neutral experts.</p></blockquote>
<p>Surprise, surprise, surprise!  </p>
<p>Not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2779</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ron Paul v. B.O.?</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2767</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2767#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 04:57:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2767</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rasmussen poll results: Election 2012: Barack Obama 42%, Ron Paul 41% Pit maverick Republican Congressman Ron Paul against President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election match-up, and the race is â€“ virtually dead even. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds Obama with 42% support and Paul with 41% of the [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rasmussen poll results:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2012/election_2012_barack_obama_42_ron_paul_41"><strong>Election 2012: Barack Obama 42%, Ron Paul 41%</strong></a></p>
<blockquote><p>Pit maverick Republican Congressman Ron Paul against President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election match-up, and the race is â€“ virtually dead even.</p>
<p>A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds Obama with 42% support and Paul with 41% of the vote. Eleven percent (11%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.</p></blockquote>
<p>There are other details of poll results in the article that are also interesting.<br />
Ron Paul?  Hmmmm. Looks like a bit of backlash to  Obamunism. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2767</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Truth and Consequences</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2749</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2749#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2010 03:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2749</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obama and the L-Word The presidentâ€™s habit of telling untruths Hereâ€™s how predictable the presidentâ€™s slippery relationship with the truth has become: Hours before the State of the Union address, Washington Examiner reporter Timothy P. Carney posted a â€œpre-emptive fact checkâ€ that, among other things, prebutted any presidential claim to have â€œstopped the revolving door [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b><a href="http://reason.com/archives/2010/03/09/obama-and-the-l-word">Obama  and the L-Word</a><br />
The presidentâ€™s habit of telling untruths</b></p>
<blockquote><p>Hereâ€™s how predictable the presidentâ€™s slippery relationship with the truth has become: Hours before the State of the Union address, Washington Examiner reporter Timothy P. Carney posted a â€œpre-emptive fact checkâ€ that, among other things, prebutted any presidential claim to have â€œstopped the revolving door between government and corporate lobbying.â€ As it happened, that night Barack Obama made an even bolder (read: less truthful) claim: that â€œweâ€™ve excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs.â€</p>
<p>In fact, more than 40 former lobbyists work in the administration, including such policy makers as Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn (who was lobbying for Raytheon as recently as 2008), Office of the First Lady Director of Policy and Projects Jocelyn Frye (National Partnership for Women and Families), White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs Cecilia MuÃ±oz (National Council of La Raza), and Treasury Secretary Chief of Staff Mark Patterson (Goldman Sachs).</p></blockquote>
<p>There&#8217;s more of this kind of BS noted in the article&#8230;but you get the drift&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2749</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamascare Clears House</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2721</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2721#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 04:01:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Mania]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2721</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sickening! Congress clears historic health care bill Summoned to success by President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled Congress approved historic legislation Sunday night extending health care to tens of millions of uninsured Americans and cracking down on insurance company abuses, a climactic chapter in the century-long quest for near universal coverage. Widely viewed as dead two [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sickening!</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul">Congress clears historic health care bill</a></strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Summoned to success by President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled Congress approved historic legislation Sunday night extending health care to tens of millions of uninsured Americans and cracking down on insurance company abuses, a climactic chapter in the century-long quest for near universal coverage.</p>
<p>Widely viewed as dead two months ago, the Senate-passed bill cleared the House on a 219-212 vote. Republicans were unanimous in opposition, joined by 34 dissident Democrats.</p></blockquote>
<p>SO&#8230;what will we REALLY get?  (Besides inevitable national bankruptcy!)</p>
<p><strong>Obamacare Means 159 New Gov&#8217;t Agencies</strong></p>
<p>Oh, joy&#8230;just what we need.  (NOT!)</p>
<blockquote><p>The new government agencies that will be created as the result of Obamacare will worsen the quality of American medical care by restricting physicians and hospitals to use their best judgment, according to Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., a physician and chairman of the Republican Study Committee.</p>
<p>In fact, he says, the bill would create 159 new governemnt agencies to regulate insurance and medical care for Americans.</p></blockquote>
<p>In Churchillian terms this will not be the end of the debate&#8230;it&#8217;s not the beginning of the end&#8230;it&#8217;s the end of the beginning.</p>
<p><strong>Hatch Says Itâ€™s â€™Nutsâ€™ to Think House Vote Ends Health Issue </strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Republican Senator Orrin Hatch said Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives are â€œnutsâ€ to think tomorrowâ€™s vote on health-care legislation will resolve the issue.</p>
<p>If the measure passes, Senate Republicans have enough votes on at least two points of order to alter the measure and send it back to the House for a second round of votes, Hatch said in an interview on Bloomberg Televisionâ€™s â€œPolitical Capital with Al Hunt,â€ airing this weekend.</p>
<p>â€œIf those people think theyâ€™re only going to vote on this once, theyâ€™re nuts,â€ Hatch said as House Democratic leaders rounded up support before the scheduled vote on President Barack Obamaâ€™s top domestic priority. </p></blockquote>
<p>&#8220;Any stick will do when you want to beat a snake.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2721</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>B.O. Administration Goes After&#8230;Fishing?!</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2696</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2696#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 05:35:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enviros & Junk Science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2696</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[WTH?Â  What&#8217;s next? Culled out: Obama moving to limit fishing access The Obama administration will accept no more public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing the nation&#8217;s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters. This announcement comes at the time when the situation supposedly still is &#8220;fluid&#8221; [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WTH?Â  What&#8217;s next?</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/saltwater/news/story?id=4975762">Culled out: Obama moving to limit fishing access</a></strong></p>
<blockquote><p>The Obama administration will accept no more public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing the nation&#8217;s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.</p>
<p>This announcement comes at the time when the situation supposedly still is &#8220;fluid&#8221; and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force still hasn&#8217;t issued its final report on zoning uses of these waters.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a disappointment, but not really a surprise for fishing industry insiders who have negotiated for months with officials at the Council on Environmental Quality and bureaucrats on the task force. These angling advocates have come to suspect that public input into the process was a charade from the beginning.</p></blockquote>
<p>This is an old strategy that was at the heart of the old Soviet system:  solicit input, ignore it, impose whatever it was you were planning to do in the first place.  (Since you DID solicity &#8220;input&#8221;, it is considered a &#8220;democratic&#8221; process&#8230;the people did get their say, not that it was really worth anything!)</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a precedent for this process:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;When the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) completed their successful campaign to convince the Ontario government to end one of the best scientifically managed big game hunts in North America (spring bear), the results of their agenda had severe economic impacts on small family businesses and the tourism economy of communities across northern and central Ontario,&#8221; said Phil Morlock, director of environmental affairs for Shimano.</p>
<p>&#8220;Now we see NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and the administration planning the future of recreational fishing access in America based on a similar agenda of these same groups and other Big Green anti-use organizations, through an Executive Order by the President. The current U.S. direction with fishing is a direct parallel to what happened in Canada with hunting: The negative economic impacts on hard working American families and small businesses are being ignored.</p>
<p>&#8220;In spite of what we hear daily in the press about the President&#8217;s concern for jobs and the economy and contrary to what he stated in the June order creating this process, we have seen no evidence from NOAA or the task force that recreational fishing and related jobs are receiving any priority.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>There is more detail in the article, and <a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/fishing/featureIndex?page=angling_for_access_archive_Angling%20For%20Access%20News%20Archive">others linked from it</a>, on what&#8217;s going on&#8230;with the usual suspects&#8230;enviro special interest groups with their collective noses up the backside of the bureaucrats who will be generating the executive order Imperial Decree that the &#8220;Dear Leader&#8221; eventually signs.</p>
<p>Typical progressive arrogant elitism once again.  B.O. really has THAT routine down pat!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2696</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamascare Digest</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2683</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2683#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 05:28:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Mania]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2683</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There&#8217;s a LOT of stuff right now on this&#8230;because there is a lot happening. Follow the links for additional coverage on these&#8230; Sen. Thune, to his credit, is leading out in the Senate opposition to Obamascare: Thune: GOP preparing to slow or block health bill in Senate debate Republicans are preparing to raise points of [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s a LOT of stuff right now on this&#8230;because there is a lot happening.  Follow the links for additional coverage on these&#8230;</p>
<p>Sen. Thune, to his credit, is leading out in the Senate opposition to Obamascare:</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/84681-thune-gop-preparing-to-slow-or-block-health-bill-in-senate-debate">Thune: GOP preparing to slow or block health bill in Senate debate</a></strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Republicans are preparing to raise points of order and other roadblocks to the healthcare bill, a member of the Senate GOP leadership said Tuesday evening.</p></blockquote>
<p>Like the African proverb says: &#8220;Any stick will do when you have to beat a snake.&#8221;</p>
<blockquote><p>Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the fourth-ranking Senate Republican who serves as chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, said the GOP is prepared for a number of scenarios in which they would seek to slow down or halt passage of healthcare legislation once it comes back before the Senate.</p>
<p>&#8220;I still think it creates a lot of problems when it comes back to the Senate because there will be lots of points of order that will lie against the bill in the Senate, and obviously, we will, hopefully, have the opportunity to raise some of those,&#8221; Thune said of the health bill during an appearance on Fox News.</p></blockquote>
<p><strong><a href="http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-now-selling-appeals-court-judgeships-health-care-votes">Obama Now Selling Judgeships for Health Care Votes</a></strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Tonight, Barack Obama will host ten House Democrats who voted against the health care bill in November at the White House; he&#8217;s obviously trying to persuade them to switch their votes to yes. One of the ten is Jim Matheson of Utah. The White House just sent out a press release announcing that today President Obama nominated Matheson&#8217;s brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.</p></blockquote>
<p>After the &#8220;Louisiana Purchase&#8221;, the Cornhusker Kickback&#8221;, and the Union exemption one had to wonder if there was any way for the abuse of Presidential power in the interest of partisan politics could be even more flagrent.  Now we know.  The Answer is yes.  What&#8217;s next? More of the &#8220;Chicago Way&#8221; of business:</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7048610.ece">Barack Obama: I&#8217;ll steamroll health reforms through Congress</a></strong></p>
<blockquote><p>President Obama declared for the first time yesterday that he was prepared to steamroller his troubled health reform legislation through Congress with only Democratic support; a move Republicans denounced as the â€œnuclear optionâ€.</p>
<p>Signalling that his patience had snapped after a year-long fight, Mr Obama laid the ground for Democrats in Congress to muscle the Bill through using a high-risk legislative manoeuvre known as reconciliation, which overrides a Republican filibuster. Although he did not use the word â€œreconciliationâ€, Mr Obama made it clear that that was the route he intended to take.</p>
<p>Democrats will, as a result, be able to get the health reform package through the Senate with a simple majority. Mr Obamaâ€™s party ceded their 60-stong majority in the upper chamber after losing the late Teddy Kennedyâ€™s Massachusetts seat in January.</p>
<p>That shock defeat was due, in large part, to growing public hostility to Mr Obamaâ€™s health reforms, which many see as too expensive at a time of soaring deficits. Ramming the Bill through Congress is, therefore, a high-risk strategy that Republicans vowed to exploit.</p></blockquote>
<p>In short, straight out of the progressive playbook: &#8220;Screw you people&#8230;you&#8217;re obviously too stupid to know what&#8217;s good for you, so I, as the leader, will drag  you into the future whether you like it or not!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2683</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gov&#8217;t Threatens Rights?  SHOCKING!</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2646</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2646#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2010 17:41:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Constitution Watch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2646</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CNN Poll: Majority says government a threat to citizens&#8217; rights A majority of Americans think the federal government poses a threat to rights of Americans, according to a new national poll. Fifty-six percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they think the federal government&#8217;s become so large and powerful [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/26/cnn-poll-majority-says-government-a-threat-to-citizens-rights/?fbid=c4IB92CH14N">CNN Poll: Majority says government a threat to citizens&#8217; rights</a></strong></p>
<blockquote><p> A majority of Americans think the federal government poses a threat to rights of Americans, according to a new national poll.</p>
<p><strong>Fifty-six percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they think the federal government&#8217;s become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.</strong> Forty-four percent of those polled disagree. [emphasis added]</p></blockquote>
<p>Apparently all that change isn&#8217;t quite what was hoped for!</p>
<blockquote><p>According to CNN poll numbers released Sunday, Americans overwhelmingly think that the U.S. government is broken &#8211; though the public overwhelmingly holds out hope that what&#8217;s broken can be fixed</p></blockquote>
<p>&#8230;like, in November!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2646</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>B.O. Tax Plans Revisited</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2639</link>
		<comments>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2639#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:11:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chief]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obamunism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Infernal Revenue]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=2639</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The CHief commented on Baraq Hussein&#8217;s concession that he is abandoning his sacred campaign promises to avoid any middle class tax increases. This extends that discussion Obama Begins His Assault on Your Life Savings The welfare state and your life savings are two cars heading down a one-lane road in opposite directions. One must yield, [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The CHief commented on Baraq Hussein&#8217;s concession that he is abandoning his sacred campaign promises to avoid any middle class tax increases.  This extends that discussion </p>
<p><b><a href="http://patriotpost.us/opinion/terence-jeffrey/2010/02/24/obama-begins-his-assault-on-your-life-savings/">Obama Begins His Assault on Your Life Savings</a></b></p>
<blockquote><p>The welfare state and your life savings are two cars heading down a one-lane road in opposite directions. One must yield, or there will be a crash.</p>
<p>For Americans who believe in the old-fashioned virtues of hard work, self reliance and respect for private property, the solution is obvious. The welfare state must yield.</p>
<p>For politicians who believe in the welfare state and redistributing wealth, the solution is equally obvious. Your savings must yield.</p>
<p>Barack Obama is of the latter group. In the new health care proposal he outlined this week, he suggested a series of unprecedented tax increases that would extend the greedy hands of government into the life savings of hard-working Americans.</p></blockquote>
<p>Think this won&#8217;t have much effect here in SD?</p>
<blockquote><p>More of the gory details are described in the article&#8230;the conclusion, referring to some of the planned revisions, caught the eye:<br />
The new taxes Obama wants to impose on interest, dividends, annuities and rents to pay for his health care plan are in fact taxes on the life savings of the net payers &#8212; on their 401(k)s, savings accounts, paid-off mortgages and life insurance policies &#8212; to cover benefits for the net recipients. The redistributionists would ultimately need $435,000 from every full-time worker to cover the welfare state&#8217;s unfunded liabilities &#8212; even if Obama&#8217;s health care plan were never enacted.</p>
<p>Obama is pointing them down the road where they will find it.</p></blockquote>
<p>Hmmmm.  The Chief is a semi-retired public school teacher.  Sound like one of those rich folks?  (Surely you jest!)</p>
<p>We are living on a quarter-section that has been in the family for over a century &#8212; not eactly a land baron.  Not being a professional farmer, the cropland on our homestead is rented out to a neighboring pro agriculturalist.</p>
<p>TA-DA!  Now, according to B.O.&#8217;s reasoning, I am now suddenly by definition a wealthy plutocratic land-owner with &#8220;unearned&#8221; rental income that becomes worthy of paying extra taxes&#8230;and THIS is after already experiencing two successive years of actual tax increases due to IRS &#8220;tweaking&#8221; the rules.  </p>
<p>With no apologies to ANYONE, the Chief has NO HESITATION to state unequivocally that anyone stating that B.O. is not going after the middle class for tax increases under the guise of the Obamacare is either (1) a total partisan hack kool-aid drinker, (2) incapable of rational analysis, (3) someone out for the extension of governmental domination as their primary policy goal, (4) a well-intentioned fool with a lack of situational awareness, or (5) some combination of the above.</p>
<p>Sorry folks, the proof of the puddin&#8217; is in the outgoing increased payment checks to the I.R.S. &#8212; at the same time that income has significantly decreased! </p>
<p>How&#8217;s all that HOPE and CHANGE working out for YOU? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2639</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
