Liberal academia? Revisionist history? Nothing to see here, move it along people…
Via CBS Houston:
The most historical instance of protesting against taxation without representation is now being taught in Texas schools as a terrorist act.
As recently as January of this year, the Texas Education Service Center Curriculum Collaborative included a lesson plan that depicted the Boston Tea Party, an event that helped ignite the American Revolution, as an act of terrorism. TheBlaze reports that in a lesson promoted on the TESCCC site as recently as January, a world history/social studies class plan depicted the Boston Tea Party as being anything but patriotic, causing many people to become upset with the lack of transparency and review for lessons.
“A local militia, believed to be a terrorist organization, attacked the property of private citizens today at our nation’s busiest port,” wrote the teachers in charge of organizing the curriculum about the Boston Tea Party. “Although no one was injured in the attack, a large quantity of merchandise, considered to be valuable to its owners and loathsome to the perpetrators, was destroyed. The terrorists, dressed in disguise and apparently intoxicated, were able to escape into the night with the help of local citizens who harbor these fugitives and conceal their identities from the authorities.
Turns out, accusations that the President has gutted the welfare reform enacted by Bill Clinton and a Republican congress in 1996, is true.
After suspending a work requirement for the eligibility of food stamps, those who collected their government handouts sky-rocketed.
Via the Washington Examiner:
Obama administration officials have insisted that their decision to grant states waivers to redefine work requirements for welfare recipients would not “gut” the landmark 1996 welfare reform law. But a new report from the Congressional Research Service obtained by the Washington Examiner suggests that the administration’s suspension of a separate welfare work requirement has already helped explode the number of able-bodied Americans on food stamps.
In addition to the broader work requirement that has become a contentious issue in the presidential race, the 1996 welfare reform law included a separate rule encouraging able-bodied adults without dependents to work by limiting the amount of time they could receive food stamps. President Obama suspended that rule when he signed his economic stimulus legislation into law, and the number of these adults on food stamps doubled, from 1.9 million in 2008 to 3.9 million in 2010, according to the CRS report, issued in the form of a memo to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va.
“This report once again confirms that President Obama has severely gutted the welfare work requirements that Americans have overwhelmingly supported since President Clinton signed them into law,” Cantor said in an emailed statement. “It’s time to reinstate these common-sense measures, and focus on creating job growth for those in need.”
In other words, stay home and collect your government welfare check, as opposed to going to work and collecting your paycheck. This is where the notion that Obama supporters sign the back of checks, while Romney supporters sign the front of checks comes from.
It is also why people refer to Obama as the food stamp President. This is the 47% of people that Obama panders to, and tries to purchase their votes, and it is the 47% that Romney can’t be concerned about when campaigning.
Romney is right.
Individuals who find it more rewarding to collect their welfare checks as opposed to their work checks will never be motivated enough to follow Romney’s vision to get America back on the right economic path.
The following video has gone viral for a reason. It is subtle evidence that the President’s energy policy is setting America up to fail.
This weekend, a video produced by Free Market America went live on YouTube — and it is racking up nationwide hits. Deservedly so. The Earth Day-timed message is compelling and extremely relevant this campaign season. As the group writes: “The environmental agenda has been infected by extremism — it’s become an economic suicide pact. And we’re here to challenge it.”
Rick Santorum on Sunday responded to Mitt Romney’s recent ad attacks involving his alleged lack of business or state government experience.
While Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney touts his business experience as one of his strongest credentials, rival Rick Santorum blasted it on Sunday as a drawback.
“If Governor Romney thinks that he is the CEO of America and can run and manage the economy, he doesn’t understand what conservatives believe in,” Santorum said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
“We don’t want someone in Washington, D.C. to manage the economy,” Santorum continued. “We want someone who can get Washington out of our lives.”
My question is, why can’t we have both? Can we not put somebody in charge who is competent enough to manage the economy, and conservative enough to know that such economic success comes from capitalism, limited government intrusion, and the free market?
You mean the administration that rammed healthcare down our throats via backroom deals and a mantra of ‘we have to pass it to find out what’s in it’, isn’t the most transparent administration in history after all?
We’ve executed several FOIA requests with the White House, none of which have been answered in the proper amount of time. In fact, they’ve still not been answered, with some approaching a full year since they were executed.
Congressman Issa has continually been stonewalled by the administration regarding Fast and Furious. So why is this a surprise?
President Barack Obama set a high bar for open government, and he set it quickly.
A minute after he took office, the White House website declared his administration would become “the most open and transparent in history.” By the end of his first full day on the job, Obama had issued high-profile orders pledging “a new era” and “an unprecedented level of openness” across the massive federal government.
But three years into his presidency, critics say Obama’s administration has failed to deliver the refreshing blast of transparency that the president promised.
“Obama is the sixth administration that’s been in office since I’ve been doing Freedom of Information Act work. … It’s kind of shocking to me to say this, but of the six, this administration is the worst on FOIA issues. The worst. There’s just no question about it,” said Katherine Meyer, a Washington lawyer who’s been filing FOIA cases since 1978. “This administration is raising one barrier after another. … It’s gotten to the point where I’m stunned — I’m really stunned.”
You shouldn’t be, this is Chicago politics.
How very fitting that this is the day Obama has chosen to present his State of the Union address. An anniversary symbolizing the incompetence of government.
The Heritage Foundation has provided some fantastic information regarding the happenings during the 1,000 days in which the Senate has failed to pass a budget:
As the 1,000th day nears, here are some facts about America’s budget and why the Senate must take action to be stewards of the people’s money as the Constitution requires:
In an op-ed in the Orlando Sentinel, U.S. Rep. Sandy Adams explains that the lack of a budget was inexcusable during the Democrats control of both houses. He writes:
Could you imagine not doing a family budget for 1,000 days, or businesses going that long without one?
The previous Democrat-led Congress had ample time to do so. With President Obama in the White House, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and former Speaker Nancy Pelosi had the power to implement any budget they chose. Unfortunately, they punted on their responsibilities, choosing to pass legislation creating a national energy tax and an unpopular health-care law instead.
And here is a GOP ad highlighting the momentous achievement. The trailer highlights the fact that January 24, 2012 marks 1,000 days since Senate Democrats passed a budget, and that President Obama’s policies have hurt job growth and made our economy worse.
And yes, it is the Obama economy, as they polled people on their level of satisfaction with the economy over the last four years. No more blaming Bush, Obama owns this economy.
“…a whopping 83 percent now say they are dissatisfied with the economic condition of the country, according to Gallup.”
Worse, the Obama reign has seen a drop in other significant areas as well.
Large drops in satisfaction were also seen with the public view of the size and power of the federal government. Only 29 percent were satisfied with the current state of the federal government, down from 41 percent in 2008, a decline of 12 percentage points.
Additionally, satisfaction with the moral and ethical climate of the country also dropped significantly over the last four years. Only 28 percent of Americans were satisfied, down from 39 percent in 2008, while 68 percent of Americans were dissatisfied with the moral and ethical climate of the United States.
But I thought this was the healing President? The man who could calm the rising tide of animosity in our country. The man who would become the first post-racial President, and fix the economy through a redistribution of wealth. The man who would pay to fill up our gas tank and pay our mortgage.