Barack Obama rejected the controversial Keystone tar sands pipeline
Now Canada will probably ship the Oil to China
Why is this a bone headed move?

1. Oil that is shipped is more likely to damage the environment than oil that is piped.
2. Oil is easier to clean up on land than water, pipelines have cutoff valves.
3. US would get 500,000 more barrels a day from a friendly neighbor
4. Help make us more energy independent.
5. Lower the cost of energy for people and manafacturers
6. Create 130,000 US jobs directly and indirectly

Congress should act on it's own to approve via a supermajority.



OBAMA and DNC asks how much for your vote $20 a week?
That is the truth about the Payroll tax cut. The funny part is you still end up paying it, 1. The money is not credited to your Social Security contributions and they borrow it from the dead broke general fund.  Just so Obama and the DNC can have a campaign issue. They must really think we are morons.

Kim Jung-un North Korea new Leader
Prediction North Korea will accept more western culture.


Barney Frank will not run again
Thanks for 30 years of absolutely nothing constructive
Goodbye and Good Riddance

Prediction
Winning Republican Ticket
Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush

Romney wins Primary then Presidency
The Next Reagan?

Look at these similarities:

◦Replace a failed liberal President who obviously was not ready to be President.
◦Governor of a bluer than blue state. (Reagan/California...Romney/Mass)
◦Was pro-choice at one his point in his career (Reagan was a pro-choice Governor and switched before becoming President...Romney the same).
Reagan re-defined conservatism. Mitt Romney will define conservatism again 30 years later.

Iranian Green Movement gearing up again


ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!

IRAN plots bombings and assassinations in US
American Hikers that were kidnapped by IRAN and imprisoned for two years get OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DOES NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!
What would Reagan do?
Why is the US acting like a bunch of scared weaklings dealing with IRAN?


11th Circuit Court of Appeals Rules Individual Mandate Unconstitutional
This Law will be struck down

We first conclude that the Act’s Medicaid expansion is constitutional. Existing Supreme Court precedent does not establish that Congress’s inducements are unconstitutionally coercive, especially when the federal government will bear nearly all the costs of the program’s amplified enrollments.

Next, the individual mandate was enacted as a regulatory penalty, not a revenue-raising tax, and cannot be sustained as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Taxing and Spending Clause. The mandate is denominated as a penalty in the Act itself, and the legislative history and relevant case law confirm this reading of its function.

Further, the individual mandate exceeds Congress’s enumerated commerce power and is unconstitutional. This economic mandate represents a wholly novel and potentially unbounded assertion of congressional authority: the ability to compel Americans to purchase an expensive health insurance product they have elected not to buy, and to make them re-purchase that insurance product every month for their entire lives. We have not found any generally applicable, judicially enforceable limiting principle that would permit us to uphold the mandate without obliterating the boundaries inherent in the system of enumerated congressional powers. “Uniqueness” is not a constitutional principle in any antecedent Supreme Court decision. The individual mandate also finds no refuge in the aggregation doctrine, for decisions to abstain from the purchase of a product or service, whatever their cumulative effect, lack a sufficient nexus to commerce.

The individual mandate, however, can be severed from the remainder of the Act’s myriad reforms. The presumption of severability is rooted in notions of judicial restraint and respect for the separation of powers in our constitutional system. The Act’s other provisions remain legally operative after the mandate’s excision, and the high burden needed under Supreme Court precedent to rebut the presumption of severability has not been met.

Accordingly, we affirm in part and reverse in part the judgment of the district court."