TrishAndHalli.com

Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, observations on life in general, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them all!

RSS Feeds, Etc.

Get New Posts Via Email! Enter your e-mail address and hit the 'Subscribe' button. Your address will never be sold or spammed.

About

Profile TrishAndHalli.com
Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them!.

Archives

Categories

Pages

Blogroll

Conservative News

General Interest

Idaho Falls Links

Idaho Politics

Left-Leaning Idaho

Libertarian Links

Pro-life Organizations


Jerry Sproul, CPA
ThoughtfulConsideration.com

Please take a moment to visit our sponsors!

Richard Larsen: Two Very Different Candidates and Ideologies

September 28th, 2012 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

Some voters, especially on the far right, erroneously maintain that there is little difference between the two major presidential candidates when in fact, their divergent views of the role of government could not be more pronounced. This election provides perhaps the starkest contrast since the 1964 election.

The Federal debt has become a problem that cannot be ignored and in my estimation, is the most crucial issue facing the nation at this time. In four short years, the nation has gone from 58% of debt to GDP to 107%, as the debt has skyrocketed from $10 trillion to $16 trillion.

Deficit spending, which has averaged $1.44 trillion over the past four years, is one of the largest contributors to the total debt. We are borrowing more than $41 for every $100 the government spends. This is unsustainable.

President Obama has presided over this massive rise in public debt and has ignored his own commission’s recommendations for addressing the problem. Mitt Romney recognizes, along with many other economists, that our debt and deficit, if not reined in, can lead to a complete collapse of the dollar and our financial system, and has spelled out how the current dangerous trend can be reversed. If ever we’ve needed a fiscal repairman, it is now, and Romney has the financial acumen and experience to do it.

Obama prefers government solutions to economic issues while Romney advocates less intrusion of government and more freedom for individuals and the private sector to succeed. The last four years has seen government control of our economy increase to nearly 60%, with direct and regulatory control over the health care, financial, automotive, energy, and real estate sectors. This is a fascistic model based on centralized control of the means of production. Romney ardently opposes this model, advocating instead free market solutions with as little governmental control and manipulation as possible. He sees the government role more as a referee rather than the crony-capitalism currently in force where the government picks winners and losers in the private sector.

The greatest facilitator of a post-recession economic recovery is job growth, and while the Department of Labor reports that we have gained 4.3 million jobs over the past four years, we have a net loss of 316,000 jobs as millions of Americans have given up hope and quit looking for work. Our participation rate, per the DOL, is lower than it’s ever been, with just 63% of the working-age public earning a paycheck. This has stymied recovery since the recession ended in July 2009, making this the most anemic recovery on record.

Uncertainty over government involvement in the private sector, including regulation and taxes, has significantly stymied job growth. With the cost of regulation to small business owners at over $10,600 per employee, according to the Small Business Administration, Romney will reduce the regulatory cost of doing business and free up small business capital to expand, grow, and create more jobs. In short, Romney’s focus is on economic growth, while Obama’s is on government growth.

President Obama was exactly right three years ago when he said, “We should not be raising taxes during a recession.” They should also not be raised during an anemic recovery. Yet that’s his answer to the $1.44 trillion deficit, to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans from 35 to 39.5%, even though it will only raise a projected $65 billion. Obama recently made his perspective clear regarding taxes, when he said that allowing those who earn more than $250,000 per year to keep most of their earnings is a government “giveaway.” This view that the government allows us to keep some of our money is vastly different than Romney’s, that your money is yours, but government needs some of it to provide the services expected.

On energy, when Obama says that he supports an “all of the above” approach, he means all of those that are above the ground, as evidenced by the crony-capitalism preferential treatment given to solar and wind. Romney’s approach is truly “all of the above,” including oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear. And he would’ve approved the Keystone Pipeline from Canada, which also would’ve created up to 140,000 jobs.

Romney believes the Constitution to be our founding legal document, and would appoint constructionist Supreme Court justices. Obama manifests little respect for the separation of powers and constitutional limits on the executive branch, and has given us justices that advance a less literalistic interpretation of the Constitution.

Romney adheres to the biological and anthropologically validated heterosexual definition of marriage, while Obama supports same-sex marriage.
Obama is pro-abortion, including partial-birth abortions, while Romney is pro-life except in cases of rape and incest.

We could go on and on. Ideologically, the two candidates could not be more divergent. Claims that they’re “just the same” are simply disingenuous and fallacious.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Pocatello Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: Surprise – Health Care Costs Rise

September 26th, 2012 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Among the many promises peddled by Barack Obama the last time he was a candidate was his pledge to cut health care costs by $2500 per family. Many times during the intense debate over his signature legislative initiative this pledge of cost containment was renewed.

For those who have been around awhile, it will come as no shock that this promise remains unfulfilled. What may surprise even the most cynical is the magnitude of the increase under his regime.

Investors Business Daily reports that health care insurance costs have skyrocketed under Obama. The average national cost for working families has gone up by some $3000 annually over the course of Obama’s first term.

Much of that rise is directly related to the new mandates imposed on insurance companies, as well as higher administrative costs associated with managing the thousands of new regulations and changes facing the industry.

But there is another fundamental economic law at work here: The more government subsidies an industry receives, the higher the costs of the product. Health care costs are rising because they can. Folks running these hospitals and insurance companies know that they have mainlined into the U.S. Treasury; the funding available is virtually endless … until the Chinese stop buying our debt.

It is the same phenomenon at work in higher education.

The ObamaCare scheme is a blatant fiasco from beginning to end, and enough evidence is already present for the American people to make a sound judgment in November about the necessity of scrapping this horrendous strategy for remaking American society.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: Public Schools Become Part of Abortion Industry

September 25th, 2012 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Students in NYC public schools are being given birth control and abortion-causing drugs without parental knowledge. So reports the NY Post on Sunday.

The school nurse can now distribute “Emergency Contraception” to girls without parental permission as part of a growing government effort to normalize abortion as part of a “preventive health care” regimen. Parents across the nation should be alarmed at this heavy-handed intrusion into the private world of families, because it is a preview of the new United States under the terms of ObamaCare.

Unlike condoms, Emergency Contraception does not prevent pregnancy. When it works, it helps destroy a new life.

Consider the darkness of school nurses becoming an extension of the abortion industry, their role being one of sexual facilitator and manipulator of young girls.

Consider the impact of an official “stamp of approval” on both premature sexual activity and the killing of a prenatal human being. How could such official sanction not further corrode the innocence of a teenage girl? How could it not lead to an increase in the very sexual behavior we all agree can be so damaging to a young soul? And with the pills will come the lie: “Don’t worry, this won’t kill a baby”.

This horrific indoctrination program may seem a distant threat. But we reported a while ago that such an effort was underway in Los Angeles public schools. More to the point, this corruption of youth will be mainstreamed by ObamaCare. One of its little-noticed provisions includes the creation of “health care” clinics in public schools across the nation under the guise of “preventive medicine”.

America’s heart is hardening.

We must pray for the defeat of Obama and his radical vision for a new America.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: Romney Holds Big Idaho Lead

September 22nd, 2012 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

A statewide poll commissioned by Idaho Chooses Life and 2 other conservative groups late last month found that Mitt Romney held a commanding lead over Democrat Barack Obama in Idaho.

Romney was garnering support from 58% of Idahoans, while Obama was backed by just 32% of the state’s likely voters.

The survey of 600 voters found that 93% of Democrats were sticking with Obama, while 91% of Republicans were planning to vote for their party’s nominee.

Romney held a 42 – 27 advantage among unaffiliated voters.

With such strong numbers, Romney is on track to outpace John McCain’s performance of 2008.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Muslim Outreach is not Working

September 17th, 2012 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

While we enjoy relative tranquility here at home, the Muslim world is erupting in a conflagration of Islamic fundamentalist protests, destruction, and murder. What started as timed terrorist attacks on U.S. embassies in Egypt and Libya on the eleventh anniversary of the attacks of 9/11, has turned into full-scale demonstrations of destruction fueled by an amateur video purportedly critical of their prophet Mohammed.

What started with the Arab Spring nearly two years ago, a democratic movement which led to the ousting of strong-arm leaders Khadafy in Libya and Mubarak in Egypt, has evolved into an Arab Fall, and likely an Arab Winter of icy relations with the Muslim world. Perhaps it is nothing more than the morphing of “hope and change” to despair and violence, induced by the Islamic extremist realities of the region.

Four embassy personnel were mercilessly murdered at the consulate in Libya, including our ambassador and two former Navy Seals, who we’ve learned remarkably, were forbidden by the State Department from being issued live ammunition to protect the embassy staff. The Washington Times reports that Ambassador Chris Stevens was raped before he was murdered.

This week U.S. embassies have been under siege in Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Israel, Iraq, and Yemen, and U.S. companies and interests targeted in Iran and London. And with all of this occurring, the president chose to skip his intelligence update to make a campaign trip to Las Vegas. In a taped message to campaign workers in Nevada, he imprudently compared them to those demonstrating in the Muslim world striving for a better world.

Some of the visual references this week remind us just how the radical elements of Islam challenge the notion that it’s a “religion of peace.” Graffiti written on the walls of the U.S. embassy in Cairo, “Take care America. We have one and a half billion bin Ladins,” as well as banners outside the U.S. embassy in London, which read, “Muslims will eventually conquer America,” do nothing to assuage our concerns of the intolerance of Islamic extremism.

There are also the aural reminders that the Muslim world has not taken kindly to the killing of Osama bin Ladin. Raw video captured by Middle East Media Research Institute shows the mob that attacked the Egyptian embassy was chanting, “Obama, Obama, we’re all Osama.” Perhaps it has been ill-advised to trumpet the killing of Osama. And all of this animus is targeted at the U.S. in spite of billions of dollars we give in foreign aid to Muslim countries, and surprisingly, one week after the administration “forgave” a $1 billion dollar, taxpayer funded loan to Egypt.

The Independent, a UK based news outlet reported that according to senior diplomatic sources, the State Department “had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted.” Yet no warnings were issued to consulates or embassies in affected areas, and the administration has denied the existence of such intelligence.

While there is no codex identifying specific tenets of the Obama Doctrine, foreign policy experts classify the Obama foreign policy of outreach and deference shown to Islam as its basis. The Obama Doctrine was aptly characterized by what critics called his “Apology Tour” at the beginning of his presidency, denouncing and apologizing for what he deemed to be American arrogance, dismissiveness, and derision shown to the Muslim states. Exemplary of the doctrine is the redefinition of one of NASA’s primary objectives to be an “outreach” to Muslims. Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, has described the Obama Doctrine as “overly idealistic and naïve, promoting appeasement” to those who seek our destruction.

Perhaps what we are witnessing across the globe today is the collapse of the Obama Doctrine, and as Obama’s former preacher might say, his “chickens are coming home to roost.”

Some have compared the failed policies of Jimmy Carter to the collapse of the Obama Doctrine. There certainly are similarities as both administrations allowed U.S. allied regimes to be toppled, leading to states founded in Islamic fundamentalism, solidified by anti-American hatred. For Carter, it was Iran, and for Obama, it’s Egypt and Libya.

Showing that he himself “shoots first and aims later,” the president said on Thursday that the U.S. would not consider Egypt an ally, “but we don’t consider them an enemy.”

On 9/11, the day our Cairo embassy was attacked, the embassy released a statement saying, “The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.” Rather than condemning those who perpetrate violence in the name of Allah, the statement targeted the producer of the obscure film that was critical of Muhammad.

Problematic throughout the Obama Doctrine era has been the cozy relationship between administration officials and the Muslim Brotherhood, a militaristic political entity that that spawned al-Qaida and Hamas and was instrumental in toppling the Libyan and Egyptian regimes. In April, a delegation of the Muslim Brotherhood made an official visit to the White House. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin has been confirmed to have formerly been involved with the group. David Horowitz has produced an ebook documenting associations between the Muslim Brotherhood and the administration, titled “The Muslim Brotherhood in the Obama Administration.”

The President has requested an audience this month with Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who won Egypt’s presidential election, while spurning a request by Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to meet this month as well. It’s difficult to explain how a sitting U.S. president can spurn a request for a visit from one of our “closest allies” while requesting an audience with a Muslim Brotherhood president of a nation that Obama doesn’t think is our ally, nor think they’re our enemy, either. The president also confirmed this week that he’ll appear with David Letterman on his show next week, adding insult to injury with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz this week indicated that Obama’s cozy relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood is troubling. And that due to the Obama Doctrine, regimes and Muslim country leaders can’t trust America to do the right thing, as evidenced by leaving Iraq after deposing a dictator, and Afghanistan after toppling a totalitarian Taliban regime. The administration actively supported the toppling of the Mubarak regime in Egypt, praising the democratic Arab Spring uprising, and militarily attacked Khadafy’s Libya to oust him.

The violence is spreading outside of the Muslim nations. Attacks on the U.S. embassy in London, as well as bomb threats at North Dakota State and the University of Texas in Austin validate concerns that anti-American violence can spread quickly, jumping oceans and geographic barriers to threaten Americans and U.S. interests everywhere. The caller of the bomb threat to the University of Texas claimed to represent al-Qaida.

Whatever the motivation, the threats and violence of terrorism are evil. The cozier our relationship with perpetrators of such vile acts as we’ve witnessed this past week is, the more compromised and susceptible we are to manipulation by those very elements. With the collapse of the Obama Doctrine of foreign policy, it’s clear that a new foreign policy is needed, based in reality, not on something as obviously tenuous as “Muslim Outreach.”

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Pocatello Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Andi Elliott: Another Throw-Away Dog

September 13th, 2012 by Halli

By Andi Elliott

The dog had been lying beside the railroad track miles out in the desert for 3 days in the 90 plus degree heat by the time I received a call. Immediately I gathered my “gear” and headed out to find him.

The directions I received were right on and I quickly located him. Parking my car on the shoulder, I began to approach him and he came roaring out at me, stiffed-legged and tail up. At least I knew he was all right. Offering him the hotdogs I had brought, he immediately became a friend. Never had I seen a dog’s coat that was so sunburned.

It took me awhile to get him into my car…inch by inch as he was not very trusting…and as a dog that could easily weigh 80 pounds at full weight, there was no picking him up. But once in the car, he collapsed on the seat, exhausted. Several hours and literally quarts of water later, he began to perk up and show his appreciation.

It’s unlikely that this dog wandered the 15 miles from the closest town. He could have been thrown from the back of a truck or abandoned. Whatever the reason, someone in this dog’s life simply didn’t care enough to even put identification on him. As I watch Storm run across my yard with his rope toy while several other rescues try desperately to catch him, I think that some fool missed out on a great dog.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Falls Issues | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Three Days of Mendacity, The DNC

September 12th, 2012 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

“I’m convinced that Americans on the right and left differ not so much in what they believe, as in what they believe the others believe,” was the comment by a friend of mine this past week. I responded that there’s much truth to that, and that was even before I watched as much of the Democrat National Convention as I could physically handle.

After watching the DNC, I knew my friend was more perspicacious than perhaps even he was aware of. The mischaracterization of conservatives, or specifically, Republicans, by the whole bevy of speakers and entertainers at the Convention prove they either don’t know what Republicans believe, or they just assume all of us watching were idiots and would believe their inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and outright lies.

San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro claimed that Romney would raise taxes on the middle class. This is a false statement, for there is nothing in any of Romney’s fiscal policy proposals that even hints at a tax increase, for anyone. If he had been honest, he should’ve said that his own candidate has raised taxes on the middle class since most of the 21 new taxes imposed through Obamacare hits the middle class directly.

Castro and others, including Joe Biden, also claimed, “The president has created 4.5 million new jobs.” Not only does the president not “create” jobs, but according to Factcheck.org, the economy has recovered only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost during the Obama administration. More significantly, the participation rate, or the percentage of the population either employed or looking for work, has dropped to a 38 year low at 63.5%, according to the Dept. of Labor, which also reports that over 3.5 million Americans have simply quit looking for work the past four years.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick claimed that Mitt Romney, “left his state 47th out of 50 in job growth.” According to Factcheck.org, under Romney, Massachusetts moved from 50th in job creation during the governor‘s first year at the helm to 28th when it came to Romney’s final year. Another outright prevarication.

Connecticut Gov. Daniel Malloy made the claim that the Republican platform would “take away a woman’s right to choose even if she is a rape victim.” There is no such wording in the Republican platform. Another outright lie.

Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards advanced the ludicrous notion that Romney and V.P. Candidate Paul Ryan are committed “to ending insurance coverage for birth control.” To the contrary, both maintain that employers should not be mandated to cover contraceptives at no cost to employees, especially for religious groups like the Catholic Church, thereby supporting the First Amendment “freedom to exercise” clause.

Several speakers claimed that a Romney administration would be slashing all domestic spending across the board by 20%. There is no such quantified proposed reduction. Another oft-repeated lie.

Bill Clinton, Rep. Chris Van Hollen from Maryland, and Obama himself made the falsified claim that Obama’s “plan” would cut the deficit by $4 trillion. The Washington Post fact checkers have totally debunked that “plan” as phony number juggling. The President’s Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction commission made its recommendations in November, of 2010. If Obama was serious about deficit reduction, why didn’t he start two years ago?

Obama, in his acceptance speech, said that the money not spent on war will be spent on domestic programs. All that money is being borrowed! What he essentially admitted was that he would not be reducing the deficit, but continuing to spend borrowed money, for currently we’re borrowing $41 out of every $100 being spent.

There were some other doozies as well. Kerry Washington, claimed Republicans would “take away our right to vote, getting educated, and health care.” Kathleen Sibelius asserted that with the Republican plan, “everyone’s on their own. Nancy Pelosi claimed Republicans, “want to suppress our right to vote.” Another speaker claimed, “when it comes to middle class jobs, Mitt Romney says no, and when it comes to respecting women’s rights, Mitt Romney says no.” DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, claimed Romney would deprive breast cancer survivors of insurance coverage. All these are fallacious, factually incorrect, and were clearly attempts at demonization.

And we can’t forget California Democrat Chairman John Burton comparing Republicans to Nazi ?Joseph Goebbels, and South Carolina Party Chairman Mr. Harpootlian comparing his governor, Nikki Haley to Hitler’s mistress. These examples barely scratch the surface, for the full three days of the DNC was replete with character assassination, fraudulent opposition-party misrepresentation, and outright falsehoods.

No wonder that former Clinton advisor, James Carville, said what he did a couple years ago. “The Democratic constituency is just like a herd of cows. All you have to do is lay out enough silage and they come running. That’s why I became an operative working with Democrats. With Democrats all you have to do is make a lot of noise, lay out the hay, and be ready to use the ole cattle prod in case a few want to bolt the herd. Eighty percent of the people who call themselves Democrats don’t have a clue as to political reality,” he said.

If there is a post-election “bounce” for Obama in the polls, it will prove nothing more than that there are still too many Americans who are just as uninformed, gullible, and ignorant as they were four years ago when they fell for “Hope and Change.”

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Pocatello Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

NEWS RELEASE: Statewide Poll Finds Strong Opposition to Insurance Exchange

September 7th, 2012 by Halli

September 6, 2012

Idahoans remain strongly opposed to Obamacare and want the governor and Legislature to reject its big government ideas, including the expansion of Medicaid and creation of a state health insurance exchange. That’s according to the results of a new statewide public opinion study commissioned by three prominent Idaho organizations – the Free Enterprise PAC, Idaho Freedom Foundation and Idaho Chooses Life.

Opposition to Medicaid expansion and a state insurance exchange was widespread and crossed party lines: 29 percent of Democrats, 51 percent of Independents and 83 percent of Republican voters oppose an insurance exchange.

“There are a lot of powerful lobbyists who want the Legislature and Governor to implement Obamacare,” said Wayne Hoffman, Executive Director of the Idaho Freedom Foundation. “We thought it was imperative to find out what Idahoans really want. It is quite clear that Idahoans want less government control of health care, not more. They want free market solutions and they want little to do with Obamacare.”

One key question asked 600 registered voters across Idaho whether they thought the Supreme Court ruling on ObamaCare was “good for the country”. Just 23 percent said yes, while 61 percent said no.

The next question asked respondents whether they thought Idaho should create a state insurance exchange as part of President Obama’s overhaul of the health care system. As an alternative, they were presented with the argument that the Legislature should allow more companies to sell insurance in Idaho, thus increasing competition and the choices available to employers and individual families. (See addendum).

Idahoans are emphatically opposed to implementation of Obamacare in Idaho:

Just 18 percent of those interviewed support the creation of a state insurance exchange. 64 percent of Idahoans are OPPOSED to an exchange. More than that – this vast majority of Idahoans wants to see the Legislature enact free market reforms in order to improve competition and create more choices for consumers and businesses in the state.

The interviews of 600 Idaho registered voters were conducted by a national survey firm on August 28 & 29. The poll carries a margin of error of 4% +/- at the 95% confidence interval.

A second question asked voters whether they would support an expansion of Medicaid. Support for this proposal rose a bit – at least among Democratic voters – but an overwhelming 63.5 percent of all respondents believe that the Legislature should reject this expansion of government.
“I was struck by the fact that opposition to the insurance exchange flows into general opposition to President Obama’s re-election,” said Lou Esposito, Executive Director of the Free Enterprise PAC.

“This survey found that Mitt Romney leads Obama 58 percent to 32 percent in Idaho. Obama’s attempt to take control of our health care system is a key reason he is in so much trouble in Idaho. Even among those who said they planned to vote for Obama, 31 percent want to see the Legislature expand free market competition in health care insurance, rather than implement Obama’s exchange.”

The study also found that opposition to a state insurance exchange was strongest among those Idahoans who held pro-Life values: only 6 percent of these Idaho voters supported creation of a state insurance exchange – while 79 percent opposed the policy initiative.

“Those of us who believe in the sanctity of life recognize that ObamaCare is the most profound threat to Life since the original Roe v. Wade decision,” said David Ripley, Executive Director of Idaho Chooses Life.

“The threat to preborn children is clear from things like the Obama Mandate requiring abortion-causing drugs as part of every health care plan. But the threat goes at seniors and the disabled as well. It is significant that among those voters over 65 years of age, 64% opposed creation of an insurance exchange.”

“I believe that the widespread opposition to an Exchange is more than money,” Ripley added. “People are scared that government bureaucrats will be making life and death decisions for their families.”

The leaders of the 3 organizations urged Governor Otter and the Legislature to not only reject a state insurance exchange and Medicaid expansion, but come together to increase the choices available to businesses and families in obtaining affordable health care insurance.

“The time is now for Idaho to provide national leadership in health care reform,” said Wayne Hoffman.

“We need more providers and greater flexibility. Competition will empower individual Idahoans.”

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics, Taxes | No Comments »

David Ripley: Democrat Death Wish

September 6th, 2012 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

As the Democrats celebrate one another at their national convention, some very disturbing decisions have been taken. Important changes have been made to the grand statement of principle known as the Democrat Platform.

They have finally emerged from the shadows and declared that not only do they support abortion rights, they truly believe that taxpayers should be obligated to pay for abortions when a woman or girl cannot afford the cost of killing.

President Obama’s true sentiments were only suspected during the congressional debate over ObamaCare. He feigned support for conscience rights and for the dignity of pro-Life taxpayers in order to get his bill passed. Now that he is desperate to gain the votes of the feminist minority, all decent pretense is gone.

This policy is at deep odds with the American people – even among those who hold some soft “pro-choice” sentiment. We believe that it will contribute to his defeat in November.

But on another level, this “death wish” is more than a political prediction. In Obama’s case, we are literally talking about the death of tens of thousands of preborn children. There is overwhelming statistical data available demonstrating that “free abortions” result in higher rates of killing.

It is beyond politics to watch a national party become so radically obsessed with the wanton destruction of human beings in order to achieve some political end. Things have gotten so dark within the Democrat tent that one must begin wondering about their drive to demonize preborn children for cheap political points.

You can read more about this sordid topic at the Weekly Standard.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Racing Towards a Fiscal Cliff

September 6th, 2012 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

Our U.S. Federal debt is reaching a tipping point. Just four years ago, economists feared that our public debt would reach 60% of the GDP by 2022. Failure to curtail spending, pass a budget, and piling on massive new spending has hurled us past that 60% benchmark twelve years earlier than feared. We passed the mark in 2010.

That 60% benchmark is critical, for it is recognized across the European Zone and developed nations as the “prudential limit” for public debt. And here we are, just two years later and our public debt is even greater. The public debt clock shows we’ll hit the spending limit of $16 trillion within the next couple of weeks, which means with a $15 trillion economy, we’re rapidly approaching the 107% mark of public debt to our GDP. For every $100 we spend, $41 of it is borrowed. All reasonable citizens must recognize the fact that we cannot continue this way.

Even that is an incomplete picture, as the total debt associated with unfunded liabilities associated with Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare places our debt level between $55 and $80 trillion.

According to Joseph J. Minarik, Director of Research at Committee for Economic Development, “Today’s financial risk arises largely from U.S. fiscal misbehavior.” We did not have a budget passed by congress while Nancy Pelosi was Speaker, and the last two years the Senate has refused to pass one.

The President has presented his own “budget” to congress, but did not receive a single vote, even from his own party, because it was so out of touch with fiscal realities. Yet with his massive spending, from a $1.3 to $1.7 trillion deficit every year that he’s been president, our debt has skyrocketed.

Just four years ago Obama declared George Bush to be “irresponsible and unpatriotic” for $4 trillion in new debt in eight years. It must be more responsible and patriotic to run up $5 trillion in half the time!

The Simpson-Bowles Commission came up with recommendations to balance the budget in 12 years and reduce our debt load. The president ignored his own commission and has continued to spend as if there is no tomorrow. And there is no hint of an indication that the president has any plans for curtailing his spendthrift ways for the next four years.

The United States now has the seventh highest public debt burden among advanced nations, according to Minarik and the latest data. The countries ahead of us should sound familiar for their debt is destroying their economies: Greece, Iceland, Italy and Japan are worse off. We’ve even far surpassed Portugal. Minarik says without fiscal discipline, our politicians have placed us on course to “stumble into a financial meltdown.”

Minarick reveals, “In due time, U.S. public finances will be caught in a vicious cycle. Rising interest rates raise the federal government’s debt-service cost, which increases the risk premia on Treasury interest rates, which raises debt-service costs still further. Higher interest rates extend to private borrowing costs, which slows economic activity, which increases the federal government’s budget deficit. In another Catch-22 contradiction, the drop in economic activity is not cushioned by a fall in interest rates to match the fall in the demand for credit. Rather, the fall in activity triggers a massive growth of fear of default risk, and so interest rates rise rather than fall, accelerating the vicious cycle. Perhaps this crossing over in the effects on interest rates would constitute a true ‘tipping point.’”

Former Comptroller General of the United States, David M. Walker, appointed by President Clinton, agrees. He’s been sounding the clarion call of economic disaster for the nation if spending is not reined in, and politicians refuse to deal with fiscal realities of unabated spending. He describes America as a “sinking ship” in a sea of our own debt. He points out that, “The US ranks near the bottom of developed global economies in terms of financial stability and will stay there unless it addresses its burgeoning debt problems,” based on the Sovereign Fiscal Responsibility Index.

“We think it is important for the American people to understand where the United States is as compared to other countries with regard to fiscal responsibility and sustainability,” Walker said in a CNBC interview recently. He predicts that the country is rapidly heading towards a debt crisis that could come within the next two to three years if we continue on our present course.

Some may call this fear mongering, but it is the fiscal reality that we face as a nation today. We simply cannot go “Forward” on this same trajectory without collapsing the entire national economy under the weight of our debt, which is now $140,000 per taxpayer (mostly middle class). Is this the “fundamental transformation of America” that Obama has in mind? It’s our reality unless we change captains to navigate the fiscal obstacles ahead of us.

It’s time to put nation ahead of partisanship for everyone, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. There are even those who claim to be “patriots,” who cling cult-like to a former presidential candidate. Any who claim to love this country, our founding documents, and our founding principles, who will, by voting for a third-party candidate, write in a candidate, or not voting at all, facilitate the election of the one with his foot on the spending gas pedal, are not worthy of the “patriot” appellation. They will be accomplices to the destruction of the very nation they feign fealty to if they put their “principles” ahead of national survival by failing to do all they can to prevent this otherwise inevitable destruction.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Pocatello Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics, Taxes | No Comments »

« Previous Entries

Copyright © 2oo6 by TrishAndHalli.com Powered by Wordpress          
Ported by ThemePorter - template by Design4 | Sponsored by Cheap Web Hosting