Monday, October 31, 2011

CURL: The very angry first lady Michelle Obama - Washington Times

CURL: The very angry first lady Michelle Obama - Washington Times

CURL: The very angry first lady Michelle Obama

First lady Michelle Obama, seen with the president and daughters Malia (right) and Sasha, has been a bitter mood lately, heaping criticism on the Republican Party as her husband campaigns for re-election. (Associated Press)First lady Michelle Obama, seen with the president and daughters Malia (right) and Sasha, has been a bitter mood lately, heaping criticism on the Republican Party as her husband campaigns for re-election. (Associated Press)

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Michelle’s back, and she’s madder than ever. She was already pretty angry, seemingly unhappy with just about everything. As her husband wrapped up the Democratic nomination in 2008, she let fly her real feelings: “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country.” A few months into her job as first lady, her French counterpart asked how she liked the gig: “Don’t ask!” she reportedly spat. “It’s hell. I can’t stand it!”

She even seems to be mad at her silver-tongued husband. When the two were to set off on a luxurious 10-day vacation to Martha’s Vineyard, she left early - four hours early - and flew up alone. And those private vacations. She’s traveled to some of the world’s most plush resorts, taking 42 days off in the past year - that’d be eight weeks of vacay time if she held down a normal job.

Now, she is ready to spew her bilious disgust with America on the campaign trail. A dignified, transcendent first lady? No chance. Michelle is going to break with a hundred years of tradition and play the role of attack dog, heaping derision on her husband’s political opponents like no other first lady before her.

And it’s already begun. Mad Michelle this week popped down to Davis Island, Fla., to hobnob with the very people her husband despises - the 1 percent. At a massive mansion on the bay, filled with the wealthiest of the wealthy, America’s first lady launched into a tirade about “them” - the Republicans.

“Let’s not forget about what it meant when my husband appointed two brilliant Supreme Court justices, and for the first time in history, our daughters - and our sons - watched three women take their seats on our nation’s highest court. But more importantly, let’s not forget the impact their decisions will have on our lives for decades to come - on our privacy and our security, on whether we can speak freely, worship openly and love whomever we choose. That is what’s at stake here,” she said to applause.

Yes, Republicans hope to regain the White House so they can install Supreme Court justices who will trample Americans’ privacy, ignore the nation’s security, crush free speech and persecute the religious.

Oh, and they’re rich and racist to boot. “Will we be a country where opportunity is limited to just the few at the top? Who are we? Or will we give every child a chance to succeed no matter where they’re from, or what they look like or how much money their parents have. Who are we?”

That’s right, rich people (white, of course) certainly don’t want black people to succeed. They want to squelch success based on what people look like, how much money they have. “Are we going to let them succeed?” the first lady yelled. “Nooo!” the rich white people screamed.

Just as her husband’s re-election strategy is inanely simplistic - blame the Republicans for thwarting his brilliant, economy-saving policies - so too is the first lady’s. She will go to the opulent homes of rich people across the country to tell them how rich people are to blame for America’s woes and guilt them into giving millions for her husband’s campaign.

And the Princeton graduate will tell supporters they simply can’t comprehend the significance of what’s occurring today in America.

“It can be hard to see clearly what’s at stake - because these issues are so complicated, and quite frankly, folks are busy and they’re tired. We’re raising families and working full-time jobs, and many helping out in their own communities on top of all that. So many of us just don’t have the time to follow the news and to sort through all the back-and-forth, and to figure out how all of this stuff connects to our daily lives.”

Yes, only Michelle and her husband can truly understand, although she often tells those uninformed people that when the president returns from one of his campaign trips, “He says, ‘You won’t believe what folks are going through.’ ” So maybe she is the only person in America who understands.

So, America’s first lady will travel the country this election season to tell her fellow Americans just how bad it is out there (between lavish vacations, of course). Unlike President Ronald Reagan, who saw morning in America - that great shining city on a hill - Michelle will tell all who will listen that Republicans want to poison the air and water, stifle free speech, oppress the religious. She will offer not an uplifting vision of what her husband’s America could be but only a vapid view of what Republicans’ America would be.

That is the America she lives in, and by campaign’s end, it will be clear that she’s no longer “proud of my country.” Maybe she never really was.

Joseph Curl covered the White House and politics for a decade for The Washington Times. He can be reached at jcurl@washingtontimes.com.

© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC.

thenationalpatriot.com » Blog Archive » A VILE Display from Michelle Obama!!!

thenationalpatriot.com » Blog Archive » A VILE Display from Michelle Obama!!!

A VILE Display from Michelle Obama!!!

By Craig Andresen on September 14, 2011 at 12:06 pm

Okay…I’ve HAD it….REALLY had it with Michelle Obama.

Here pronouncement years ago of being proud for the first time in her adult life of her country PALES in comparison to what she said during a 9-11 commemoration over the weekend.

This anti American socialist blathering FOOL has gone WAY too far.

There she sat on Barack’s right side as bagpipers played and an honor guard folded an American Flag. You know how it’s done…With reverence and respect, folded precisely and crisply…honored. It was during that moment that our nations “First Lady” leaned to her husband’s ears and asked the question that should set your TEETH on fire!!!

“All of this for a damned flag?”

When Barack nodded, she sat back and gave a look of disgust. There is no audio but you can clearly read her lips. HE doesn’t show the least bit of surprise at her question!!

See the video by clicking here!

“All of this for a damned flag?”

YES!!! ALL OF THIS FOR A FLAG!!!

This woman is beneath contempt and in NO WAY worthy of the title she currently holds!!

“All of this for a damned flag?”

Michelle Obama has NO IDEA what that “DAMNED FLAG” is or what it stands for…NOT A CLUE!!!

That flag…the stars and stripes to her must be nothing more than an old rag…just pieces of cloth sewn together and not worth the consideration of a dust cloth.

That flag IS the representation of the GREATEST NATION ON EARTH. That flag flies in honor of those who protect this nation with their lives. It stands as a symbol of freedom and justice in this world. It protects our liberty and our rights. Each star represents an individual state and each stripe one of the 13 original colonies.

That flag is our national emblem. That flag is our ambassador. That flag waves in the hearts of Patriots and is a beacon to those who seek freedom. It has been carried into battle, it has survived the greatest challenges, it has flown over victory and adorned the caskets of those who died for us all.

Our flag has flown in space. It’s on the moon. Our flag is on Mars. Our flag has flown beyond the confines of our solar system. Our flag is a symbol of achievement and exploration!!

“All of this for a damned flag?”

Did I say Michelle Obama wasn’t fit to be the First Lady? Allow me to correct myself. SHE’S NOT FIT TO BE AN AMERICAN!!!

With those words, Michelle Obama makes it clear, CRYSTAL clear, exactly how she feels about this country. She abhors it. She has no respect for it. She finds it disgusting.

“All of this for a damned flag?”

NO MICHELLE…It’s NOT just for the “DAMNED FLAG.”

What was happening before her that day was for the victims of 9-11. It was to respect those who died under the banner of this great nation. It represented all those first responders who gave their lives on 9-11 to save others. It represented the people who were lost at the Pentagon and it stood for those who, on Flight 93, became the first to fight back against those terrorists.

THAT FLAG FLIES OVER THE BUILDING AND THOSE WHO SERVE INSIDE THE BUILDING THAT THE HEROES OF FLIGHT 93 SAVED!!!

“All of this for a damned flag?”

In those 7 words, she proves just how vile she is.

Liberals who tried to make a stink over Allen West who a few months ago took an American flag on a diving excursion and accused him of desecration SHOULD be up in ARMS over this but, silently they sit.

Never again should Michelle Obama be allowed at an official event. NEVER AGAIN!!

If she can’t show respect for our flag, how can she possible respect everything, or ANYTHING our flag represents?

That flag represents America and it represents AMERICANS. That flag represents each and every one of us and if she doesn’t respect the flag she can’t possibly have any respect for the people it represents.

“All of this for a damned flag?”

Yes you waste of the air Patriots breathe, all of this for a flag. The flag deserves more – but this is how it is honored and through our actions towards the flag, how we honor those for whom it flies.

To Michelle Obama I will proudly stand and say…GET OUT! GET OUT OF MY HOUSE AND GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY. GO! GET OUT!! YOU ARE A DISGUSTING EXAMPLE OF AN AMERICAN AND YOU DON’T DESERVE ANY MORE RESPECT THAT WHAT YOU HAVE SHOWN TO OUR FLAG. GET OUT!!!

From this point on, until she is replaced in the white house by someone who does have respect for our nation, Michelle Obama needs to sit down and shut the hell up.

“All of this for a damned flag?”

I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all.

And long may it wave!

Friday, October 28, 2011

A Dossier on Cerberus’s Freedom Group - Deal Journal - WSJ

A Dossier on Cerberus’s Freedom Group - Deal Journal - WSJ

A Dossier on Cerberus’s Freedom Group

The WSJ reports tonight that Cerberus is preparing an initial public offering for Freedom Group, a little known company that it started in 2006 and has grown into a big player in the rifle industry.
The deal, of course, will prove to be a headline writer’s dream: (Cerberus Guns for IPO; Cerberus Aims to Take Freedom Group Public). It could also prove to be a profit machine for the private equity firm, as it cashes in on the growing market for guns and ammunition.
Here are some nuggets about Freedom Group:
Largest unit: Remington Arms Company. In April 2007, Cerberus bought the nearly 200 year-old rifle manufacturer for $118 million and assumed $252 million in debt. Remington sells guns and ammo for hunters, police and the military, including classic shotguns and state-of-the art sniper weapon systems. Remington was bought by the Dupont Corp. during the Great Depression and later by Clayton, Dubilier & Rice, a private equity firm, which sold the company to Cerberus.
Cerberus Fan: “One positive aspect to Cerberus’ involvement in the gun industry is that the huge political clout Cerberus commands as the “rescuer” of Chrysler Corp. (which Cerberus also acquired) should undermine efforts to ban AR-platform rifles,’’ wrote the Accurate Shooter.com in December 2007. “Cerberus is big enough to make waves in Washington. Money talks in politics and Cerberus has lots of it.”
Cerberus Critic: “Understandably, Cerberus is trying to brand their firearms companies under a new name: Freedom Group, Inc. I’m sure they’ve probably conducted a poll that finds gun owners are not the types who are thrilled with a private group taking $4 billion in tax dollars to bailout one of the worst investments: Chrysler. This would be the same firm that decided to take out full page ads in USA Today, The Wall Street Journal and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution to the tune of $400K+ thanking taxpayers for giving up their hard earned dough to continue supporting a dying company….. I’m saying it in the interest of full disclosure since I have a history of calling out PR campaigns for what they are,’’ wrote ‘Bitter’ on the blog “Bitchin’ in the Kitchen” in Feb. 2009
Cerberus’s Gun Guy: George Kollitides, a Cerberus managing director, is helping oversee Freedom Group. He has twice run unsuccessfully for an NRA board seat. His campaign platform says he’s a “true sporting sportsman” who has “lobbied for the Second Amendment politically, in the field and on the range.” In endorsing his 2009 candidacy, Guns & Ammo magazine said Kollitides “is a person who is engaged in the shooting sports industry on a daily basis and lives in our world of hunting and shooting.”
Lethal Weapon: Remington makes the R-15, a semi-automiatic rifle in the AR-15 family of guns. Remington markets the R-15 to the “modern predator aficionado.”
Another Freedom Group Holding: Advance Armament Corp. which makes silencers for hand guns and submachine guns and has a skull for a company logo.
=======================================================================================================================

SOMETHING YOU MAY NOT KNOW THAT IS HAPPENING

Subject: Who is buying companies manufacturing guns????????????

For the last several years a company called The Freedom Group has been
buying up gun and ammunition manufacturers.Some of the companies are
Bushmaster,Marlin,Remington,DPMS, Dakota Arms and H&R. Some people worry
that this Freedom Group is going to control most of the firearms companies in the United States. If you control the manufacturers you can decide to stop selling to civilians.What a perfect way to control guns.
Now if you do somedigging you will see that The Freedom Group is owned
by a company called Cerberus Capital Management.
Guess who controls Cerberus??? GEORGE SOROS !!!!!!!!! One of the most evil men on this planet who wants to restrict or ban all civilian guns.
Please pass this on to all your freedom loving friends. This needs to come out.Why have we not heard about this in the "mainstream" media? I would think this would be BIG news.

If you don't know who George Soros is you need to do some research. He backed Obama with millions of dollars and Obama is a puppet on a string controlled by Soros.
Send this to every gun owner in America.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

The Perfect Conservative | RedState

The Perfect Conservative | RedState

The Perfect Conservative


He was not born into a royal family, but He left a royal impression on the world.

For 30 years, He learned the ways of the world without becoming of the world. He then changed the world for the better.

He led without a mandate. He taught without a script. His common sense parables filled people with promise and compassion, His words forever inspiring.

He never condemned what others believed – just sin, evil and corruption.

He helped the poor without one government program. He healed the sick without a government health care system. He feed the hungry without food stamps. And everywhere He went, it turned into a rally, attracting large crowds, and giving them hope, encouragement and inspiration.

For three years He was unemployed, and never collected an unemployment check. Nevertheless, he completed all the work He needed to get done. He didn’t travel by private jet. He walked and sailed, and sometimes traveled on a donkey.

But they made Him walk when He was arrested and taken to jail, and no, He was not read any Miranda Rights. He was arrested for just being who He was and doing nothing wrong. And when they tried Him in court, He never said a mumbling word.

He didn’t have a lawyer, nor did He care about who judged Him.
His judge was a higher power.

The liberal court found Him guilty of false offences and sentenced Him to death, all because He changed the hearts and minds of men with an army of 12.

His death reset the clock of time.

Never before and not since has there ever been such a perfect conservative.

For over 2,000 years the world has tried hard to erase the memory of the perfect conservative, and His principles of compassion, caring and common sense.

His followers are now millions and millions the world over, as those who resent Him have intensified their attacks on who He was and what His followers believe.

The attacks are disguised as political correctness, or a misunderstanding of the First Amendment to the Constitution. Separation of Church and State does not mean Separation of Church from State. The State cannot impose Church on the people, but the people can display and say as much Church in the public square as they desire.

Our Founders recognized that distinction, which helped to inspire the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the founding of this nation – The United States of America!

We must be the Defending Fathers and the defenders of the perfect conservative.

That’s why I proudly wish one and all a very Merry Christmas!

Herman Cain Says Jesus Christ Is the Perfect Conservative | TheBlaze.com

Herman Cain Says Jesus Christ Is the Perfect Conservative | TheBlaze.com

Herman Cain Says Jesus Was ‘a Perfect Conservative’ Who Was Condemned By a ‘Liberal Court’


Last December, GOP presidential contender Herman Cain penned an interesting article about Jesus Christ that has been resurrected (no pun intended) and is getting some attention in the blogosphere. Published just five days before Christmas, the piece claims that Jesus was “a perfect conservative” and that “he…changed the world for the better.”

In his article, Cain goes on to explain, though, the reasons why he believes that to be true. He writes:

He helped the poor without one government program. He healed the sick without a government health care system. He [fed] the hungry without food stamps. And everywhere He went, it turned into a rally, attracting large crowds, and giving them hope, encouragement and inspiration.

For three years He was unemployed, and never collected an unemployment check. Nevertheless, he completed all the work He needed to get done. He didn’t travel by private jet. He walked and sailed, and sometimes traveled on a donkey.

These certainly are some intriguing comparisons. During Jesus’ life, government programs weren’t what they are today. And while Jesus was unemployed, there were many along the way who likely offered their hospitality to him and his disciples. Still, the facts behind these notions, from a Christian perspective, are accurate.

Cain also covers the fact that Jesus wasn’t born to a royal family, although he left a “royal impression on the world.” Additionally, he says that Christ learned all of the world’s ways without becoming of the world.” In addressing condemnation, the successful businessman writes that Jesus never attacked what others believed in. Instead, he focused upon sin, evil and corruption.

In discussing Jesus’ death, Cain writes that he was arrested and taken to jail without being read his Miranda Rights. The “liberal court,” Cain says, found Jesus guilty of false offenses and then sentenced him to death. Interestingly, he then delves into the world‘s attempts to erase Jesus’ impact since his death:

For over 2,000 years the world has tried hard to erase the memory of the perfect conservative, and His principles of compassion, caring and common sense. [...]

The attacks are disguised as political correctness, or a misunderstanding of the First Amendment to the Constitution. Separation of Church and State does not mean Separation of Church from State. The State cannot impose Church on the people, but the people can display and say as much Church in the public square as they desire.

Obviously these statements — especially those that assert that Jesus was a conservative — serve as a source of frustration to those on the religious left who would argue the contrary.

In responding to these claims, the leftist Faith in Public Life (FPL) wrote that some of Cain’s examples presented in the article are “self-evidently silly.” In addressing the fact that Cain said Jesus had principles of common sense, FPL writes:

Now Herman Cain is a minister, and I only had eighteen years of religious education, but I‘m pretty sure Jesus’s principles were anything but common sense. In fact, in my recollection, they were the complete opposite. The story of the Gospel is Jesus openly challenging the prevailing norms, social structures, and power dynamics of his day and turning them on their heads with a radical message of humility, non-violence, selflessness and faith in the seemingly impossible.

Speaking to another point, ThinkProgress can’t fathom why Cain called the court that sentenced Jesus to death “liberal.” TP’s Zaid Jilani writes:

Cain does not explain why he finds the Roman court that sentenced and executed Jesus to be “liberal.” But his claim is baffling for all kinds of reasons, only one of which is the fact that liberals tend to be ideologically opposed to capital punishment while conservatives tend to favor it.

Regardless of negative reaction stemming from it, the column sheds further light on Cain’s views on Christianity and freedom of religion in America. On Tuesday, we brought you a piece delving deeply into his faith background. Cain’s church, Antioch Baptist Church North, is widely regarded as liberal — a fact that is surprising when considering Cain’s staunch conservatism.

“You know, I don’t wear my Christian faith, which has been my faith since I was 10 years old, on my forehead,” Cain said in a recent interview with the Associated Press. ”But people can see it on my website and when they read my credentials they can see I’m a staunch Christian conservative, and they are saying ‘wait a minute.”’

His faith, it seems, is just making its way into the forefront of the media and political scenes this week.

National Popular Vote Plan to Replace the Electoral College

National Popular Vote Plan to Replace the Electoral College

Destroying the Electoral College: The Anti-Federalist National Popular Vote Scheme

By Hans von Spakovsky
October 27, 2011

Paul Ryan’s ‘Politics of Division’ Speech - By Andrew Stiles - The Corner - National Review Online

Paul Ryan’s ‘Politics of Division’ Speech - By Andrew Stiles - The Corner - National Review Online

Paul Ryan’s ‘Politics of Division’ Speech

“Saving the American Idea: Rejecting Fear, Envy and the Politics of Division”

By Paul Ryan
October 26, 2011 — The Heritage Foundation
Remarks as Prepared for Delivery

Thank you so much, Ed, for that kind introduction.

We’re here today to explore the American Idea, and I can’t think of a better venue for this topic. The mission of the Heritage Foundation is to promote the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

These are the principles that define the American Idea. And this mission has never been timelier, because these principles are very much under threat from policies here in Washington.

The American Idea belongs to all of us – inherited from our nation’s Founders, preserved by the countless sacrifices of our veterans, and advanced by visionary leaders, past and present.

What makes America exceptional — what gives life to the American Idea — is our dedication to the self-evident truth that we are all created equal, giving us equal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And that means opportunity.

The perfection of our union, especially our commitment to equality of opportunity, has been a story of constant striving to live up to our Founding principles. This is what Abraham Lincoln meant when he said, “In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free – honorable alike in what we give, and what we preserve.”

This commitment to liberty and equality is something we take for granted during times of prosperity, when a growing economic pie gives all Americans the opportunity to pursue their dreams, to provide brighter futures for their kids, or maybe just to meet their families’ needs.

These are tough times. We know all too well that too many Americans are hurting today. And these hardships have reopened our longstanding national debate over what it means to be an exceptional nation. Have those periods of unprecedented prosperity in America’s past been the product of our Founding principles?

Or, as some would argue, have we made it this far only in spite of our outdated values? Are we still an exceptional nation? Should we even seek to be unique? Or should we become more like the rest of the world — more bureaucratic, less hopeful, and less free?

The American Idea is not tried in times of prosperity. Instead, it is tested when times are tough: when the pie is shrinking, when businesses are closing, and when workers are losing their jobs.

Those are the times when America’s commitment to equality of opportunity is called into question. That’s when the temptation to exploit fear and envy returns – when many in Washington use the politics of division to evade responsibility for their failures and to advance their own narrow political interests.

To my great disappointment, it appears that the politics of division are making a big comeback. Many Americans share my disappointment – especially those who were filled with great hope a few years ago, when then-Senator Obama announced his candidacy in Springfield, Illinois.

Do you remember what he said? He said that what’s stopped us from meeting our nation’s greatest challenges is, quote, “the failure of leadership, the smallness of our politics – the ease with which we’re distracted by the petty and trivial, our chronic avoidance of tough decisions, our preference for scoring cheap political points instead of rolling up our sleeves and building a working consensus to tackle big problems.”

I couldn’t agree more.

And yet, nearly three years into his presidency, look at where we are now:

Petty and trivial? Just last week, the President told a crowd in North Carolina that Republicans are in favor of, quote, “dirtier air, dirtier water, and less people with health insurance.” Can you think of a pettier way to describe sincere disagreements between the two parties on regulation and health care? Chronic avoidance of tough decisions? The President still has not put forward a credible plan to tackle the threat of ever-rising spending and debt, and it’s been over 900 days since his party passed a budget in the Senate. A preference for scoring cheap political points instead of consensus-building? This is the same President who is currently campaigning against a do-nothing Congress, when in fact, the House of Representatives has passed over a dozen bills to help get the economy moving and deal with the debt, only to see the President’s party kill those bills in the do-nothing Senate.

Look, we put our cards on the table. Earlier this year, the House of Representatives advanced a far-reaching plan filled with common-sense reforms aimed at putting the budget on the path to balance and the economy on the path to prosperity.

But instead of working together where we agree, the President has opted for divisive rhetoric and the broken politics of the past. He is going from town to town, impugning the motives of Republicans, setting up straw men and scapegoats, and engaging in intellectually lazy arguments, as he tries to build support for punitive tax hikes on job creators.

The tax increases proposed by Senate Democrats and endorsed by the President – when combined with the new taxes in the health-care law, and the President’s other tax preferences – would push the top federal tax rate to roughly 50 percent in just 14 months, while doing nothing to promote job creation.

This tax increase on so-called “millionaires and billionaires” would actually constitute a huge tax hike on the nation’s most successful small businesses. According to the Tax Foundation, the surtax would hit roughly 35 percent of small-business income.

As P.J. O’Rourke put it, “The good news is that, according to the Obama administration, the rich will pay for everything. The bad news is that, according to the Obama administration, you’re rich.”

Actually, the news is even worse. As a practical matter, when you try to chase ever-higher spending with ever-higher tax increases, you eventually run into a brick wall of math.

The President has been talking a lot about math lately. He’s been saying that, quote, “If we’re not willing to ask those who’ve done extraordinarily well to help America close the deficit… the math says… we’ve got to put the entire burden on the middle class and the poor.”

This is really a stunning assertion from the President. When you look at the actual math, you quickly realize that the way out of this mess is to combine economic growth with reasonable, responsible spending restraint. Yet neither of these things factors into the President’s zero-sum logic.

According to the President’s logic, we should give up on trying to reform our tax code to grow the economy and get more revenue that way. Instead, these goals are taking a backseat to the President’s misguided understanding of fairness.

Remember that 2008 debate, when ABC’s Charlie Gibson pointed out that raising the capital gains tax rate actually tends to drive revenues down?

Obama replied: “Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.” That’s the kind of logic we are unfortunately seeing today.

Also according to the President’s logic, spending restraint is incompatible with a strong, well-functioning safety net. The belief that recipients of government aid are better off the more we spend on them is remarkably persistent. No matter how many times this central tenet of liberalism gets debunked, like Brett Favre, it just keeps coming back.

The President has wrongly framed Republican efforts to get government spending under control as hard-hearted attacks on the poor. In reality, spending on programs for seniors and for lower-income families continues to grow every year under the House-passed budget – it just grows at a sustainable rate. We direct tax dollars where they’re needed most, and stop spending money we don’t have on boondoggles we don’t need.

The President’s political math is a muddled mix of false accusations and false choices. The actual math is apolitical, and it’s clear: By the time my kids are my age, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projects that the size of government will be double what it is today.

Government health care programs alone will have grown to consume 45 percent of federal spending. The primary driver of this increase is runaway inflation in health care costs, which are rising at 2 to 3 times the rate of GDP.

It’s impossible to keep funding health care expenditures at this rate. Even President Obama has said, quote, “If you look at the numbers, Medicare in particular will run out of money, and we will not be able to sustain that program no matter how much taxes go up.”

So the real debate is about how best to control these unsustainable costs. And if I could sum up that disagreement in a couple of sentences, I would say this: Our plan is to empower patients. Their plan is to empower bureaucrats.

The Republican plan gives individuals the power to put market pressure on providers and make them compete.

The President’s plan is to give 15 unelected bureaucrats in Washington the power to cut Medicare in ways that, according to Medicare’s own chief actuary, would simply drive providers out of business. This would result in harsh disruptions and denied care for seniors.

Pain like this simply can’t be sustained. So when it comes to out-of-control spending on entitlements, the President’s math simply doesn’t add up.

And his math is no better on the tax side. Let’s say we took all the income from those the President calls “rich” – those making $250,000 or more. A 100 percent tax rate on their total annual income would only fund the government for six months. Just six months!

What about some of the other tax hikes the President likes to talk about? Under the President’s policies, deficits are set to rise by a whopping $9.5 trillion over the next 10 years.

Letting the top two tax rates expire would equal roughly 8 percent of that planned deficit increase. Eliminating tax subsidies for oil and gas companies would only equal 0.5 percent of the President’s planned deficits. And what about corporate jet owners? That provision would reduce those deficits by just 0.03 percent.

Look, I’m all for closing tax loopholes – but you can’t close our nation’s deficits by chasing ever-higher spending with politically motivated tax hikes here and there. Instead, tax reform must broaden the base and lower rates.

This policy approach, which has attracted strong bipartisan support, would bolster our fiscal health by increasing competitiveness and encouraging more investment and job creation.

Lately, the President has been fond of taking Ronald Reagan quotes out of context, in an effort to persuade Republicans that Reagan would have agreed with the idea of using fear and envy to push a partisan agenda of permanently higher taxes.

Every time he does this, I can picture Reagan shaking his head: “There you go again.”

Obama quotes Reagan as saying that bus drivers shouldn’t pay a higher effective tax rate than millionaires. Well, that’s a no-brainer. Nobody disagrees with that.

But it is simply disingenuous to use this quote as evidence that Reagan would have supported the tax increases that Obama wants Congress to pass.

Reagan was attempting to build support for the landmark 1986 tax reform, a revenue-neutral law that reformed the tax code by lowering tax rates while broadening the tax base.

Reagan’s point – which President Obama clearly missed – was not that we should raise tax rates to chase out-of-control spending in Washington.

His point was that we should get rid of loopholes that are exploited by the few, so that we could lower everyone’s tax rates and help the economy grow.

The House-passed budget includes this kind of tax reform, which many agree would provide an immediate boost to the economy. Our budget proposed getting rid of scores of loopholes, lowering the hurdles for job creation and economic growth, and making our tax code fair, simple, and competitive.

In his address to Congress last month, the President said he agrees in principle with this kind of reform, especially when it comes to the uncompetitive way we tax our businesses.

This made Republicans think, well, we might have an opportunity here for the kind of genuine consensus-building that the President talked about as a candidate.

Yet he chose not to pursue this kind of tax reform. Instead, he sent us a partisan bill filled with the same stimulus proposals that failed two years ago, only this time he also asked for permanent tax hikes to go with them.

He’s also failed to work with us on another area where one would think we could find common ground: ending the lavish subsidies and government benefits that go to those who are already successful.

The House-passed budget was full of proposals to get rid of corporate welfare and crony capitalism.

Why are tax dollars being wasted on bankrupt, politically-connected solar energy firms? Why is Washington wasting your money on entrenched agribusiness? Why have we extended an endless supply of taxpayer credit to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, instead of demanding that their government guarantee be wound down and their taxpayer subsidies ended?

Rather than raising taxes and making it more difficult for Americans to become wealthy, let’s lower the amount of government spending the wealthy now receive.

The President likes to use Warren Buffett and his secretary as an example of why we should raise taxes on the rich.

Well, Warren Buffett gets the same health and retirement benefits from the government as his secretary.

But our proposals to modestly income-adjust Social Security and Medicare benefits have been met with sheer demagoguery by leading members of the President’s party.

The politics of division have always struck me as odd: the eagerness to take more, combined with the refusal to subsidize less.

Instead of working with us on these common-sense reforms, the President is barnstorming swing states, pushing a divisive message that pits one group of Americans against another on the basis of class.

This just won’t work in America. Class is not a fixed designation in this country. We are an upwardly mobile society with a lot of movement between income groups.

The Treasury Department’s latest study on income mobility in America found that during the ten-year period starting in 1996, roughly half of the taxpayers who started in the bottom 20 percent had moved up to a higher income group by 2005.

Meanwhile, half of all taxpayers ended up in a different income group at the end of ten years. Many moved up, and some moved down, but economic growth resulted in rising incomes for most people over this period.

Another recent survey of over 500 successful entrepreneurs found that 93 percent came from middle-class or lower-class backgrounds. The majority were the first in their families to launch a business.

Their stories are the American story: Millions of immigrants fled from the closed societies of the Old World to the security of equal rights in this land of upward mobility.

Telling Americans they are stuck in their current station in life, that they are victims of circumstances beyond their control, and that government’s role is to help them cope with it – well, that’s not who we are. That’s not what we do.

Our Founding Fathers rejected this mentality. In societies marked by class structure, an elite class made up of rich and powerful patrons supplies the needs of a large client underclass that toils, but cannot own. The unfairness of closed societies is the kindling for class warfare, where the interests of “capital” and “labor” are perpetually in conflict. What one class wins, the other loses.

The legacy of this tradition can still be seen in Europe today: Top-heavy welfare states have replaced the traditional aristocracies, and masses of the long-term unemployed are locked into the new lower class.

The United States was destined to break out of this bleak history. Our future would not be staked on traditional class structures, but on civic solidarity. Gone would be the struggle of class against class.

Instead, Americans would work, compete, and co-operate in an open market, climb the ladder of opportunity, and keep the fruits of their efforts.

Self-government and the rule of law would secure our equal, God-given rights. Our political and economic systems – rooted in freedom and responsibility – would reward, and thus cultivate, traditional virtues.

Given that the President’s policies have moved us closer to the European model, I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised that his class-based rhetoric has followed suit.

We shouldn’t be surprised… but we have every right to be disappointed. Instead of appealing to the hope and optimism that were hallmarks of his first campaign, he has launched his second campaign by preying on the emotions of fear, envy, and resentment.

This has the potential to be just as damaging as his misguided policies. Sowing social unrest and class resentment makes America weaker, not stronger. Pitting one group against another only distracts us from the true sources of inequity in this country – corporate welfare that enriches the powerful, and empty promises that betray the powerless.

Ironically, equality of outcome is a form of inequality – one that is based on political influence and bureaucratic favoritism.

That’s the real class warfare that threatens us: A class of bureaucrats and connected crony capitalists trying to rise above the rest of us, call the shots, rig the rules, and preserve their place atop society. And their gains will come at the expense of working Americans, entrepreneurs, and that small businesswoman who has the gall to take on the corporate chieftain.

It’s disappointing that this President’s actions have exacerbated this form of class warfare in so many ways:

While the EPA is busy punishing commercially competitive sources of energy, a class of bureaucrats at the Department of Energy has been acting like the world’s worst venture capital fund, spending recklessly on politically favored alternatives. While the unemployment rate remains stuck above 9 percent, a class of bureaucrats at the National Labor Relations Board is threatening hundreds of jobs by suing an American employer for politically motivated reasons. And while millions of Americans are left wondering whether their employers will drop their health insurance because of the new health care law, a class of bureaucrats at HHS has handed out over 1,400 waivers to those firms and unions with the political connections to lobby for them.

These actions starkly highlight the difference between the two parties that lies at the heart of the matter: Whether we are a nation that still believes in equality of opportunity, or whether we are moving away from that, and towards an insistence on equality of outcome.

If you believe in the former, you follow the American Idea that justice is done when we level the playing field at the starting line, and rewards are proportionate to merit and effort.

If you believe in the latter kind of equality, you think most differences in wealth and rewards are matters of luck or exploitation, and that few really deserve what they have.

That’s the moral basis of class warfare – a false morality that confuses fairness with redistribution, and promotes class envy instead of social mobility.

I’d like to introduce President Obama to the Ronald Reagan he isn’t so eager to quote – the man who said, “Since when do we in America believe that our society is made up of two diametrically opposed classes – one rich, one poor – both in a permanent state of conflict and neither able to get ahead except at the expense of the other? Since when do we in America accept this alien and discredited theory of social and class warfare? Since when do we in America endorse the politics of envy and division?”

President Reagan was absolutely right. Instead of policies that make it harder for Americans to rise, let’s lower the hurdles to upward mobility.

That’s what the American Idea is all about. You know, in the midst of all the joys and sorrows of our everyday lives, I think we sometimes forget why America was considered such an exceptional nation at its Founding, and why it remains so.

To me, the results of the Founders’ exceptional vision can be summed up in a single sentence: Throughout human history, the American Idea has done more to help the poor than any other economic system ever designed.

Americans, guided by our ideals, have sacrificed everything to combat tyranny and brutal dictators; we’ve expanded opportunity, opened markets, and inspired others to resist oppression; we’ve exported innovation and imagination; and we’ve welcomed immigrants seeking a fresh start.

Here in America – unlike most places on earth – all citizens have the right to rise.