Barack Obama

Obama’s ludicrous, anti-consumer cap and trade regulations aren’t actually about the environment

It’s been overshadowed by the continuing coverage of the Bergdahl-Taliban five swap, but reports began to surface this week that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), at the direction of the White House, has begun pushing new carbon rules on existing coal plants that aim to reduce their emissions by 30% from 2005 levels.

Call it cap and trade by regulatory fiat:

Analysts widely expect the final rule to give states the option of joining or creating cap-and-trade programs, which allow companies to trade credits for emissions. The draft released on Monday does not discuss that possibility.

“There are no commercially viable [carbon capture and storage methods]. That’s why we expect cap-and-trade,” said Michael Ferguson, an associate director at S&P who covers merchant energy producers.

At risk of drawing the ire of the climate change true believers, there was a reason the climate change cap and trade legislation failed a few years back, and it wasn’t because evil, bible-thumping conservatives are convinced mankind has no effect on the environment (for the record, we do. But our carbon emissions, for example, are pretty negligible compared to things like decaying organic matter and volcanoes).

No, it was defeated in the Senate because many Democrats that voted against hailed from states that relied on jobs related to the coal industry. And if there’s one thing that moves a politician, it’s the voice of a united constituency.

But not to be deterred, the Obama administration used the EPA and the Clean Air Act to declare carbon emissions a health hazard that must be regulated:

Obama’s economy: 63 percent of Millennials say the American Dream is impossible to achieve

For many immigrants, the American Dream has always meant living on your means and searching for your own happiness in an unrestrained fashion, like Americans always have been able to do.

While many often agree with that definition, they have started letting skepticism and pessimism bias get the best of them.

Can you blame them?

More than 480,000 people under the age of 25 left the workforce in April while Democrats celebrate the drop in the country’s unemployment rates. About 40 percent of college graduates are unable to find work and at least 29 percent of Millennials choose to stay home and live with their parents.

According to a poll carried out by CNN and ORC International, not even American exceptionalism is engaging citizens lately.

The results show that Americans are having a hard time agreeing that the American Dream is a possibility, whether they agree with the definition provided in this article or not.

A shocking 63 percent of Millennials, young adults between the ages of 18 and 34, say that the American Dream has become impossible to achieve.

Some experts believe that the pessimism is the result of the harsh financial reality of many low- and middle-income Americans. Also, according to the poll, nearly two-thirds of Americans believe that the next generation will not grow up to be better off than their parents.

The grim outlook could simply mean that this generation is more realistic about their country’s economic reality, but it could also be a reflection of their ultimate disappointment in this administration.

President Obama made it to the White House with the help of Millennials who were simply tired of having their lives being held hostage by big government policies, but Obama is managing to disappoint everyone.

Democrats only care about dying veterans when their jobs are in danger

Eric Shinseki

**After this story was written news broke that Eric Shinseki officially resigned today as Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and that wait times at VA facilities may be related to employee bonuses. No word yet as to what an official investigation into the matter may look like, but Congress has called for an inquiry.

In yet another entry in the annals of weird and conflicting policy ideas from the Democrat side of the aisle, Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Eric Shinseki is taking a beating from left-leaning politicians looking to hang onto their seats on the Hill in the wake of the abhorrent stories of veterans dying and committing suicide while awaiting treatment in VA facilities around the country.

There really is no excuse for what’s been going on because we’re not talking about annoying bureaucratic realities where you don’t get a tax return in a timely fashion. People who served their country were treated as secondary to a system that clearly couldn’t handle the demand.

But hiding that inefficiency came first in the form of secret waiting lists, while treatment of veterans took a back seat. And Shinseki is no doubt responsible for his agency’s negligence. But the calls for his head, as CNN points out, may be more about political savvy than concern for ailing vets.

Thos calls began after a damning VA Inspector General’s report indicating that “1,700 military veterans waiting to see a doctor were never scheduled for an appointment and were never placed on a wait list at the Veterans Affairs medical center in Phoenix.” But, also as CNN points out perhaps a bit more cynically, those on the Hill lighting torches have something in common:

Barack Obama is the middle class’ biggest enemy

Some of the best intentioned among us may think regulations indeed serve a greater purpose, after all, certain companies are only in it to make as much as they can with as little effort as they can! Somebody should certainly make sure they are working under strict rules so this type of predatory behavior can be avoided and consumers can be protected.

Well, that’s everything regulations promise to do and the exact opposite of what they actually achieve.

A recent study carried out by American Action Forum demonstrated that the increase in consumer prices under the Obama administration is directly linked to the surge in the number of regulations it has adopted.

The study shows that since 2009, this administration has imposed at least 36 new regulations that range from new fuel-efficiency standards, which resulted in an increase in the price of automobiles by $91, to the cost of mortgages, which has risen to an abysmal $362 annually.

ObamaCare, this administration failure disguised as health care law, has also increased the prices of health care insurance.

If his lips are moving, he’s probably lying: Obama goes back on campaign promise to remove all U.S. troops from Afghanistan

Afghanistan Troop Withdrawal

“We are bringing our troops home from Afghanistan. And I’ve set a timetable. We will have them all out of there by 2014.”

President Obama spoke these words at a campaign stop in Boulder, Colorado, just a few weeks before the 2012 Presidential election. Taking a swipe at Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who didn’t have a timetable for troop withdrawal, Obama warned, “That’s what’s at stake in this election.”

Nearly two years later, President Obama has decided to keep nearly 10,000 American soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan past the initial 2014 deadline, the Associated Press reports:

The two-year plan is contingent on the Afghan government signing a bilateral security agreement with the U.S. While current Afghan President Hamid Karzai has declined to sign the agreement, U.S. officials are confident that either of the candidates seeking to replace him would give his approval.

The plan calls for the U.S. military to draw down from its current force of 32,000 to 9,800 by the start of next year. Those troops would be dispatched throughout Afghanistan and focus on counterterrorism missions and training Afghan security forces. They would not be engaged in combat missions.

Over the course of next year, the number of troops would be cut in half and consolidated in the capital of Kabul and at Bagram Air Field, the main U.S. base in Afghanistan. Those remaining forces would largely be withdrawn by the end of 2016, with fewer than 1,000 remaining behind to staff a security office in Kabul.

TN Appellate Court Judge Bennett, Backed by Supreme Court Chief Justice Wade, Used Other States’ Caselaw to Justify Opinions

The month of May has turned rocky for the Chief Justice of the Volunteer State’s highest court, after the Board of Judicial Conduct finally released a letter, in a Friday news dump before Memorial Day Weekend, warning him against making political endorsements.


Tennessee Court of Appeals Judge Andy Bennett attended Vanderbilt University in Nashville for undergraduate and law school. / gettyimages.com

Tennessee’s serpentine and secretive attorney oversight and disciplinary body, the Board of Professional Responsibility, is presently investigating Nashville-area lawyers Connie Reguli and Nathan Moore. Connie Reguli previously sued the Board under the Tennessee Public Records Act for copies of documents containing information about her, but Court of Appeals Judge Richard Dinkins cleverly snuck a unilateral and unconstitutional exemption to the Public Records Act for the Board in his opinion in Connie Reguli v. James Vick, Lela Hollobaugh, and Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility, which United Liberty covered recently:

Stop Obama’s green energy cronyism: Kill the Export-Import Bank

Barack Obama and Solyndra

One of the Export-Import Bank’s main goal, as it appears stated on its “About Us” page, is to “provide[s] export financing products that fill gaps in trade financing,” and effectively support U.S. companies that export “primarily to developing markets worldwide.”

The noble mission of filling in the gaps in trade financing, working as if the institution exists to fill in for an all-seeing eye and making sure that the developing world is being coerced into purchasing American products, doesn’t seem all that noble once you explore what the agency has accomplished in the last 80 years.

While the export credit firm offers financial incentives that promote a few amongst the greats of American corporations so that poor countries can afford U.S. products, one of the agency’s least publicized but extremely essential functions is to pick winners and offer them a striving market that is ready for their subsidized – therefore artificially affordable at the final consumer level – goods.

According to a research published by the Mercatus Center, the Export-Import bank’s most pressing problem is its procedural favoring of politically-connected corporations, which ultimately undermines competition, offering a disloyal and unjust environment to other companies that are not even allowed to compete with the government’s protégé abroad.

One of the industries that have been recently picking up steam with the help of the Ex-Im Bank is the green energy and sustainability sector.

Stand with Rand for the Bill of Rights: Defend our liberties or watch them slip away

Rand Paul
(Photo credit: CSPAN)

The nomination of David Barron to the First Circuit Court of Appeals is not about transparency, but rather the right to due process guaranteed in the Constitution, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) explained this morning.

“I rise today to oppose the nomination of anyone who would argue that the President has the power to kill American citizens not involved in combat,” said Paul in a 31-minute speech on the Senate floor. “I rise today to say that there is no legal precedent for killing American citizens not directly involved in combat and that any nominee who rubber stamps and grants such power to a President is not worthy of being placed one step away from the Supreme Court.”

The Obama administration has indicated that it will make public the controversial memo written by Barron that gave President Barack Obama the legal justification for the assassination of American citizens accused of terrorist ties, including those who are not involved in combat. Paul, however, explained that the issue the Senate must face isn’t transparency, but the substance of the memo.

“It isn’t about seeing the Barron memos. It is about what they say. I believe the Barron memos disrespect the Bill of Rights,” Paul explained. “The nomination before us, though, is about killing American citizens NOT engaged in combat,” The nominee, David Barron, has written a defense of drone executions of American citizens NOT directly involved in combat.”

That’s it?: Sequester spending cuts claimed only one federal job

The Budget Control Act of 2011 was one of the few decent pieces of legislation passed by Congress. The bipartisan measure did increase the statutory borrowing limit for the federal government, but it at least mandate $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts to the project rate of spending growth from 2012 to 2021.

That sounds like a lot of money, but the cuts were a fraction of total spending in the 10-year budget window. At best, the sequester was look at as a “good start,” not some sort of cureall for the nation’s fiscal woes.

President Barack Obama promised to veto any attempt to stop the cuts enacted through the Budget Control Act. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) hailed the sequester, calling the cuts “important for the fact that our economy needs to get going.”

Not long after the sequester was passed and signed into law, however, both White House and Republican leaders began complaining about the automatic cuts. President Obama reversed course and complained about the “meat-cleaver approach” to the budget deficit, claiming that the cuts “are not smart,” “not fair,” and “will add hundreds of thousands of Americans to the unemployment rolls.”

Obama’s inconsistency, incoherence has created a foreign policy mess for America

Cognitive dissonance is defined as the discomfort one feels when holding contradictory beliefs, thoughts, ideas, or values simultaneously. It’s based on the idea that it is inherently human to want consistency — it makes us feel secure and, frankly, sane.

What, then, to do with political policy decisions that should induce these feelings of discomfort given their glaring inconsistencies but that apparently produce no such feelings since no one in the press or the White House is commenting on the confusion? For example, how can the nation under President Obama be simultaneously weakening the military and drawing back on foreign policy, yet going ahead with what the Free Beacon calls “imperialist meddling in Nigeria”:

As the pressure mounts from America’s media elites and hashtag aficionados, what will he do when strongly worded condemnations fail to persuade Boko Haram’s elected leader Abubakar Shekau to release the hundreds of girls his group has (allegedly) enlisted in its quest for religious freedom?

 


The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.