Wednesday, November 28, 2012

RANDOM SHOTS - Sandra Fluke, Obama and the Fiscal Cliff, ObamaCare, and More!

Sandra Fluke's Extreme Promiscuity Pays Off Big Time

First she testified in front of Congress to say that she spent over $3000 on birth control during her three years at Georgetown Law. Then she was picked by the Democrat Party as their poster-girl of new-age promiscuity and actually gave the doll-eyed Fluke the microphone to speak at their Convention.

She has appeared on magazine covers and on talk shows like The View and so on. Well now there is more! And yes, this is too funny!

All of the money that she spent on birth control, and no there is no word if she needed to pay for multiple abortions, is all paying off big time.

Yes, this is really a big deal when we consider that her singular accomplishment in life is needing government assistance to have sex because she spent $1000 a year for condoms and such while in Law School.

Imagine what she has done to become famous? Imagine her road to stardom and fame? Heck, her whole persona is built around the fact that she sleep around so much that she needs government assistance to do what she does in the future.

Now Sandra Fluke, who by the way is now being billed as a "feminist activist" instead of "sex activist," is now being considered for Time Magazine's Person of the Year.

No kidding, it's true. Fluke, pronounced "Fluck" at Georgetown University, is one of 40 contenders who have been nominated to grace the cover of Time as its Person of the Year.

Fluke makes a list of luminaries that includes President Obama, Mitt Romney, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former President Bill Clinton, Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and many others who haven't done anything noteworthy.

Fluke's nomination might come as a surprise to some, but not to the guys at Georgetown Law. It is rumored that she has been the person of the year at Georgetown Law for at least 4 years.

I received an e-mail telling me that Sandra Fluck is very "popular" there. That explains a lot, especially when you consider that the not very attractive and somewhat vacant looking Fluck spent $1000 a year on condoms and other birth control while attending Law School.

To answer some of your e-mail, I can honestly say that don't know how she found time for classes. Yes, I agree with those writing me, $1000 a year on condoms is an astronomical amount. And no, I don't know how many Prostitutes are attending school at Georgetown Law.

I always assumed that sexually active co-eds weren't as sexually active as someone who would need to have the government subsidize what they do. It appears from what Fluke said that there might be others like her who are extremely promiscuous who need  government subsidies to have sex.

The winner of Times Person of the Year will be announced on December 14th.

Since spending $1000 a year on condoms is a great deal of money, I just can't help but wonder if there are hundreds of guys attending Georgetown Law who will want bragging rights to say they know Time's Person of the Year.

Yep, I can only do the math and wonder!

What Will More Taxes On The Rich Get Us?

President Obama’s plan to end the Bush-era tax cuts for families earning more than $250,000 a year would finance the U.S. government for only eight days, says Georgia Republican Rep. Tom Price.

"The president's plan to increase taxes on the upper 2 percent (of American earners) covers the spending by this federal government not for eight years, not for eight months – not for eight weeks, but for eight days," Rep Price, the chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee, told MSNBC.

The Obama tax-rate plan would generate only $82.3 billion a year, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, Price said.

The Bush-era tax rates expire and massive spending cuts automatically kick under sequestration on January 2nd.

"Eight days only," Rep Price told MSNBC. "It's not a real solution. I’m puzzled by an administration that seems to be more interested in raising tax rates than in gaining economic vitality."
A more balanced approach – which includes cuts to federal spending on such programs as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security – is what Obama should be focused on, he said.

The tax increases and spending cuts would total about $500 billion next year, Fox News reports.

In addition, about $1.2 trillion will be cut from the federal budget over 10 years should both sides fail to reach a deal to keep the nation from going over the so-called fiscal cliff.

ObamaCare Should Be On The Table As Well!

Democrats have gone back on their word and have already started cutting Medicare. They did earlier this year with ObamaCare's automatically started $716 Billion in cuts from Medicare.

Back in August, Obama declared that his proposed reforms "won’t touch your guaranteed Medicare benefits. Not by a single dime."

But facts are facts and this was a lie. Fact is that ObamaCare cuts $716 billion from Medicare over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and uses these "savings" from Medicare to fund other entitlement expansions mandated by ObamaCare.

Medicare becomes a cash cow for ObamaCare, and the Medicare "savings" from payment cuts are not put back into making Medicare solvent. Such massive payment cuts do impact Medicare benefits, as well as seniors’ access to those benefits.

To me, it seems apparent that America is trying to fund ObamaCare by taking from Medicare and seniors.

Why not make cuts to ObamaCare before it's fully implemented in 2014? Why not fix Medicare and Social Security and leave it's essential services alone? Why not shift the focus on making cuts to ObamaCare before it gets off the ground?

Initially, the government said they needed to provide health care coverage for a 5% of the American public. So why create this huge dictatorial program that is going to effect 100% of the public and takes from programs that need the funds?

Why can't someone in Congress come up with Amendments to the ObamaCare Law stopping it from sucking so much money out of the system?

It seems to me that all of the problems that we are having with this so-called "fiscal cliff" stems from the government wanting to fund ObamaCare.

And I ask you this, if Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, Veteran Hospital funding, Military funding, and all the rest are said to be on the table to take a look at for cuts, then shouldn't ObamaCare be on the table as well? 

Black Friday Gun Sales Set Record for Second Year

Can you tell that people are still wiry of Obama and his so-called promises not to go after guns?

Americans know full well that Obama is going to treat his next four years as if he has a mandate to work his agenda. Obama may lie all he wants to, and that's fine because people are on to him.

Gun sales on Black Friday set a record for the second year, as firearm dealers seeking required background check requests shut down FBI calls centers twice.

The FBI said on Monday that it fielded 154,873 calls on Black Friday, up about 20 percent over last year’s previous one-day record of 129,166, USA Today reports.

The requests for background checks were so numerous that FBI call centers experienced two brief outages, one lasting 18 minutes and another 14 minutes, FBI spokesman Stephen Fischer said.

The FBI does not track actual gun sales, but Fischer told USA Today that the number of firearms sold on Friday was likely higher because multiple firearms could be included in one transaction by a single buyer.

Dealers said the continuing gun surge was affected by an increase in women buyers and concerns that lawmakers in President Obama’s second term might impose stricter gun laws, including a ban on assault weapons.

One reporter said that "Obama did not offer any such proposals during the campaign."

But that's a lie, fact is that Obama said that he would like to revive the so-called assault weapons ban in the townhall debate with Mitt Romney. The spin from the left never stops so don't believe when they say something like "Obama did not offer any proposals during the campaign" because he did so.

“With the recent election, some people are making buying decisions just in case something (a new law) happens,” Don Gallardo, manager of Shooter’s World in Phoenix, told USA Today.

Gallardo’s store posted a 10 percent increase in Black Friday sales, he said.

Buyers cited similar reasons right after Obama won his first term in 2008, Gallardo told USA Today.

At Guns Galore in Killeen, Tex., salesman Greg Ebert said his store has seen more purchases by women.

“Women have taken a strong interest in shooting sports,” Ebert told USA Today. “I think they see target shooting and other shooting sports as another form of relaxation.”

That might be well and good, but there is no denying the fact that fear of what Obama will do in the future remains the number one reason for the majority of gun sales in America.

Colorado County Considers Banning Panning For Gold 

Prospectors during widespread Gold Rushes in the 1800s are credited with settling land and developing commerce in several Western states, including Colorado.

However 200 years later, officials in one Colorado county say amateur prospectors panning for gold on county land have become such a nuisance they are considering banning the practice.

9News reports officials in Larimer county say they will vote vote on banning widespread prospecting next month after a significant increase in panning.

"There's certainly an uptick," Dan Rieves, visitor services manager for Larimer County, told 9News. "There's rangers that we've had out in the field who have been working here for 10, 15 years that have contacted more people out prospecting in the past 18 months than they have in their entire career."

The vote would lead "minerals" to be added to a list of things that already can't be removed from county land. Officials say the county is not anti-prospecting, and may consider setting up specific prospecting zones or times in the future if the ban is passed.

"We're really just trying to put that regulatory structure in place, and kind of slow things down," Rieves told 9News.

This all doesn't surprise me since that state did vote overwhelmingly for Obama. Check behind the curtain and you'll find out that liberal environmentalist are behind any effort to restrict what can be taken out of a river or steam.

No it certainly doesn't surprise me. After all, Colorado is turning into East California!

Story by Tom Correa

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for your comment.