IT'S VITAL

(Published in the Independent Coastal Observer)

Conservatives are split on what to make of Chief Justice Roberts’ unexpected decision that kept Obamacare on life support. A majority of the Court struck down the Individual Mandate, which should have been the end of Obamacare. But, it wasn’t. The Chief Justice recast the Individual Mandate as a tax. Never mind that the President and almost every every other Democrat proclaimed long and loud for two years that the Individual Mandate was not a tax. In spite of the Court’s ruling, Democrats are even now running around glassy-eyed and flush with victory saying, “Tax, what tax?”

Some conservatives see a silver lining in the limitations the Court placed on expanding the Commerce Clause, a tool that liberals have used for decades to gobble up individual freedoms like a giant PacMan. But this Decision defines its limits; that is, Americans can’t be forced to buy a product that they don’t want or don’t believe they need. Still other conservatives see the newly-minted “tax” as another way to achieve the same end for our "elite" rulers- - the never-ending expansion of government powers over individual citizens.

Overanalyzing or even psychoanalyzing the majority Decision is a fool’s errand. We have what we have. The political battle lines for November are clearly drawn. The conservative priority is to elect Mitt Romney and as many conservative Senators and Congressmen as we can.

Replacing Obamacare, with its legion of 16,000 new IRS agents and unprecedented intervention in the patient-doctor relationship, is vital to our freedom. It is equally important to restore the spirit of the American people and to allow our inherent entrepreneurial genius to once again place this great country on a sound economic footing - - well out of the grasp of these irresponsible leftists and far from their reach.

Jim Littlejohn

Concerned Coastal Voters

Gualala, CA

PREPOSTEROUS

(Published in the Independent Coast Observer)
Is there anything this President or his supporters won’t say or do to gain traction in this election? Recently, an internet commentator named Rex Nutting conveniently cobbled together an article that he said proved spending growth under President Obama was actually less than that of his predecessors. This preposterous claim was soon throughly discredited by the facts. However, this did not stop the President or his supporters, and at least one local writer, from repeating the absurdity. 

Let’s look at some cogent numbers from Peter Ferrara’s article in Forbes (6/14/12):

1. President Obama’s spending binge begun in 2009 quickly rocketed federal spending to 25.2% of GDP and is projected to average 24.4% for the entire four years. That compares to an average of 19.6% during Bush’s two terms. The average during Clinton’s two terms was 19.8%.
2. Obama’s 2013 budget (which has not passed) shows federal spending increasing from $2.983 trillion in 2008 to an all time record $3.796 trillion in 2012, an increase of 27.3%.
3. Before Obama there had never been a deficit anywhere close to $1 trillion.  The highest previously was $458 billion in 2008. The federal deficit for the last budget adopted by a Republican controlled Congress was $161 billion for fiscal year 2007.   Obama’s 2013 budget reports his deficits as:  $1.413 trillion for 2009, $1.293 trillion for 2010, $1.3 trillion for 2011, and $1.327 trillion for 2012.

These staggering deficits add up to more than $5 trillion dollars in new debt in just 4 years! Thus, in just one term President Obama will have increased the national debt as much as all prior Presidents, from George Washington to George Bush, combined. And, ObamaCare's trillions are yet to come.

Surely, this nation can do better.

Jim Littlejohn

Concerned Coastal Voters

Gualala, CA

NO MORE

(Published in the Independent Coast Observer)

President Obama has failed to put forth any plausible rationale as to why he should receive a second term. His two signature "achievements" - - ObamaCare and the almost $1 trillion dollar stimulus  - - are so out of favor with the American people they can’t be discussed in polite company, much less stand as a basis for his reelection.

Oh, he has tried very hard; that is, he has tried very hard to place the blame for his failures on former President Bush and myriad other “non-Obama” reasons for this almost unprecedented period of continuing economic stagnation. 

The hard fact is that President Obama’s poorly-conceived policies of overspending and over-regulation, and the resulting uncertainty, continue to stifle the entrepreneurial initiative of the American people. No matter how clever his excuses, this anemic economy hangs about Mr. Obama's neck like a limp albatross.

It’s amusing to hear local liberals attempt to make the case for returning Obama to the Oval Office with reasons such as, “He’s killed a lot of terrorist with drone attacks," or,  "He’s (now) more experienced than Romney because he’s held the office for three plus years, yada, yada, yada.”

Seriously, if President Bush had sat in a room picking out bad guys to kill from the air, these same liberals would have screamed for his impeachment.  And as to President Obama’s newly-minted "experience," too bad voters (and most of the media) didn’t seriously consider that issue in 2008. 

Instead, we elected a woefully inexperienced individual who, with rhetorical charm, promised almost everything to everyone and then proceeded to break almost every one of those promises. He didn’t just break them, he completely forgot them.

The question voters should ask is:  “Will four more years of an Obama regime yield different results?” We believe not.

Jim Littlejohn

Concerned Coastal Voters

Gualala, CA