The financial state of most of these United States is dismal.

According to a new report from the Nelson Rockefeller Institute of Government, states’ tax revenues last year were down for a fifth straight quarter; it’s the longest period of declines since the Great Depression.

Prospects for a quick turnaround are also dismal.

Why? Well, because in too many of these states, liberals are running the show.

New York Times:

“The revenue decline comes despite the tax increases imposed by many states since the recession began.”

DUH???  Tax increases result in the decline of revenues… Any rational and minimally educated human being (excluding Democrats) knows this.

Actually, the revenue decline is a direct result of tax increases, and the out-of-control spending imposed by these states, which was made even worse by this slush fund spending from the Stimulus bill. The Democrats’ slush fund gave states a one-time cash infusion that has come to an end — for now — until the next round of slush fund money comes through.

The Rockefeller report warns that state tax revenues will continue to be “insufficient to support current spending commitments,” and that more spending cuts and tax increases are likely. But they say sales tax collections should rise when retail sales pick up. (That’s if they pick up.)

Look: This is not that hard. Government spends too much money on too many things. The government doesn’t have the money they’re spending. People are already taxed beyond the breaking point.

If you want to grow state economies, there are three steps to make it happen:

1. You cut spending

2. You lower tax rates

3. You fire liberals.

It’s that simple.

Do you know what the construction unemployment number is?

Construction unemployment — and it is understandable with new home sales at an all-time record low — is 27.1% in February.

This despite the stimulus and the “shovel-ready jobs” that we were going to be paying for! When people don’t have work they lose their homes and that is happening, too. They lose their cars. They lose their motivation.

President Obama is killing small business.

He said he was going to save homeownership. He signed another multibillion-dollar bill to do that. It’s done nothing!

He said he would create jobs. He’d keep unemployment below 8%. He passed the laws and spending he wanted. Anyone see any jobs?

He is spending like a drunken sailor, and what do we have to show for it?

I knew this was coming, but I have to admit, I never expected such destruction so quickly… Like a bull in a china factory, he destroys all he touches.

But one thing I am sure of:

The Silent Moral Majority is now wide awake, and no longer, will we be silent.

WJR radio Detroit, John Dingell, the senior Democrat in the House of Representatives.

DINGELL:

Paul W. (Smith), we’re not ready to be doing it, but let me remind you, this has been going on for years. We are bringing it to a halt. The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re going to pass legislation that will cover 300 American people in different ways it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.

It’s going to take a long time to control the people… John Dingell, the most senior Democrat in the House of Representatives.  It’s going to take long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.

Guess what?  Obama’s out there touting the fact that as of now, children with preexisting conditions are covered. They forgot to include it in the bill.  It is not there. They’re going to have to go back and fix it somehow.  They left it out.  Now, the point of this is pure incompetence.  They’re out touting all of these wonderful things in the bill and preexisting condition coverage for kids, it’s not there.

The Associated Press

“Administration officials are now scrambling to fix a gap in highly touted benefits for children. Obama made better coverage for children a centerpiece of his health care remake, but it turns out the letter of the law provided a less-than-complete guarantee that kids with health problems would not be shut out of coverage.”

Now, if he cares so damn much about the kids, how did this happen?  The point of this is, if this is a major thing to them and they screw this up, these are the people that are going to be writing a hundred thousand additional pages of regulations to go along with the health care bill that’s already 3,000 pages. We’re dealing with strict, utter, total incompetence.

Who the hell is this guy to run health care?  What’s Barack Obama ever done but learn Saul Alinsky?  What’s Barack Obama ever done but learn what he doesn’t like about this country? But what has he ever run?  What has he ever done in the private sector or the government sector that’s ever worked?  It’s an absolute mess.

Now, the public won’t feel the mandate until four years from now, and until then, Obama will cynically argue that nobody’s complained yet about the mandates, when there aren’t any.

In fact, do you remember when he ripped and criticized Hillary Clinton for health care mandates during the campaign?

This happened in 2008, February 21st in Austin.

OBAMA:

When Senator Clinton says a mandate, it’s not a mandate on government to provide health insurance.  It’s a mandate on individuals to purchase it.  Massachusetts has a mandate right now.  They have exempted 20% of the uninsured because they’ve concluded that that 20% can’t afford it.  In some cases, there are people who are paying fines and still can’t afford it so now they’re worse off than they were.  They don’t have health insurance and they’re paying a fine.  In order for you to force people to get health insurance, you’ve got to have a very harsh, stiff penalty.

Here he is ripping Mrs. Clinton for exactly what is in his health care bill.  Obama is ripping Senator Clinton for suggesting a mandate for people to have health insurance.  He’s ripping her for that, which is what his health care legislation — what he just signed — does, although not ’til 2014, after the next presidential election.

Why is that, Mr. President, by the way? Why is it that the mandate doesn’t kick in until two years after you, God forbid, are reelected?

Friends, this is what we got.

He has not made good on a single promise.  Even now he still speaks about his promises since most of his health care bill phases in over four years.  And the mandates don’t happen for four years.  And the preexisting coverage for adults, that doesn’t happen for four years.  It’s not until 2019 that 32 million people are covered.

Do you understand that?

Thirty-two million people, that’s the current number, will not be fully insured until 2019.

That’s ten years, nine-and-a-half years: 2019 for all 32 million to be covered.  If you believe that.  I don’t even believe that.  In fact, the Senate bill doesn’t come close. No, it won’t cover all 32 million by 2019.  It won’t even be close to it.  There’s nothing in this that you can believe.

He’s criticizing Hillary Clinton for having a mandate that everybody buy insurance, and he’s pointing to Massachusetts where it doesn’t work because 20% of the people can’t afford it and then he says,

“In order to get people to do it you have to have a harsh, stiff penalty,”

…and he’s criticizing Hillary for having that idea.

That idea was signed into law yesterday.

The Washington Post,

Pelosi is out threatening the insurance companies: If you raise premiums, we’re not going to let you in the exchanges.

They’re going to have no choice but to raise premiums if they’re going to have to cover preexisting conditions, if they’re going to have to cover people from the moment they get sick and not before.  So if they raise premiums, uhhhh, they’re not going to be allowed in the exchanges. That’s Nancy Pelosi.  I don’t know if that’s in the legislation or not, but if it’s not in the legislation, they’ll pass it.  Nobody can stop ’em.

So there you have it. If they’re kept out of the exchanges, guess what?

Hello, single payer!

Even sooner than we feared it would happen.

The Chris Matthews Show, March 7, 2010

MATTHEWS : Party time. After 13 months of whispering and wooing across the aisle, the president must now win with those on his side. He must rally the Democrats to pass health care because they’re all he’s got. He must now lead the band with all the music and magic he has in him.

Selling victory. To win his biggest test, one he set himself, the president must convince his people the prize is worth the pain. He must teach the deepest of all truths, that it’s what you do with what you’ve got.

These statements are amazing to me.

Ok Chris, do you have your Pom Poms out? You seem to be marching in lockstep behind the Obama Health Care Parade.

Matthews has a new liberal definition of  ‘Victory’ or in his words, “Selling victory.”

VICTORY now defined: Passing a plan that the American people don’t want.

NewsBusters.org:

• Split on Obama’s handling of health care: 48-48 (46-50 August 17)
• Support Obama’s health care reforms: 46-48 (45-50 August 17)
• President Obama’s job approval is at 54 (57 August 17)
• Deficit: 65% think health care reform will make it worse
• Medicare: 56% of seniors think it will weaken Medicare
• On the crucial “what’s in it for me?” question, twice as many Americans (32-16) think it will make their own care worse, twice as many (40-20) think it will increase their costs, and more than three times as many (37-11) think it will hurt their coverage.

December 16, 2009 Washington Post-ABC News Poll

• Obama and the Democrats have had decidedly less success convincing the public that their health proposals will bring positive change.
• More than half of those polled, 53 percent, see higher costs for themselves if the proposed changes go into effect than if the current system remains intact.
• About as many (55 percent) say the overall cost of the national health-care system would go up more sharply.
• Moreover, just 37 percent say the quality of their care would be better under a new system; 50 percent see it as better under the current set-up.

Steven Thomma  McClatchy Newspapers, March 17, 2009

“Its new survey finds Obama’s approval rating falling to 59 percent from 64 percent in February. It also finds the ranks of Americans who disapprove of the president’s job performance rising, to 26 percent from 17 percent.”

Back to Chris Matthews Sunday Program.

Ms. KATHLEEN PARKER : I think he’s done his best to say, `Look, I’ve tried.’ But everybody’s forgetting something, which is that the American people don’t want this plan.

MATTHEWS : “He must teach the deepest of all truths, that it’s what you do with what you’ve got.”

Really? What has the President been doing?? He has given over 100 speeches on Obama-care, and over 100 combined television and newspaper/magazine interviews.

Professor Obama has been preaching the same sermon for over a year and the polls show it continues to be rejected by 2/3 of the American people.

Rasmussen Reports:

Three-out-of-four Americans (74%) trust their own judgment more than that of the average member of Congress when it comes to economic issues facing the nation.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 13% trust the average Congress members judgment more, while 12% are not sure who knows best.

I don’t think “the deepest of all truths” have seen the light of day, as reflect by Rasmussen.

A few “simple truths” have been exposed:

• The Cornhusker Kickback
• The Louisiana Purchase
• No TORT Reform
• No selling insurance across state lines
• No Stupak amendment
• No Health Savings Accounts
• No Media Care Reform…
  Just cuts of 500 billion, … which will never happen, to a program that is going BANKRUPT.

Ms. O’DONNELL: Well, one of the problems is, there’s an intramural aspect to this that may not be as obvious. The House has mistrust of the Senate. The Senate has to promise to make fixes.

“The House has mistrust of the Senate,” and the American people don’t trust Congress… But we are going to believe the Senate is going to keep promises.

Are you kidding me?  What’s not “obvious” about that?

Ms. O’DONNELL: And people just don’t believe they will follow through and help cover those House Democrats who would vote for this, and that’s a real problem.

MATTHEWS: OK. I think they’re going to try to solve that by some kind of public statement, by 50 at least Senate Democrats. `We are going to pass reconciliation and meet your objections to the Senate bill if you vote for the Senate bill.’ They’re going to have to, clearly.

Excuse me, I though the Obama line on that was the “Republican obstructionists” were blocking the presidents every move, not his fellow progressive Democrats.

A simple math lesson here. The Democrats had a super Majority in the Senate and an overwhelming numbers in the House. They could have passed anything.

Anything.

Even with the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts, all they needed was ONE Republican. One Republican. And Lord knows we have some Liberal Republicans that pollute the Senate on a regular basis. Could they find one Republican, that they could convince, or like Democrats, bribe? ONE Republican?

NO.

Now they speak of ‘reconciliation‘. Really? Just 51 votes? Seems like the Democrats are struggling like a beached whale to round up enough votes in the House to pass the Senate version of this monstrosity. If you can only get 51 Senate Democrats to vote for this, and there are 59 who caucus with the Democrats, doesn’t that mean you have BIPARTISAN OPPOSITION to this bill? All the Republicans and maybe 8 Democrats?

BIPARTISAN OPPOSITION.

Poles, Tea Parties, Town Halls… The American people have spoken, but no one in Washington is listening.

Washington will hear all of us soon!

This Week, the fill-in host Elizabeth Vargas talking to Nancy Pelosi.

“You understand, I mean, with Charlie Rangel. You promised the most ethical Congress in history, and — and, I mean, you gotta understand now why so many Americans think Congress is corrupt. It just doesn’t look good. This Rangel thing just doesn’t pass the smell test.”

PELOSI: Look, I — I served for seven years on the ethics committee. The last thing I would have wanted would be for the speaker of the House to interfere in a political way in what was going on there. That just should never happen. Uh, but the fact is — is that, uh, w-w-what Mr. Rangel has been admonished for is not good. It was, uh, uh, a violation of the rule of the House. Uh, it was not something that, uhhh, jeopardized our country in any way.

No, no, no.  How could the fact that one of the most powerful men in Congress is corrupt have any effect on America? I mean, after all, all he does is write the tax law. He’s chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

He doesn’t have any effect on America. No way. Don’t even tell me he’s in the same league as Tom DeLay, who they had to force out of there.

Here’s Pelosi back from November 7th, 2006, election night.

PELOSI: To-day the American people voted to restore integrity and honesty in Washington, DC. And the Democrats in-tend to lead the most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history.

Typical of everything the Democrats say: It’s a lie and is not true.

Here’s Paul Krugman from the New York Times. He was on This Week as well during the roundtable, and Elizabeth Vargas says,

“Speaker Pelosi, Steny Hoyer were all calling for Tom DeLay to relinquish his post when he was also admonished by the ethics committee.”

KRUGMAN: It is worth pointing out that none of these things actually seemed to affect national policy. Yeah, I’m unhappy with this. I wish Rangel would go away. But it — it really has no national significance.

Oh, no national significance at all!

Oh, he’s only chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. He’s cheating on his taxes. He’s not reporting income.

On MSNBC, Joe Scarborough says to Senator Durbin,

“You served with Charlie. I served with Charlie. Are you disappointed?”

DURBIN: I want to tell you one thing about Charlie Rangel. When he joined the Army after World War II as an African-American, he was put in a segregated unit. He served in combat in Korea. This man has served his country. I am not going to presume, uhhh, guilt when it comes to Charlie Rangel.

Charlie Rangel is a veteran, so who cares if he’s corrupt? He served in North Korea. Who cares?

He’s corrupt – simple truth.