Tag Archives: Democrat

What You Will Never Hear On Main Stream Media

The other day a story broke about the Texas man that requested his Latino employees to Anglicize their names.

The tough-talking former Marine immediately laid down some new rules. Among them, he forbade the Hispanic workers at the run-down, Southwestern adobe-style hotel from speaking Spanish in his presence (he thought they’d be talking about him), and ordered some to Anglicize their names.

No more Martin (Mahr-TEEN). It was plain-old Martin. No more Marcos. Now it would be Mark.

Not sure where I fall on this one.  I mean, jeez.  On the other hand, he has a point.  If a customer can’t understand your name, it makes it hard to relate to that customer.  Maybe he should have made it clear that he was going to have the employees change their names when he hired them; I don’t know.  But what I DO know is this clip from CNN is awesome.

Just listen to the females reporter’s voice as she “interviews” this guy.  Her tone is simply dripping with intent and scorn.  Then listen as Rick Sanchez weighs in.  I’ll tell ya this much; the Main Stream Media will NEVER play this for you!

Where Brad and Britt Are Wrong

The boys over at WZTK are at it again.  This morning they are talking about Obama reducing the pay of executives whose companies took money in the bailout program.

Responding to the growing furor over the paychecks of executives at companies that received billions of dollars in federal bailouts, the Obama administration will order the companies that received the most aid to deeply slash the compensation to their highest paid executives, an official involved in the decision said on Wednesday.

Under the plan, which will be announced in the next few days by the Treasury Department, the seven companies that received the most assistance will have to cut the annual salaries of their 25 best-paid executives by an average of about 90 percent from last year. The executive’s total compensation — including bonuses and retirement contributions — will drop, on average, by about 50 percent. The companies are Citigroup, Bank of America, the American International Group, General Motors, Chrysler and the financing arms of the two automakers.

The conversations mostly centered on the fact that it was these big companies executives fault that the economy has gone through this latest recession.  And, as such, these executives should “suffer”.  Or, at the very least, should not continue to reap the rewards of their position by continuing to make all of this money.

I completely resonate with the concept of reward by performance.  I think that bad teachers should be fired.  Bad lawyers not be allowed to pass the bar.  Bad soccer players not make the team etc etc.  But the idea that we somehow cede this normal working of things to the government to satisfy the political need of the day is very very dangerous.  Very.  Not to mention it may be illegal.

However, the part that really got me going was the inevitable conversation surrounding the cause of this whole mess; the housing bubble.  The boom and bust.  The left just SCREAMS when anyone suggests that government regulation is responsible.  That somehow, by passing laws and creating rules that force people to do what they normally would not do, isn’t going to disrupt the market, always in ways that are unforeseen and undesirable.

For example, if a friend or family member asked to borrow $100 I would enter into that arrangement.  And prolly for free.  That is, I would give them 5 twenties and if they gave me a hundred bucks later, we would be “even.”  No juice or interest.  Now, if I were in the business of selling money, I would want to see some reward to hand money out.  This comes in the form of interest.  Soo I begin to borrow money to people.  Sometimes I get all of my money back with interest.  Sometimes I get most or some of my money back and then sometimes I don’t get any money back.  I begin to try to figure out what characteristics trend to me getting paid back.  I really want to lend only to those people who are going to pay me back [crazy talk, I know!  Wanting my money back.]  However, I am not the only money seller out there so I have to compete, in terms of lower interest rates, with other firms.  This keeps my profits down.

Now, a guy walks into my office and says he would like to borrow $100.  I say nope, the 5% interest isn’t enough to overcome my doubts that you’ll repay.  He looks at me and says, well, how high of a rate do I need to agree to before your fears are overcome?  I say 8%.  He says okay.  And now I sell money to another group of people for 8%.  And so on.  However, there is a group of people who I will not sell money to under any condition.  Just won’t do it.  Will not.

Enter the Libtard.  They claim that it’s not “fair” for me to deny lending opportunities to those people.  And because they have the power of law and fiat, they create rules and laws that force me to make a set % of my loans to these people.  Because I enjoy paying my mortgage and feeding my family, I comply out of fear they will put me out of business.  And low and behold, these people begin to default and I start losing money.  No one is surprised.  I sure ain’t.

And this is the beginning of the crisis.

Shocker

Because buying money isn’t any different than buying plywood it is no surprise that banks are going to change the way in which they sell plywood.

On Friday, Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, will join FDIC Vice Chairman Marty Gruenberg and others in a discussion of “new, safe and affordable credit options for America’s underbanked.”

The policy discussion on Capitol Hill comes as banks – reacting to new credit card rules imposed by Democrats – start pulling the plastic from current credit-card holders, a move that is sure to lead to even more “underbanked” Americans.

Press reports note that Citibank recently canceled a number of credit card accounts affiliated with the Shell, ExxonMobil, Citgo and Phillips 66-Conoco oil companies.

Citibank also has notified some customers that interest rates on unpaid balances are going up – to a whopping 29.99 percent APR, effective Nov. 30. As the new law requires, customers have been notified that they may reject the change to their accounts, in which case their accounts are closed immediately and they may continue paying off their balances at current rates over five years.

So, when people who have a track record of not paying back their loans no longer have to pay the price of not paying back their loans, banks are going to react by no longer loaning them money they have no hope of paying back, that’s news?

Stop.

But then again, maybe it is.

Dave seems to think that credit card companies are simply soaking the folks that use their cards and imposing new rules will not result in increased fees:

The new rules are likely to reduce some of those profits (that is, to the extent that companies don’t find new “gotcha” fees to replace the old ones). However, the rules are not likely to raise rates or fees for responsible card holders.

But that is not what we are seeing, in fact, it’s the opposite:

On Wednesday, USA Today noted that starting next year, Bank of America will charge a small number of customers an annual fee, ranging from $29 to $99 – an “experimental” move. Even card holders who have never carried a balance or paid late fees could be among those affected, the newspaper said. “You could be spanked for staying out of debt,” the article stated.

So once more, we see government stepping in and regulating where they have no business regulating.  The result?  Predictable.  Higher prices and reduced supply.

Go Obama!

Obama's Numbers

The Democrats are reeling.  Support for the Leftist Congress is plummeting. Voters are ready to fire them with only 2 points to spare and closing fast.  {though if you ask Rasmussen, you get a different picture}.  Governors in two key Democratic states are going to flip.  Support for the health care bill is down and even Obama himself is seeing his numbers plummet.  {again, if you ask Rasmussen you will see a bigger decline}

But the real telling sign is the battle in the blogosphere.  Where once the debate wasn’t so much if the country loved Obama, it was about how many did.  The media was fawning all over the man what with men’s legs shivering in his aura.  Now?  Now the battle isn’t over whether or not CNN is biased, but rather if it’s biased to the left or to the right.

Wanna put into perspective how bad this President is?  His approval rating is lower than Carter’s.

Music.  Sweet music.

Media Bias: Brad and Britt Have It Wrong

This morning on the Brad and Britt show the conversation was concerning the continued attack on Fox News from the White House.  I only was able to catch a small part of the show, but the general gist was that, in fact, Fox News as an organization is slanted to the Right.  I got this impression from the conversation between Brad and Britt regarding the Fox Radio reporters that the show dealt with for the first 3 years of the station’s existence.

Britt commented:

During this time he and Brad often spoke to those reporters and during those conversations, where it was just one on one, the reporters would often come across as genuine and fair, as if they were liberated from the corporate expectations of Fox.

I waited for the comparison to ABC Radio and its reporters.  I would expect that if Fox had certain expectations than ABC must also.  And if the Fox reporters felt liberated in one on one conversations with peers, it would hold that ABC reporters would feel the same way.  I was rewarded with no such point.  So I was left with the feeling that:

  1. Yes.  Fox News does expect a Conservative slant.
  2. Yes.  That expectation is wrong.

So I started to wonder.  Many folks say that America is a “Center Right” nation.  So maybe Fox is just right on the money when they report as a “Center Right” network.  Which in turn got me to thinking, how far “right” is Fox?

So I checked.  And this is what I found:  A report titled:  A Report on Media Bias

It turns out that two researchers conducted a study.  And a rather clever study at that.  The researchers

count the times that a media outlet cites various think tanks and other policy groups.  We compare this with the times that members of Congress cite the same think tanks in their speeches on the floor of the House and Senate.  By comparing the citation patterns we can construct an ADA score for each media outlet.

Then, by ranking these ADA scores, the report was able to rank not only how liberal or conservative a news outlet is, but also how far from “Center” it is.

The results?  Surprising only in the fact that SO many sources are liberal, by how far and even how traditional conservative sources are really liberal:

Media source and ADA Score

Media source and ADA Score

Sources are listed in the order of the distance they are from center.  The lower the number, the more conservative; the higher the more liberal.  Average is 50.06.   So, where does Fox news sit?  5th.  They are the fifth closest to center with a 39.7 ranking.  Every other source from 6th through 20 is further from center than Fox and all of them save 1 has a liberal bias.

The report is informative in 2 other aspects:

  1. Aaron Brown doesn’t host on CNN any longer.  That honor goes to the decidedly more liberal Anderson Cooper.
  2. MSNBC isn’t even on the list.  Yowza.

So I ask you gentle reader; who is really in the tank for who?

Dad Talk to Jeff Latta

Okay, so yesterday I posted on the plight of the 53 year old retired man that can’t afford his $1,000 mortgage.

The story reads that his mortgage is 93% of his pension.  I managed to do the math and calculate how much this guy would have left over.  What I didn’t do was calculate what he made per year; $20,640.  And his mortgage?  Well, assuming he has a 7% rate and given a $1,600 payment, that means he borrowed $240,000.  That, ladies and gentlegerms, is a QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS!  And brother is making a cool 20k a year.

I hereby make this covenant with you, gentle reader.  I will not, I swear to you, I will NOT raise my son to think that it’s okay to borrow $240,000 and then retire at 53 knowing your fixed income will be $20,000.  And more than that, he will not ever, EVER, consider it someone else’s burden to pay for or bail him out of that dumb ass decision.

I swear to you.

Now, son…about that whole pumpkin farm thing you got goin’ on…..

Where Brad and Britt Are Wrong

I’ve been listening to the Brad and Britt show for some years now.  I know what I am getting when I turn ’em on.  I’m getting a couple of guys who think they’re center or neutral, think they’re not talking over folks and think they’re right.  What I get though, are some left leaning talk over guys who think they’re right.  Mostly you can only blame ’em for being leftists.  Everyone thinks they’re right and really, it’s a talk show on the radio; they are supposed to be a little bit “jabby”.  So, I know what I’m getting when I turn ’em on.

This morning though, I just went crazy.  They are talking about health care reform and the proposed system and how it’s being compared to auto insurance etc etc.  And so it starts.

Brad begins by trying to pull the analogy by saying that if you only consider folks who do drive cars, then the auto insurance parallel is accurate; we do mandate that all drivers carry car insurance.  In this he’s right.  But he fails to mention that there are three important distinctions:

  1. If the cost of owning a car becomes to great [payments, insurance and upkeep] you can opt out and the insurance stops.
  2. Really, we are only mandating that you carry insurance to cover THE OTHER GUY.  If you own the car, it is your choice to cover any damage to your actual car itself.  In short, you are allowed the choice to “self insure”.
  3. No one is saying that the car insurance folks would be forced to cover “pre-existing conditions.”

I mean really, enough with this car insurance parallel.  Serious, can you imagine how expensive car insurance would be if insurance companies were forced to cover pre-existing conditions on a car?  That they would, for example, be forced to fix a car AFTER it had been in an accident?  Silly.  SImply silly.

But there was more.  The Brad and Britt show had a guest on who claimed that as a 52-year-old man he could get very nice insurance individually that was not outrageously priced.  Let’s check.  When I do this, I like to go here: eHealthInsurance

I am looking for plans in Greensboro for a single 52-year-old man who does not smoke.

Ah, here’s one.  $5000 deductible, Office visits are free after the deductible.  0% coinsurance.  149 a month.  Oh yeah, and you can have an HSA.

Another:  $5000 deductible, $15 office visits and 0% coinsurance.  $229 a month.

One more:  $1250 deductible, office visits are not covered and the coinsurance is 20%.  $253 a month.

Net/net, I don’t know why people think that coverage isn’t affordable.  It is.  It may not be free.  It may not cover every single thing in the whole medical world.  But the whole argument for this reform bill is that “if you get sick or hurt you should not go bankrupt.”  Here ya go.  Buy this policy and you won’t.

Last, Brad and Britt spoke about the fact that people miss allocate their money.  In other words, they aren’t spending wisely.  This resonates with me; I don’t think people budget well.  We spoke about this in a post just a few days ago:  Health Care Lottery.

In short, of people who make less than 10k a year, 46% of them play the lottery.  And they play about $600 a year.  Which, by the way, is the cost of a health insurance plan for a 25-year-old man.

I know what I get when I tune in Brad and Britt.  Today was just too much of it.

Goodyear: Bad Policy

The United Steelworkers Union won one the other day. In the deal, the Union was able to win a number of concession from Goodyear:

  1. Minimum staffing levels
  2. Prevention of shifting production to any facility not represented by the Steelworkers Union
  3. $600 million in updates to the plants to keep them modern
  4. Wage and benefit increases
  5. Continuation of cost of living increases.
  6. A plant in Tennessee that was closed will have it’s employees to receive a buy out

So lemme get this straight.  Companies across the country, world in fact, are trying to cut back to minimize the impact of the global recession [which has most certainly ended by the way].  We are seeing staff reductions, we are seeing wage freezes and even in some cases wage roll backs.  All of this in order to keep companies from having to close.  But Goodyear?  What are they doing?  Why, of course, they are promising that they will keep a minimum number of workers on the job; not a maximum.  They are promising that they won’t move work to any plant not in America represented by the SWA.  Yeah, did ya notice that?  The Union didn’t say that they couldn’t move the jobs out of city or out-of-state or country, they simply said that the couldn’t move them where the union didn’t have representation.  So, if Goodyear wanted, they couldn’t move the plant to a Right to Work State and avoid a represented racket work force.  Nice.

Further, the Union was able to provide raises on top of cost of living increases to its membership.  All the while forcing Goodyear to spend $600 million in the plants so that they would be anchored to this ship wreck for the next several years.  Awesome.  Simply awesome.

Meanwhile,the only mention of why  these plants are in need of protection comes when the article mentions:

The Tennessee factory has been severely hurt by the economic downturn and an influx of cheap tires from China

Let’s ignore the fact that all of the tire buying American’s enjoy the “cheap tires from China.”  We like to have things provided to us at a price that is less expensive than we could otherwise find in the market.  So, while the American tire makers may see a decline in their sales, or at least in their profits, the rest of America see more money in their pockets.  This could be anyone from the single mother trying to make it to work to the florist that has to rely on tires to deliver her flowers on time.  All of this means added productivity.

Allocation of scare resources with multiple uses.

What we have now is an artificial allocation.  Or, people spending money on things that they wouldn’t otherwise spend that money on.  Which is almost always not optimal.  And somehow the press and the world rejoices at the fact that some Union jobs are saved at the expense of jobs elsewhere in the economy.  Jobs that have long ago ceased to be meaningful means of employment here in the US.  Here, you see, we are known for innovation and for services.  We need to free resources from the manual labor of tire making in order to free those minds to invent new kinds of tires.  Or news kinds of rubber.  Or any other of a long list of things yet to be invented but now prevented from being discovered.  All because of a racket.

But how, may you ask, can Goodyear continue to survive in this system where it is forced to pay fees and services to a work force that isn’t worth those fees and services?  Because, Mr. Obama has allowed Goodyear to charge an extra 35% for its tires adding directly to that companies bottom line.

Aha….Why Cost of Insurance is so High in Maine

Alright, so we have been discussing health care, health insurance and everything wrong with all of that.  As always, the Democrats cry out “We need this.  We just NEED this damn it!  And then they walk away to their voting place and vote for someone who wants to be in power, which is different than someone wanting to be a Senator, and presto, we have a voice in Washington that is going to legislate this health care for everyone thing.  On the other side, you have republicans, seriously going about the days business when they hear this nonsense and look up from their work and say “No”.  In much the same way a father says “no” to the 7th request for another cookie before bed.

And so, republicans are labeled as the party of “No”.  But this time around, the republicans have offered some solutions to bring the price of health care down.  Down for everyone.  Down to the point that every single person in the country can have insurance.  And one of the methods in doing that is to free insurance companies to sell policies to people outside of the state the reside in.  That is, as a citizen of North Carolina, I could purchase health insurance from a company in Washington state.  Or Arizona.  Or anywhere for that matter.  What THIS would do is free the consumer to choose and not be subject to the regulations placed upon the insurance providers in that state.  But even this causes Liberals to scream.

For example, a recent study found that Maine ranks 6th in the nation when it comes to expensive individual policies.  Sixth.  And folks around the lefty campfire are saying that the reason for the high prices is due to the monopoly that exists in Maine.  They claim that because Wellpoint has a 90%+ customer saturation base, they are able to charge whatever they want.  The problem is, those liberals are reporting only on the results, not the cause of the problem.

See, it turns out that in 1993 Maine passed laws requiring coverage to every citizen.

Blink.  Blink.

But that’s not bad enough.  Not only are they required to sell insurance to everyone that applies, they are also unable to distinguish based on gender, health status, claims experience or time with coverage.

Now, after that law passed, what do you supposed happened to the price?  Yeah, right through the roof.  And it drove out all but a few providers that specialized in mandatory care and THEY, in turn, bought up the remaining companies.  Net/net:  Noe one wants to do business in Maine and THAT’S why there is only one provider.

Damn.

Next thing these liberals are going to mandate is that all kids make the varsity.

The Chairman’s Weekly Radio Address: August 16, 2009

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
Saturday, August 15th, 2009

This week, I’ve been traveling across our country to discuss health insurance reform and to hear directly from folks like you – your questions, your concerns, and your stories.

Nah, nah ya haven’t.  You’ve been making fun of guys like me.  Calling me a teabagger and a right wing nut case.  What you ARE doing is travelling across the country talking to folks like you!

Now, I know there’s been a lot of attention paid to some of the town hall meetings that are going on around the country, especially those where tempers have flared. You know how TV loves a ruckus.

Ahhwww, you folksy guy you!  But really, ’cause organizing is your bag I’m just ‘spossed to not have my say?

But what you haven’t seen – because it’s not as exciting – are the many constructive meetings going on all over the country where Americans are airing their hopes and concerns about this very important issue.

I’ve been holding some of my own, and the stories I’ve heard have really underscored why I believe so strongly that health insurance reform is a challenge we can’t ignore.

They’re stories like Lori Hitchcock’s, who I met in New Hampshire this week. Lori’s got a pre-existing condition, so no insurance company will cover her. She’s self-employed, and in this economy, she can’t find a job that offers health care, so she’s been uninsured for two years.

See, now that’s strange.  And while I’m not callin’ ya a liar, I AM sayin’ I don’t believe you.  See, I went on line, just now- right this very minute- and found a quote for health insurance that covers me after a 5k deductible for about $130 a month.  Now, I don’t have a pr-existing condition, the plan WOULD cover me 12 months after I had been paying premiums.  So, ya see, you CAN get coverage.  If you are willing to, you know, work.

Or they’re stories like Katie Gibson’s, who I met in Montana. When Katie tried to change insurance companies, she was sure to list her pre-existing conditions on the application and even called her new company to confirm she’d be covered. Two months later, she was dropped – after she’d already gone off her other insurance.

These are the stories that aren’t being told – stories of a health care system that works better for the insurance industry than it does for the American people. And that’s why we’re going to pass health insurance reform that finally holds the insurance companies accountable.

Do you know what that means?  To hold an insurance company accountable?  Cause I don’t.  See, I have insurance and I see doctors and my kids see doctors and the insurance company pays the bills.  I don’t fight with ’em or have to call ’em or anything.  So, what are they doin’ that you don’t like?

But now’s the hard part. Because the history is clear – every time we come close to passing health insurance reform, the special interests with a stake in the status quo use their influence and political allies to scare and mislead the American people.

Strange of you to speak so poorly about your Union brothers.

As an example, let’s look at one of the scarier-sounding and more ridiculous rumors out there – that so-called “death panels” would decide whether senior citizens get to live or die.

Before you get on with what I am sure is a well thought out response to this concept—-it’s TRUE.

Now, back to regularly scheduled programming.

That rumor began with the distortion of one idea in a Congressional bill that would allow Medicare to cover voluntary visits with your doctor to discuss your end-of-life care – if and only if you decide to have those visits. It had nothing to do with putting government in control of your decisions; in fact, it would give you all the information you need – if you want it – to put you in control of your decisions. When a conservative Republican Senator who has long-fought for even more far-reaching proposals found out how folks were twisting the idea, he called their misrepresentation, and I quote, “nuts.”

So when folks with a stake in the status quo keep inventing these boogeymen in an effort to scare people, it’s disappointing, but it’s not surprising. We’ve seen it before. When President Roosevelt was working to create Social Security, opponents warned it would open the door to “federal snooping” and force Americans to wear dog tags. When President Kennedy and President Johnson were working to create Medicare, opponents warned of “socialized medicine.” Sound familiar? Not only were those fears never realized, but more importantly, those programs have saved the lives of tens of millions of seniors, the disabled, and the disadvantaged.

Those who would stand in the way of reform will say almost anything to scare you about the cost of action. But they won’t say much about the cost of inaction.

You’ve been down this road before; remember the Stimulus package?  Yeah, how’d THAT work for ya Sparky?

If you’re worried about rationed care, higher costs, denied coverage, or bureaucrats getting between you and your doctor, then you should know that’s what’s happening right now.

We’re not worried about it; we get it.  It’s a concept that we are all familiar with.  It’s a concept that serves us well.  For example, when we ration on price we get healthy competition resulting in lower costs and higher quality.  Not that you would know about it however, so, just keep on pretending like you’ve ever had a job.

In the past three years, over 12 million Americans were discriminated against by insurance companies due to a preexisting condition, or saw their coverage denied or dropped just when they got sick and needed it most. Americans whose jobs and health care are secure today just don’t know if they’ll be next to join the 14,000 who lose their health insurance every single day. And if we don’t act, average family premiums will keep rising to more than $22,000 within a decade.

On the other hand, here’s what reform will mean for you.

First, no matter what you’ve heard, if you like your doctor or health care plan, you can keep it.

Right…..until ya need to change.  Then, then ya can’t keep it.  But just go right ahead and skip that part.

If you don’t have insurance, you’ll finally be able to afford insurance. And everyone will have the security and stability that’s missing today.

Who can’t afford insurance today?  Really?  Who?  And why not?  I swear to you…when you buy ANYTHING before you buy insurance, it means that you can buy insurance you simply choose not too.

Insurance companies will be prohibited from denying you coverage because of your medical history, dropping your coverage if you get sick, or watering down your coverage when it counts – because there’s no point in having health insurance if it’s not there when you need it.

Insurance companies will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or lifetime, and we will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses – because no one in America should go broke just because they get sick.

Finally, we’ll require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies – because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be saving lives and dollars by catching diseases like breast cancer and prostate cancer on the front end.

Pssst, over here.  You mentioned above that the normal tactics were being used to fight this, cough cough, reform bill of yours?  Well, far be it from you to go down that road.  Cause, ya know, insurance companies cover that today already.  But shhhh, better for you if no one calls ya on that!

That’s what reform means. For all the chatter and the noise out there, what every American needs to know is this: If you don’t have health insurance, you will finally have quality, affordable options once we pass reform. If you do have health insurance, we will make sure that no insurance company or government bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need. And we will deliver this in a fiscally responsible way.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.  What kinda mooch do ya think I am?  No government bureaucrat, fiscally responsible.  Rich!

I know there’s plenty of real concern and skepticism out there.

Ya think?  Even you Democrats are eating your young on this one.

I know that in a time of economic upheaval, the idea of change can be unsettling, and I know that there are folks who believe that government should have no role at all in solving our problems. These are legitimate differences worthy of the real discussion that America deserves – one where we lower our voices, listen to one another, and talk about differences that really exist. Because while there may be disagreements over how to go about it, there is widespread agreement on the urgent need to reform a broken system and finally hold insurance companies accountable.

Nearly fifty years ago, in the midst of the noisy early battles to create what would become Medicare, President Kennedy said, “I refuse to see us live on the accomplishments of another generation. I refuse to see this country, and all of us, shrink from these struggles which are our responsibility in our time.” Now it falls to us to meet the challenges of our time. And if we can come together, and listen to one another; I believe, as I always have, that we will rise to this moment, we will build something better for our children, and we will secure America’s future in this new century.

Jeez!