Was Barack Obama born in Kenya? He says no, yet a biography he used from 1991 to 2007 indicates he was in fact born in Kenya. His literary agent claims it was an error, yet he didn’t see fit to correct it until 2007, when he began his run for the Presidency. Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

House Speaker John Boehner and President Barack Obama

Barack Obama wants Congress to raise the debt ceiling again. Democrats love spending and will vote for any increase he wants, while Republicans will fight any increase without major spending cuts. That just about sums up the argument, on a very simple, superficial level.

The National Debt is a growing problem which needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, the President and Congressional leaders don’t see it as a problem. They say they do, but they don’t

Barack Obama has done a horrendous job as President. Federal spending is out of control and the National Debt is growing rapidly. John Boehner and the Republicans have every right to demand major spending cuts. Unfortunately, there are two problems. First, they should have started acting as the debt ceiling police years ago when George W. Bush and his predecessors were President. They also need to propose meaningful cuts, not just token cuts to appeal to the base.

As for the Democrats, they’re even worse. Are there any in Congress who have a fiscally responsible bone in their body? Do they have any plan to address the National Debt? If they do, I’m not seeing it.

We need to balance the budget

immediately

. There is no reason, other than a lack of poitical courage and common sense, that the budget can’t be balanced in a single year. Sure, the draconian cuts would make some people angry, but if you’re afraid to make the big decisions, you shouldn’t run for office.

Even if Mitt Romney wins, both parties could have primaries in 2016.

I was thinking about the 2016 Presidential Election recently. That’s right, 2016.

I’ve seen several stories that have mentioned the possibility of Hillary Clinton or (hold the laughter) Joe Biden running in 2016. Here’s a question: If Barack Obama loses, which I think seems likely, will he run again in 2016? If so, we could see a repeat of the 2008 election.

This scenario also led me to think about Mitt Romney’s chances in 2016 if he should win in 2012. I’m not referring to the General Election, but rather the primary. Romney will be the Republican nominee in 2012, but if he becomes president, is it a foregone conclusion that he would win in 2016? I don’t think so.

By now, we all know how much flip-flopping Romney has done over the years. If he wins and moves too closely to the middle during his first (only) term, I could see a ground-swell of support for a primary opponent. If he is victorious, he should keep this possibility in mind.

Over the past couple of years, there have been many Republicans in Congress who have been defeated by opponents who are more conservative. Is it really far-fetched to think that the President would be held to the same standard?

This week’s issue of Newsweek features a photo of Barack Obama with a rainbow halo and a headline proclaiming him as the “First Gay President.”. Of course, Barack Obama isn’t gay, it’s just Newsweek’s way of shocking people and grabbing headlines. I guess they’re not confident in the quality of their writing, and decided to use tabloid techniques to sell magazines.

It could also be a reaction to Time Magazine, which decided to place a picture of a woman breast feeding her child. That alone would be questionable, but when you take into account that the child was pretty big in comparison to his mother, it seemed very strange. Actually, sick is probably a better word.

For me, the topic of the articles isn’t the question. It’s their need to sensationalize articles in order to grab attention in a way that is unrelated to the story. As these techniques continue, the line between news magazines and publications such as The National Enquirer will continue to blur, and journalistic integrity will continue to deteriorate.

A very big kid breast feeds on the cover of Time Magazine.

Quick question: Is Barack Obama the first black President, or the 44th white one?

What does Mitt Romney really believe?

The more I think about it, the more I think I might be too conservative to be a Republican. On both the local and national level, I’ve seen things that have made my head spin. It has me wondering if I would be better off as an independent, without the baggage associated with the hypocrites and flakes.

Republicans have rightly criticized Barack Obama for his socialist-leaning views, and their warning that things will get worse if he were to be reelected. My problem is with the revisionism and lack of insight amongst many in our party.

Obamacare is an abomination that deserves to be struck down by the Supreme Court. The only positive thing about this legislation is that it mobilized conservative organizations to take action. The problem is that some Republicans agreed with some of the basic tenets of Obamacare in the past and only changed their mind when it became politically expedient to do so.

We have Mitt Romney, author of Romneycare, whose healthcare plan as Governor of Massachusetts bore a striking resemblance to Obamacare. Now, he’s attempting to split hairs, grasping for details that differ between Obamacare and his own socialist scheme. Besides Romney, there’s Newt Gingrich, who was a vocal proponent of a mandatory health insurance, until it became politically unpopular. Plus, let’s not forget about Newt’s couch time with Nancy Pelosi.

Those who oppose Obamacare also bemoan the ever increasing size of government, growing deficits, repeated debt-limit increases, and an intrusive government. Here’s the problem: During the Bush Administration, we had the prescription drug plan, increases in the size of government, growing deficits, repeated debt-limit increases, and an intrusive government. Sound familiar? Granted, these similarities are far worse now than during the Bush administration, but where were the Republican complaints between 2001 and 2008? This failure to speak up has caused many Republicans to look like hypocrites, which damages the party’s credibility.

Any Republican candidate would be better than Barack Obama, but this still puts us in the lesser-of-two-evils mindset. With Mitt Romney poised to become the Republican nominee, I expect him to do the right thing for as long as it is politically popular to do so. That’s why it’s important for fiscal conservatives to stay vigilant and continue to voice our displeasure with big government and attacks on liberty. We cannot become complacent.

For those who are fans of fine art and small government, artist Jon McNaughton has created another painting you might want to check out. I’d also suggest visiting Jon McNaughton’s official site, which has a dizzying array of beautiful art work.

Model Elle Macpherson turns her back on common sense.

Supermodel Elle Macpherson was recently on the Howard Stern show. At one point, the conversation turned to politics:

HOWARD STERN: Who should be the next President of the United States Elle MacPherson, go ahead.

ELLE MACPHERSON: I think Obama’s going to do it.

STERN: You like Obama?

MACPHERSON: Yeah, I’m living in London and I’m socialist. What do you expect?

STERN: And you’re living in London and you sense what other foreigners feel. Do they like him?

MACPHERSON: I think foreigners like him. He’s very popular.

STERN: Don’t we look good having a black president and everything? Makes us kind of cool.

MACPHERSON: I think it’s more about his policy. But you know there are I understand that there are a lot of people who don’t, you know, don’t want change. “We want change. We want change.” And he says, “I’ll implement change,” and you go, “Oh, actually, I don’t bleeping feel like I want change. It’s too difficult.

Who cares who Elle Macpherson likes or doesn’t like? I don’t, but I do find it interesting that someone who proudly and publicly identifies themselves as a socialist would voice support for him.

If Barack Obama were to win a second term, his socialist tendencies would be front and center. He has received a lot of criticism from the right because of his views and policies, but let’s not forget that his left-wing views were likely moderated by those wanting to appeal to the middle in 2012. Once the election is over, any attempt at moderating his views will be out the window.

Since you’re probably thinking about how a second Obama term could be much worse than the first, I’ve included a few pictures to cheer you up. Elle Macpherson may be a socialist, but she still looks good.

I’m hoping Barack Obama is a one-term President for a variety of reasons that I won’t regurgitate in this post. Defeating him is important, but I’m hoping the Republican nominee won’t use pie-in-the-sky predictions to gain favor with voters. Eventually, such tall tales will catch-up to him and undermine his credibility. The first potential pitfall to come to mind are promises to lower gas prices.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has often said that gas prices would fall below $2.49 per gallon if he were elected. He points out that such a fall would put money into the pockets of consumers, which would be pumped into the economy, corporate profits would be increased, fueling growth, and tax receipts would climb. These positive events would likely follow lower gas prices. The problem is that Gingrich thinks he can single-handedly bring down prices in the span of a single administration. This isn’t likely.

Gasoline prices depend on a myriad of factors, such as OPEC’s decisions, refining capacity, demand, and a host of geopolitical factors. A President is important, but when it comes to these disparate factors, their hands will be tied.

Decreasing prices is simple in theory: Increase supply and decrease demand. Of course, the devil is in the details. Some solutions are unpalatable, and would create other problems. For example, you could institute a tax on all cars that average less than 40 miles per gallon. I’d personally be opposed to this solution, but in the grand scheme of things, it wouldn’t be meaningful. Even though American cars consume a great deal of fossil fuel, it’s a small percentage of the overall global output.

On the supply side, we could ramp up drilling, which would probably take a decade to bring more oil to market. Of course, if we did attempt to increase the global oil supply, wouldn’t OPEC just cut production to maintain a higher price? Let’s not forget that OPEC is a cartel.

Some would argue that domestic oil production would increase U.S. Security by assuring that portion of our energy is produce in the U.S. This is a noble goal, but will all of this new oil be sold in the United States? Will we forbid the sake of crude to foreign countries? These are questions that need to be asked.

The next time you hear a politician talk about lowering energy prices, please keep in mind that their mouths are bigger than their influence.

It has been nearly a week since protests over Koran burnings began in Afghanistan. Barack Obama quickly apologized to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, but to this point, there have been no apologies for the 6 U.S. soldiers who were shot, two killed, by an Afghan soldier. Not surprisingly, there also hasn’t been any apology for the two U.S. officers who were murdered by a member of the Afghan security force.

To be honest, I don’t care about an apology. This entire episode should provide definitive proof to everyone that we don’t belong in Afghanistan. We are losing American lives defending a savage people who deserve nothing from us. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration doesn’t get it.

Besides apologies from Obama and Pentagon officials, we Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defending Obama’s apology. I might be mistaken, but I also haven’t heard any anger or outrage expressed by the Obama Administration about the deaths of our soldiers. If there is any mention of the incident, I’m sure officials will do everything in their power to make it look like an isolated incident. Of course, we know the opposite it true.