Chad’s Morning Brief: The Dependent States of America & More
Here is your Morning Brief for the morning of February 9th, 2012. Give us your feedback below and tune in to Lubbock’s First News with Chad Hasty for these and many more topics from 6-9 am.
1. Dependence on Government Rises (link)
Under President Obama the American public's dependence on government rose 23% in two years. According to inverstors.com 67 million Americans now rely on some type of federal program.
The conservative think tank's annual Index of Dependence on Government tracks money spent on housing, health, welfare, education subsidies and other federal programs that were "traditionally provided to needy people by local organizations and families."
The two-year increase under Obama is the biggest two-year jump since Jimmy Carter was president, the data show.
The rise was driven mainly by increases in housing subsidies, an expansion in Medicaid and changes to the welfare system, along with a sharp rise in food stamps, the study found.
"You can't get around the fact that policy decisions made over the past two years, on top of those made over the past several decades, are having a large effect on the pace of growth of the index," said William Beach, who authored the Heritage study.
Government dependence has climbed steadily since 1962, when the index stood at 19. By 1980, the index had risen to 100. It stood at 294 in 2010, the last year for which the data are available. D.C.-based Heritage has produced the index for nine years.
Scary when you think about just how many people depend on the government to live and get by. It also paints a picture that shouldn't look to good for Republicans in the 2012 election. Many of those who are taking government handouts don't want things to change. Republicans do. That means many of those who rely on government will vote for the person they think will continue to support them. Of course, that would be President Obama.
You have to wonder how many Americans will rely on government in 10 years. If we keep going down the same path, we are in for a rude awakening. The Occupy movement also shows just how much younger people want the government to save them. Drive by 19th and University in Lubbock and you will see the sign that begs for debt forgiveness. What happened to working to pay off your debt? Now we need the government to come in and bail us out? This is exactly the type of mindset Obama wants. Depend on the government and the more power the government has.
2. War? (link)
It's an election year which means the Liberals need to look tough when it comes to foreign policy. Luckily, there is a hot spot in the world right now. Syria.
Although the U.S. focus remains on exerting diplomatic and economic pressure on Syria, the Pentagon and the U.S. Central Command have begun a preliminary internal review of U.S. military capabilities, CNN has learned.
The options are being prepared in the event President Barack Obama were to call for them. Two senior administration officials who spoke about the review to CNN emphasized that U.S. policy for now remains the use of non-military options.
The focus on diplomatic options was underscored by the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in an interview with CNN on Tuesday.
"Before we start talking about military options, we very much want to ensure that we have exhausted all the political, economic and diplomatic means at our disposal," Ambassador Susan Rice said on CNN's “Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.”
The president has also said that the U.S. is working on non-military options first.
"I think it is very important for us to try to resolve this without recourse to outside military intervention, and I think that's possible," Obama said in an interview with NBC News that aired during the Super Bowl on Sunday.
But the military is beginning to look at what can be done. One of the senior U.S. officials called the effort a “scoping exercise” to see what capabilities are available given other U.S. military commitments in the region.
Should the U.S. military get involved in Syria?
3. Dems Bailing on Obama (link)
President Obama's war with the Catholic Church is starting to become a lonely one for Obama as top Democrats are siding with the Church.
At this point, the Democratic defectors are few in number but tall in stature. They include two swing-state pols on the November ballot — Obama’s former DNC chairman, Tim Kaine, who’s running for Senate in Virginia, and Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey — as well as House Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson.
But an intraparty values rift — likely to be most pronounced in battleground states with large numbers of Catholic voters, like Pennsylvania — can’t be helpful to Obama as he heads into the general election.
“I think the White House made a good decision in including a mandate for contraception coverage in the [health care act] insurance policy,” Kaine, a former Virginia governor, said in a radio interview on WHRV. “But I think they made a bad decision in not allowing a broad enough religious employer exemption.”
Not very surprising that we are seeing Democrats abandon the President on this issue. I believe that this is just one of many issues where you will see divisions in the Democratic Party heading into the election. Obama isn't as popular as he was back in 2008 and people are starting to take notice.
4. Dumb story of the morning (link)
You've got to be kidding me.
Lawyers for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals will face SeaWorld in court on Monday to demand the release of five orcas into their natural habitat.
"This case is the first time we've sought constitutional protection," said lawyer Jeff Kerr, who has worked with PETA for 16 years.
Kerr and his team claim SeaWorld is violating the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution's ban on slavery and involuntary servitude by holding orcas Tilikum, Katina, Kasatka, Ulises, and Corky at its parks in Orlando, Fla. and San Diego."[The suit] eradicates slavery in all forms and slavery should not depend upon the species of the slave anymore than it depends upon gender, race or ethnicity of the slave," said Kerr.PETA will argue that if the orcas can suffer from enslavement, they should be protected from it."They were ripped from their homes and families, with whom they would have spent their entire lives," said Kerr. "They're held in the equivalent of concrete bathtubs. They're denied everything natural to them… They're forced to perform for human amusement and they've been turned into virtual breeding machines. By any reasonable definition, they're slaves."SeaWorld said PETA's claim is "baseless and in many ways offensive."However, some believe that the Founding Fathers probably did not have Shamu and Flipper in mind when they wrote the Constitution."Because it's PETA, I'm rarely surprised," said Mike Martindil, a professor at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law.Martindil does not think the case will hold up in court."I was fascinated by their attempt to assert constitutional claims on behalf of non-humans," he said.Kerr, however, believes his team has a strong case."It's an uphill battle, but anything that's worthwhile always has been," said Kerr.He said all civil rights have been an effort worth fighting for in the past and the efforts do not end with animals.The suit was brought on the orcas' behalf by PETA, three marine-mammal experts and two former SeaWorld trainers.
PETA is so over the top and ridiculous that you just have to laugh at them.
Other Top Stories:
These and many more topics coming up on today’s edition of Lubbock’s First News with Chad Hasty. Tune in mornings 6-9am on News/Talk 790 KFYO, streaming online at kfyo.com, and now on your iPhone and Android device with the radioPup App.
More From News/Talk 95.1 & 790 KFYO
