So now we finally have the truth about why Kissimmee City Commissioner Art Otero proposed the addition of "In God We Trust" on the city's logo. According to an interview done by the Orlando Sentinel:
So the expense is justified to stick one to President Obama. Nothing says patriotism more than not supporting your Commander in Chief during a time of war. Classy, very classy.
As far as Commissioner Otero's argument about President Obama's push towards "socialism," we have just one question. Will Commissioner Otero give up his government provided, taxpayer funded health care? This must be the socialist direction Commissioner Otero is talking about since all the other "socialist" cries from mis-informed republican "leaders" have faded away. Most of the banks have repaid the TARP funds and GM just went through the quickest bankruptcy proceedings in history of the country. What other claims could Commissioner Otero be trying to falsely tie to our President? President Obama has specifically said he against the legalization of marijuana and he has said he is against gay marriage? Sounds like Commissioner Otero and President Barrack Hussein Obama have alot in common. That only leaves the issue of government provided health care as a 'socialist' issue, unless the scary "liberal" demons chanting in Commissioner Otero's head have given him other insights that we are just not aware of. We also have to wonder that if direction of the country is really the motivator behind the logo change, does that mean that Commissioner Otero liked the direction the country was headed in a year ago? This would at least explain Commissioner Otero's infantile concepts of the responsibilities of local government. Spending $200,000 of taxpayers money to let people know how you 'feel' about a few issues during an economic crisis is not a very conservative approach to government. It is wasteful.
Fix our roads, provide us good public safety, and spend your own money to let the world know about your feelings instead of raising our taxes to do it.
"Commissioner Art Otero, who proposed the addition, said he was prompted to suggest the change because he doesn't agree with the direction the country is going under the Obama administration, which he referred to as 'socialist.' He said his initiative was not based on faith but on patriotism."
"This nation has been moving toward more liberal postures such as homosexuality, gay marriage, abortion and the legalization of marijuana," Otero said. "I'm against that way of thinking. Those are not the values upon which this nation was founded. I think we need to fight for the values we're losing."
So the expense is justified to stick one to President Obama. Nothing says patriotism more than not supporting your Commander in Chief during a time of war. Classy, very classy.
As far as Commissioner Otero's argument about President Obama's push towards "socialism," we have just one question. Will Commissioner Otero give up his government provided, taxpayer funded health care? This must be the socialist direction Commissioner Otero is talking about since all the other "socialist" cries from mis-informed republican "leaders" have faded away. Most of the banks have repaid the TARP funds and GM just went through the quickest bankruptcy proceedings in history of the country. What other claims could Commissioner Otero be trying to falsely tie to our President? President Obama has specifically said he against the legalization of marijuana and he has said he is against gay marriage? Sounds like Commissioner Otero and President Barrack Hussein Obama have alot in common. That only leaves the issue of government provided health care as a 'socialist' issue, unless the scary "liberal" demons chanting in Commissioner Otero's head have given him other insights that we are just not aware of. We also have to wonder that if direction of the country is really the motivator behind the logo change, does that mean that Commissioner Otero liked the direction the country was headed in a year ago? This would at least explain Commissioner Otero's infantile concepts of the responsibilities of local government. Spending $200,000 of taxpayers money to let people know how you 'feel' about a few issues during an economic crisis is not a very conservative approach to government. It is wasteful.
Fix our roads, provide us good public safety, and spend your own money to let the world know about your feelings instead of raising our taxes to do it.
15 comments:
This is one of the most outrageouse wastes of taxpayer money that I have seen! Art needs to go!
Art does not speak the rest of us Republicans. We may disagree with President Obama, but we would never allude to the fact he is not a religous man. President Obama is an honorable man.
So now if the commission votes to approve this new logo, does that mean that everyone in the city is against the President? That would be sad. I didn't originally care if they changed, the logo, but I support President Obama.
I am a Republican and I want to state for the record that I like Obama. I think he is a decent man. I think the fact that he was elected says a lot for race relations in the country. The days of affirmative action should be numbered and rightly so.
Now even though I like Obama I do not have to agree with him. I abhor his leadership into socialism. You can see it all over the country. Nationalizing the financial sector, pick and choosing which companies go bankrupt and which get saved, 32 unelected czars to manage different areas of the economy,the total embrace of Keynesian economics.
Take a look at Glen Beck's special program on the economy. He lays out how Goldman Sachs is a criminal enterprise. He further shows how the financial industry has captured the government financial regulatory agencies. Do you trust bankers to regulate themselves?
Obama's policies are destroying America. He believes the solution is more government and more control. Government is not the solution. Government is the problem.
Take a look at jobs. The only growth in unions in the past decade has been government unions. This is because of an increase in government jobs at the expense of the private sector. The only way to provide lasting jobs is through the private sector..not the government.
When the government does not like a statistic they change the way that statistic is figured. The unemployment rate is now up to 20% in a lot of states if you include the people who are discouraged and quit looking for a job. They changed the way inflation was figured several years ago and took out housing and energy, the two sectors where prices were going up. The government changes methodology when confronted with bad numbers.
You say that most of the TARP money has been paid back, that is not true. It is on the Fed's balance sheet but it is still tied to individual banking entities as reserves. When the stimulus money went to states it came with strings attached. You got the money now, but you became obligated to fund specific programs in future years.
Sanford realized this and sued the government. He lost and now South Carolinans will be taxed that much more in future years to pay the bill. Floridians will be taxed at a greater rate in the future for accepting the stimulus.
With the amount of money being printed that is injected into the system you can only have 2 outcomes unless you change behavior.
1) You have to raise taxes. The bulk of the tax money will not go toward specific programs or infrastructure. It will go to the bankers to pay the interest on the debt.
2) If you do not raise taxes, you have to inflate the monetary supply. This will devalue the dollar. If the dollar is devalued by 50% then a 10 trillion dollar debt is reduced to 5 trillion because you are repaying it in dollars that are worth much less. This also creates a hidden tax on savings and retirement because your assets will be worth considerably less. It will also foster more malinvestment.
More than likely it will be some combination of the 2.
Neither one of these options is attractive. You have to change behavior. The way to start changing behavior is to let the free market work instead of bogging it down with high taxes, strict regulation, and economic disincentives. The only valid and logical solution is to unshackle the chains and set Americans free.
Sorry to go off for so long, but this is really disturbing when people refuse to see Obama as whast he really is. A Socialist.
It appears that the public agrees with you Wayne. The poll on the Orlando Sentinels web site right now is showing 89% of 5467 are against changing the logo. The comments left on their article are even worse. Art and the rest of the commission has just made us all sound like a bunch of racists hate mongers. Good job commissioners!
Is this a city logo or the logo that the downtown businesses are working on? I am looking at a sheet of logos and I do not see "In God We Trust" on any of them?
City Commission seats are nonpartisan; however, Art Otero's campaign was mostly financed by the Republican party. Look at his financial reports and you will see where his financing came from and also the nonreporting of his media advertising which was paid for by the Republican party. Talk about "values" you need to live what you preach. Otero needs to represent the citizens not his own personal agenda.
To the Anonymous poster who used Glen Beck as a reference. Please never do that again, Glen Beck is a moron using scare tactics to keep his job at FOX News. He is caught spewing mis-information night after night. Also in the paragraph where you mention Beck, you ask the question if we trust the Financial institutions to regulate themselves. Aren't you basically saying you want the government to step in and control financial institutions in a 'socialistic' way?
The changes you talk about as far as how unemployment is figured were changed under George W. Bush's administration.
As far as tarp money, you are actually incorrect. You can see the facts here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124524619467123215.html
Embattled South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford is probably not the best republican example to use in any argument, but I would agree that the stimulus package came with way to many strings. The problem is that local and state governments are so screwed up that the Federal Government had to come up with some way to make sure money was spent properly.
The rest of your arguments are very valid, but you are pointing to problems created by a the prior administration. What you are really saying is that the republican majority put us on a path to socialism.
If nothing else, I always love the debates that this site creates!
As of this morning the Orlando Sentinel Poll shows that 14645 people are against changing the logo with only 672 people being for changing the logo. Looks like Art is on the wrong side of this issue.
Looks like the crazy right wing stations are picking this topic up fast. 540 has a poll on their site and it show that more people are in favor of the logo change. They only show a couple of hundred votes, but it still show 60%.
By the way Wayne. This was a great article. Keep up the good work that you do.
I think the Mayor comments were great, but I think that you are seeing some payback from the vote that was taken on the Waste Management issue. Swan won't let that one go very easily.
I think the Mayor was right. This can not be approved because of what it now represents. A changed logo would now represent hate.
Otero is just trying to keep his name in the media. That's what this whole thing is about. ME, me, me! Well, bad timing for $200k spending Otero. Think about the lawsuits this will bring to Kissimmee with the ACLU. Even if you win, we the people are the losers. All that money going for legal fees.
By doing this your not building up your reputation for a higher position within the County.
There is no difference between a $200,000 logo and a $200,000 fountain. We will remember Art Van Otero come election day.
With the story in the Sentinel about how Otero wouldn't comment on the issue after the vote, but would pray for the Sentinel reporter, Art is well on his way to becoming Kissimmee's Gary Siplin.
Maybe he figures this is an "in" at the state or federal level, talking about "important issues" like values. Hope his gamble works out for him, because I think he's done at the local level.
Post a Comment