The Obama regime is despicable.
I'm sitting here watching Megyn Kelly's new show "The Kelly Files" on Fox News and I'm in a state of shock. I've learned that the families of five of our warriors killed in Afghanistan will be denied death benefits. Basically what that means is that the government won't pay for the warriors' funerals nor for flying the families to Dover Air Force Base to retrieve their fallen loved ones' bodies. And this is being blamed on the government shut down. Outrage doesn't begin to described my feelings on this. This is the Obama regime's policy of maximum pain in action. What is the policy of maximum pain?
Maximum pain is the Obama regime's strategy to rout the GOP by using the shutdown to cause as much hurt to Americans as possible and then blaming Republicans. It's pure political warfare being waged on the backs of the American people. Private businesses have been closed by the Parks Service. Park rangers have been told to make things as difficult for the public as possible. And now this outrage of denying death benefits to the families of our fallen heroes. Corrupt! Corrupt! Maximum pain is corrupt. The Obama regime is corrupt, headed by a Dear Leader wannabe utterly contemptuous of the limits on his power.
Obama must be made to know that he's no Dear Leader. He's the president of a free, representative republic with a loyal opposition legally and morally entitled to block policies they don't like. That's how America works. If Obama and his Democrats don't like that then they need a BIG dose of their own medicine. Maximum pain for Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. YEAH!!!!
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 08, 2013
Sunday, November 18, 2012
America: Not Worth An Iron Dome
Iron Dome.
Remember that name. That's the moniker of Israel's missile defense system that has shot down most of the rockets Hamas terrorists have been raining down on the Jewish state in recent days. The system was designed to intercept and destroy short range rockets and artillery shells. The Israelis recognized the need for a missile shield during the Second Lebanon War in 2006, when Hezboallah fired more than 4000 rockets into northern Israel. With US financial backing, the Iron Dome defense system was developed and first deployed in in March of 2011. Since then it has shot down over 400 rockets, sparing Israeli civilians much suffering and death. Clearly, a missile defense system can work. But our newly reelected president doesn't believe America deserves one.
If you recall, in 2009 Obama cancelled plans to deploy an interceptor site and radar in Poland and the Czech Republic that would've protected America and its allies against a primarily Iranian missile threat. Obama cancelled the site and radar--and put America and it's allies at risk--in order to appease the Russians. The president thought it more important to "restart" our relationship with Moscow than do everything possible to protect the US. He also apparently thought that being liked by the Russians was more valuable than the goodwill America would've garnered from the Poles, Czechs, and other Europeans who would've been protected by the shield. So now, three years later, America (and her allies) have no defense against missiles from Iran or anyone else. Yet, Iron Dome shows that a missile shield can work. Yes, ID is designed for short-range projectiles, but it still shows that an anti-missile defense system can work. But America doesn't have one because it would make the Russians mad. So thinks Barak Obama.
I guess the people who reelected him forgot about that.
Remember that name. That's the moniker of Israel's missile defense system that has shot down most of the rockets Hamas terrorists have been raining down on the Jewish state in recent days. The system was designed to intercept and destroy short range rockets and artillery shells. The Israelis recognized the need for a missile shield during the Second Lebanon War in 2006, when Hezboallah fired more than 4000 rockets into northern Israel. With US financial backing, the Iron Dome defense system was developed and first deployed in in March of 2011. Since then it has shot down over 400 rockets, sparing Israeli civilians much suffering and death. Clearly, a missile defense system can work. But our newly reelected president doesn't believe America deserves one.
If you recall, in 2009 Obama cancelled plans to deploy an interceptor site and radar in Poland and the Czech Republic that would've protected America and its allies against a primarily Iranian missile threat. Obama cancelled the site and radar--and put America and it's allies at risk--in order to appease the Russians. The president thought it more important to "restart" our relationship with Moscow than do everything possible to protect the US. He also apparently thought that being liked by the Russians was more valuable than the goodwill America would've garnered from the Poles, Czechs, and other Europeans who would've been protected by the shield. So now, three years later, America (and her allies) have no defense against missiles from Iran or anyone else. Yet, Iron Dome shows that a missile shield can work. Yes, ID is designed for short-range projectiles, but it still shows that an anti-missile defense system can work. But America doesn't have one because it would make the Russians mad. So thinks Barak Obama.
I guess the people who reelected him forgot about that.
Saturday, August 04, 2012
Conspiracy?
So, I got to listen to Rush Limbaugh's show yesterday. It was open line Friday and wasn't very interesting, actually. But then Rush related something he'd heard from another source (sorry, didn't catch the source). This source speculated that rising unemployment could help Obama in November. I know. That sounds totally counterintuitive. How could a worsening economy help Obama? But Rush explained it. He pointed out that more and more unemployed and underemployed people means more and more people looking to government for help. And who is promising more and more government entitlements? Obama! People who are on the edge, scared, and feeling like there's no hope can be very susceptible to Obama's class warfare, government-is-here-to-help-you message. Such people would be very tempted to vote for benefits over values. That's how a weakening economy could help the president on election day. And I'm sure the preceding scenario hasn't escaped Obama and his team. So, is Obama deliberately letting, or even making, the economy run down to help his re-election chances? I don't want to be conspiratorial but I can't put anything past the current occupant of the White House.
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Just What Will This Mean?
It's been about two weeks now since the Supreme Court upheld Obama's health care reform law and I'm still trying to digest it. The Court's decision certainly wasn't expected by me and the more I think about it it seems more and more shady. I'm starting to wonder if all is at it seems here.
The Court found the Affordable Care Act, aka "Obamacare", constitutional which seems like a straight forward victor for Obama, but the way the Court found Obamacare constitutional poses problems for the president. The Supreme Court upheld Obamacare by defining the most hated part of the law, the individual mandate, as a tax in contrast to the administration's 3 year long insistence that it was not. So now the president's victory will force him and his supporters to sell this newly defined tax to a nation that hates taxes even more than big government. In short, his "victory" has Obama in a bind.
I've heard speculation from conservative talking heads that this conundrum for Obama may have been planned. I've heard that Chief Justice Roberts was being "crazy like a fox" with his decision, making Obamacare constitutional but in a way that a) put Obama on the spot and b) gave Republicans a weapon to deploy against him in the election. And it energized the conservative/Republican base to boot. Some conservative talking heads seem to think that the Supreme Court's decision not only isn't so bad but is a net positive for Republicans. Sorry, but I'm just not feeling it.
Yes, the Court's decision energized the conservative/Republican base, which is good, but that's the only good thing I see in it. I don't see calling the individual mandate a tax as a good thing at all. Sure, it gives the Republicans a weapon against Obama but I fear that it also expands the taxation power of Congress. By labeling the individual mandate a tax the high Court set a precedent that makes Congress' taxation power pretty much limitless when it is intended to control behavior. Think about it. The federal government passes a law that forces Americans to buy health insurance and financially punishes them if they don't, and the Supreme Court says the law is constitutional because the financial punishment is a "tax". The feds can now "tax" us for not doing pretty much anything they tell us to do.That's frightening, and my fear is not assuaged just because this expansion of federal power has energized the base.
Please don't misunderstand me. I'm glad, thrilled actually, the conservative/Republican base is energized like it hasn't been since the Tea Party protests of 2009-2010. We need that energy to get out our message and, more importantly, our vote. But if we fall short in November, despite all this new energy, and fail to oust Obama from the White House and the Senate Dems from their majority, Obamacare will remain the law of the land. What then? Will conservatives/Republicans have enough energy to keep fighting this insidious law? Will we have enough energy to use uncomfortable (for us) tactics, e.g. civil disobedience, if necessary? We don't know the answer to those questions and that scares me as much as the federal government's unprecedented power grab.
So, what does this all mean? Where will the Supreme Court's decision lead? It will lead, I believe, to either the restoration of American freedom and self-reliance or to the transformation of America as Obama promised. I want the restoration of America, not Obama's Marxist-inspired "change". Conservatives/Republicans can restore America if we choose to. We have the energy, but do we have the tenacity to win? Time will tell, and I pray it's on our side.
The Court found the Affordable Care Act, aka "Obamacare", constitutional which seems like a straight forward victor for Obama, but the way the Court found Obamacare constitutional poses problems for the president. The Supreme Court upheld Obamacare by defining the most hated part of the law, the individual mandate, as a tax in contrast to the administration's 3 year long insistence that it was not. So now the president's victory will force him and his supporters to sell this newly defined tax to a nation that hates taxes even more than big government. In short, his "victory" has Obama in a bind.
I've heard speculation from conservative talking heads that this conundrum for Obama may have been planned. I've heard that Chief Justice Roberts was being "crazy like a fox" with his decision, making Obamacare constitutional but in a way that a) put Obama on the spot and b) gave Republicans a weapon to deploy against him in the election. And it energized the conservative/Republican base to boot. Some conservative talking heads seem to think that the Supreme Court's decision not only isn't so bad but is a net positive for Republicans. Sorry, but I'm just not feeling it.
Yes, the Court's decision energized the conservative/Republican base, which is good, but that's the only good thing I see in it. I don't see calling the individual mandate a tax as a good thing at all. Sure, it gives the Republicans a weapon against Obama but I fear that it also expands the taxation power of Congress. By labeling the individual mandate a tax the high Court set a precedent that makes Congress' taxation power pretty much limitless when it is intended to control behavior. Think about it. The federal government passes a law that forces Americans to buy health insurance and financially punishes them if they don't, and the Supreme Court says the law is constitutional because the financial punishment is a "tax". The feds can now "tax" us for not doing pretty much anything they tell us to do.That's frightening, and my fear is not assuaged just because this expansion of federal power has energized the base.
Please don't misunderstand me. I'm glad, thrilled actually, the conservative/Republican base is energized like it hasn't been since the Tea Party protests of 2009-2010. We need that energy to get out our message and, more importantly, our vote. But if we fall short in November, despite all this new energy, and fail to oust Obama from the White House and the Senate Dems from their majority, Obamacare will remain the law of the land. What then? Will conservatives/Republicans have enough energy to keep fighting this insidious law? Will we have enough energy to use uncomfortable (for us) tactics, e.g. civil disobedience, if necessary? We don't know the answer to those questions and that scares me as much as the federal government's unprecedented power grab.
So, what does this all mean? Where will the Supreme Court's decision lead? It will lead, I believe, to either the restoration of American freedom and self-reliance or to the transformation of America as Obama promised. I want the restoration of America, not Obama's Marxist-inspired "change". Conservatives/Republicans can restore America if we choose to. We have the energy, but do we have the tenacity to win? Time will tell, and I pray it's on our side.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Raaaaaacist!
So, I heard today that former president Jimmy Carter severely criticized Barak Obama, accusing him if violating human rights in fighting the War on Terror. Now from the moment Obama was elected president liberals have promulgated the notion that it's racist to dare oppose him. No critic can possibly be motivated by genuine policy or ideological differences with the Anointed One. Oh, no. Racism is the only motive anyone can truly have for "disrespecting" Obama. So, now that Jimmy Carter has lashed out at Obama he will be in for stern, hysterical accusations of racism from liberals any minute now. This ought to be good. Waiting, waiting, waiting...
Saturday, March 03, 2012
Monique And The Magical Mystery Fuel
While driving home from Bible study tonight I was listening to talk radio. The show that was on--sorry, I didn't catch the name--was addressing the Obama administration's policy not to bring down gas prices. The show's host was positing the idea that Obama wants higher gas prices as a way to gin up support for green energy investments, which Obama believes in fervently. A woman named Monique called into the show to weigh in on the discussion. Monique opined that Obama is looking for the magical mystery fuel to replace oil and he believes he can compel its invention by making it financially painful for Americans to drive. When I heard what Monique said I burst out laughing. "Magical mystery fuel". LOVE IT! And she was so right! That IS what Obama devoutly believes in, a magical mystery fuel to deliver us from the evil of fossil fuels. And he IS arrogant enough to believe he can force it to materialize by allowing more and more pain at the pump.
Barak Obama has a messiah complex. He does not believe he was elected president to discharge the chief executive's constitutionally mandated duties and to do the will of the people. No, he believes he was elected to impose on us religion-and-gun clinging people his superior, secular progressive vision of the Good Society. Obama knows that alternative energy is better for us so he feels justified in compelling compliance with his "green energy" policies and objectives. Moniuqe nailed it. The magical mystery fuel is Obama's Holy Grail, and he's willing to permit increasing hardship on millions of Americans to get it. But hey, it's for our own good, even though we're too unsophisticated to get that. But the Anointed One is looking out for us. I'll try to remember that next time I'm pumping $4 a gallon gas.
Barak Obama has a messiah complex. He does not believe he was elected president to discharge the chief executive's constitutionally mandated duties and to do the will of the people. No, he believes he was elected to impose on us religion-and-gun clinging people his superior, secular progressive vision of the Good Society. Obama knows that alternative energy is better for us so he feels justified in compelling compliance with his "green energy" policies and objectives. Moniuqe nailed it. The magical mystery fuel is Obama's Holy Grail, and he's willing to permit increasing hardship on millions of Americans to get it. But hey, it's for our own good, even though we're too unsophisticated to get that. But the Anointed One is looking out for us. I'll try to remember that next time I'm pumping $4 a gallon gas.
Monday, May 16, 2011
A Small Taste Of Obamacare
I'm opposed to Obamacare but I always kind of thought it wouldn't impinge on me personally for a few years. I know, that's a naive thought but I did think it...until today. Today I got what I think is a small taste of Obamacare.
Today at work we learned that some changes are taking place in our company health benefits. To put it simply, our health insurance is getting more expensive. Our premiums are going up, new surcharges will apply under certain conditions and, worst of all to me, the co-pay system has been abolished. Instead, we will have to pay the contract cost for doctor's visits and procedures until our deductible is paid. After that we will pay 20% of the cost of visits and procedures. Like I said, our health care is getting more expensive. Didn't Obama promise Americans just the opposite?
The costly changes that my company is making to its health benefits is an example of the unintended(?) consequences of government intervention in health care and the free market. Two Obamacare policies appear to be driving my company's health benefits shake up. Those policies are the requirements for health insurance companies to provide free preventative care and to let parents carry their children on their health plans until those children are 26 years old (and there are no restrictions on these adult kids; they can be married and have kids of their own and still be eligible for their parents' health coverage).
On the surface these policies seem compassionate. What's wrong with free preventative care? What's wrong with letting parents keep their twenty-something kids on their health insurance plan? What's wrong is that somebody has to pay for these "reforms". "Free" preventative care is free only to the patient; it still costs money to the doctors, clinics, and hospitals who deliver that care, and that costs money to the insurance company. Likewise, forcing insurers to take on droves of new customers will raise their cost of doing business. How will insurance companies pay for these new expenses? By passing them onto consumers in the form of higher premiums, new charges, and/or reduced services. Nothing very compassionate about that.
The Founding Fathers were right not to make social welfare the responsibility of the federal government. In almost every instance, government "help" winds up creating more problems than it solves. In the case of Obamacare, federal "compassion" means that my co-workers and I will end up a bit poorer and possibly a bit less healthy. And all because Barak Obama cares.
I really wish he didn't.
Today at work we learned that some changes are taking place in our company health benefits. To put it simply, our health insurance is getting more expensive. Our premiums are going up, new surcharges will apply under certain conditions and, worst of all to me, the co-pay system has been abolished. Instead, we will have to pay the contract cost for doctor's visits and procedures until our deductible is paid. After that we will pay 20% of the cost of visits and procedures. Like I said, our health care is getting more expensive. Didn't Obama promise Americans just the opposite?
The costly changes that my company is making to its health benefits is an example of the unintended(?) consequences of government intervention in health care and the free market. Two Obamacare policies appear to be driving my company's health benefits shake up. Those policies are the requirements for health insurance companies to provide free preventative care and to let parents carry their children on their health plans until those children are 26 years old (and there are no restrictions on these adult kids; they can be married and have kids of their own and still be eligible for their parents' health coverage).
On the surface these policies seem compassionate. What's wrong with free preventative care? What's wrong with letting parents keep their twenty-something kids on their health insurance plan? What's wrong is that somebody has to pay for these "reforms". "Free" preventative care is free only to the patient; it still costs money to the doctors, clinics, and hospitals who deliver that care, and that costs money to the insurance company. Likewise, forcing insurers to take on droves of new customers will raise their cost of doing business. How will insurance companies pay for these new expenses? By passing them onto consumers in the form of higher premiums, new charges, and/or reduced services. Nothing very compassionate about that.
The Founding Fathers were right not to make social welfare the responsibility of the federal government. In almost every instance, government "help" winds up creating more problems than it solves. In the case of Obamacare, federal "compassion" means that my co-workers and I will end up a bit poorer and possibly a bit less healthy. And all because Barak Obama cares.
I really wish he didn't.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Does Obama Want Gaddafi To Win?
Does Obama want Moammar Gaddafi to win the civil war raging in Libya? I'm pondering this question in light of the president's skittishness about imposing a no-fly zone over Libya.
Gaddafi's forces are crushing what had been a largely successful rebellion against his rule. The loyalists have superior equipment all around but one of their biggest strengths over the rebels is their air power. If that power could be grounded the rebels stand a chance of winning. A rebel victory would be good not only because it would free the Libyan people from a brutal dictator but also for a reason specific to America.
Moammar Gaddafi is a mass murderer of Americans. Before 9/11 and Al Quaeda Gadaffi had killed more Americans than any other terrorist. In 1986 he ordered the Berlin discotheque bombing which killed three US servicemen. And in 1988 Gaddafi masterminded the infamous bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland which killed nearly 200 hundred American civilians. If Gaddfi is overthrown he can be snatched by the US and put on trial for the Americans he slaughtered. That's the American reason why the no-fly zone must be imposed. It'll increase the likelihood of Gadaffi's fall and the chance of America snagging the butcher of Lockerbie. And I'm wondering if that's what Obama wants to avoid.
Barack Obama is a far-Left guy. Yes, he's done some good things in the War on Terror, but he's skeptical of American power and leadership, preferring to defer to the "world community". In fact, that is the "official" reason, articulated by Hillary Clinton, for his administration's reluctance to act first on the no-fly zone. There must be an international consensus on any action against Libya, Hillary Clinton said; America must not take the lead. With the "world community" in charge there's a greater chance that Gaddafi will crush the rebellion and stay in power, making moot any question of America apprehending Gaddafi. I believe that's the outcome Obama's hoping for.
Snagging Gaddafi and putting him on trial just doesn't mesh with Obama's worldview. In fact, being the far-Left guy that he is, it's safe to say that that would be a nightmare scenario for him. Obama would much prefer an end game that jibes with his progressive, "America the Bad" paradigm. So, does Obama want Gaddafi to win? In a word, yes. That would relieve him, at least partially, of the job of defending and avenging Americans, something he never really wanted to do. And he can save face by blameing his inaction on the "world community" which, in his paradigm, takes precedence over the needs of America. You see, in spirit Obama truly is a citizen of the world, just as he said in his Berlin speech in 2008. And those of you who voted for him thought you were electing an American. Silly you.
Gaddafi's forces are crushing what had been a largely successful rebellion against his rule. The loyalists have superior equipment all around but one of their biggest strengths over the rebels is their air power. If that power could be grounded the rebels stand a chance of winning. A rebel victory would be good not only because it would free the Libyan people from a brutal dictator but also for a reason specific to America.
Moammar Gaddafi is a mass murderer of Americans. Before 9/11 and Al Quaeda Gadaffi had killed more Americans than any other terrorist. In 1986 he ordered the Berlin discotheque bombing which killed three US servicemen. And in 1988 Gaddafi masterminded the infamous bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland which killed nearly 200 hundred American civilians. If Gaddfi is overthrown he can be snatched by the US and put on trial for the Americans he slaughtered. That's the American reason why the no-fly zone must be imposed. It'll increase the likelihood of Gadaffi's fall and the chance of America snagging the butcher of Lockerbie. And I'm wondering if that's what Obama wants to avoid.
Barack Obama is a far-Left guy. Yes, he's done some good things in the War on Terror, but he's skeptical of American power and leadership, preferring to defer to the "world community". In fact, that is the "official" reason, articulated by Hillary Clinton, for his administration's reluctance to act first on the no-fly zone. There must be an international consensus on any action against Libya, Hillary Clinton said; America must not take the lead. With the "world community" in charge there's a greater chance that Gaddafi will crush the rebellion and stay in power, making moot any question of America apprehending Gaddafi. I believe that's the outcome Obama's hoping for.
Snagging Gaddafi and putting him on trial just doesn't mesh with Obama's worldview. In fact, being the far-Left guy that he is, it's safe to say that that would be a nightmare scenario for him. Obama would much prefer an end game that jibes with his progressive, "America the Bad" paradigm. So, does Obama want Gaddafi to win? In a word, yes. That would relieve him, at least partially, of the job of defending and avenging Americans, something he never really wanted to do. And he can save face by blameing his inaction on the "world community" which, in his paradigm, takes precedence over the needs of America. You see, in spirit Obama truly is a citizen of the world, just as he said in his Berlin speech in 2008. And those of you who voted for him thought you were electing an American. Silly you.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Why Isn't This Racist?
Well, the Chosen One worked out a deal with Republicans on the Bush tax cuts. Obama agreed to extend the cuts for ALL Americans, not just the middle class and, exchange, the Republicans agreed to extend unemployment benefits for some people for another year and one month. As compromises go, this one was pretty mundane to me, but not to Obama's liberal base, and that's the interesting part here.
Remember when the Tea Party movement first started? What was the movement accused of? Racism, right? Most of the Tea Partiers were White and that was supposedly prima facie evidence that their movement was anti-Black. After all, what motive but racism could White people have for criticizing America's first Black president? White criticism equalled racism; that was the formula, until just a few days ago.
Obama's agreement with the Republicans on the tax cuts has enraged his liberal base. Even now, they are in a virtual revolt against their erstwhile messiah. For the last several days White politicians have been all over the tv lashing out at Obama. And no one's accusing them of racism. Indeed, the very people who were sanctimoniously yelling, "Raaaaacist!" at the Tea Partiers for criticizing Obama are now yelling, "F--k the president!". But the Congressional Black Caucus, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Jeanane Garofalo are all silent.
This is solid proof that, for the Left, dissent isn't a right but a strategy to advance their agenda. And playing the race card is an intergral part of that strategy. Leftists originally saw criticism of Obama as a threat to their agenda and tried to discredit the critics by smearing them as racists. Now, though, Leftists see Obama's tax compromise as a threat to their agenda and are going after Obama for his heresy. But their angry revolt against the Chosen One will never be characterized as racist. You see, criticism of Obama or Blacks generally, is racist ONLY when it threatens the Left's objectives. That's why all those White liberals can unload on Obama without being smeared as haters. It's all about advancing the Left. And you actually thought liberals cared about stopping racism. Silly you.
Remember when the Tea Party movement first started? What was the movement accused of? Racism, right? Most of the Tea Partiers were White and that was supposedly prima facie evidence that their movement was anti-Black. After all, what motive but racism could White people have for criticizing America's first Black president? White criticism equalled racism; that was the formula, until just a few days ago.
Obama's agreement with the Republicans on the tax cuts has enraged his liberal base. Even now, they are in a virtual revolt against their erstwhile messiah. For the last several days White politicians have been all over the tv lashing out at Obama. And no one's accusing them of racism. Indeed, the very people who were sanctimoniously yelling, "Raaaaacist!" at the Tea Partiers for criticizing Obama are now yelling, "F--k the president!". But the Congressional Black Caucus, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Jeanane Garofalo are all silent.
This is solid proof that, for the Left, dissent isn't a right but a strategy to advance their agenda. And playing the race card is an intergral part of that strategy. Leftists originally saw criticism of Obama as a threat to their agenda and tried to discredit the critics by smearing them as racists. Now, though, Leftists see Obama's tax compromise as a threat to their agenda and are going after Obama for his heresy. But their angry revolt against the Chosen One will never be characterized as racist. You see, criticism of Obama or Blacks generally, is racist ONLY when it threatens the Left's objectives. That's why all those White liberals can unload on Obama without being smeared as haters. It's all about advancing the Left. And you actually thought liberals cared about stopping racism. Silly you.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Guest Column: Obama Has Failed
Hey friends! While I'm out of sorts because of chemo a blogging friend of mine, Robert, has offered to do a guest column for my blog. I hope you enjoy Robert's insightful post and check out his blog, "Wise Conservatism", in the blog roll. Happy reading!
Obama has failed.......even as he is pushing his "so called" Summer of Recovery.
If you tell a lie enough times, eventually, the people will begin to believe it as the truth. That is what we have happening now. Obama, is saying over and over again, that this is the summer of recovery, when in fact it isn't happening. But, saying it over and over and over again, does not make it so.
-Robert Garding-
That quote tells it like it is. The Gaffe-o-Matic Joe Biden keeps doing that, too. It seems that the entire left end of the spectrum in our government are there only for progagating the same lie, in the hopes that we, the American people fall for it, as we always have in the past. I will explain this in a bit. But they do not stop there.
Even after a year of working the economy the way they want, they still turn to Bush bashing and blaming Bush for the troubles that they are having. Historically, it has been proven, that liberalism and Socialism do not work. Liberalism, if left to it’s own devices, implodes like we are seeing now. They start out with government programs to help the needy. This in itself is not a bad thing. No one ever said it was. But, like I said, it doesn’t stop there. Liberalism will not work unless it grows government. A big government, and our constitution are not compatible. Just like Sharia Law and our Constitution are not compatible.
This is something that bothers me, and I know it bothers Seane-Anna, and the rest of America who do not like what Obama is doing. The fact is the left is so disconnected from the American people, and that they do not care to get connected to us, is insulting. It's insulting because they feel we are too stupid to know what we want. It is really galling that Obama and his gang really think the American people are dumb enough to fall for their propaganda. And Propaganda is what it all is folks. It’s as if they think we can't see reality, even though we're the ones living it, not Obama and his limousine liberal friends. They cannot seem to tell the truth to us no matter what, but they think that their lies are not detected by us either.
Now it is like I said a few paragraphs ago. They think that we believe their lies, mainly because we have allowed them to be implemented in the past. I have a sort of historical perspective on this, because in my 58 years, I have seen freedom after freedom taken away from us in the name of bigger government and more governmental programs. Freedoms like being able to pray in school. Freedoms like learning America is a great nation. Freedoms like learning the truth, which for the most part isn't taught anymore in government schools. Freedoms like being able to put our children into private schools. That freedom isn't gone yet, but you can see the government trying to take that one too.
In Chicago, the second amendment of the Constitution does not apply anymore because the average person cannot own or possess handguns. This did not happen overnight either. It started out small, with a law to help the police fight crime. When that didn’t work they went to the next step. And on and on, always with the same pretext that if we do this, the desired effect will happen. The trouble is, the desired effect of the government, and the desired effect of the people soon parted ways, and the people didn’t speak up....and we ended up with the second amendment of our constitution being junked in Chicago by the usual thuggish style of politics, and criminal polticians, that has now hit the White House.
Chicagoans allowed their rights to bear arms to be taken away from them. We are now fighting it, because we see what is going on. The difference being is that Chicago had it happen to them over generations. We are seeing it happen in less than a decade. That is the other side of Liberalism. They start out slow, and when they get what they want, which is total power, they go power crazy and start implementing their ideals with no regard to what the people want. And there is the disconnect from the people. It is the same as the analogy of the Frog. Drop it into a boiling pot of water and it will leap out to keep from boiling to death. Put it in cool water, and slowly heat it up, the Frog will sit there and cook because it doesn’t see or feel the danger of what is coming before it’s too late. That is how the liberals have pushed they’re agenda since the beginning. Things that are seen as normal today would have been completely rebuffed 50 years ago if tried then.
We the people, still see the Constitution as the document that forms this Republic into the great nation that she is. They the liberal left, sees the Constitution as a document that is flawed and in the way of the things they want to do. Nancy Pelosi spoke it right out in the open a few months ago, when a reporter asked her if the Health care bill was Constitutional. Her reply was telling if nothing else, when she said, ‘Are you kidding???’ Fortunately, the reporter wasn’t kidding. UNFORTUNATELY, Pelosi wasn’t either. That is how these liberals believe. But there is more.
On October the 29th of 2008, before the election was voted on Thomas Sowell said this about an Obama Presidency. And his words have all but come true. Read them:
"........if Sen. Barack Obama wins, it is more likely to be historic — and catastrophic.
Once the election is over, the glittering generalities of rhetoric and style will mean nothing. Everything will depend on performance in facing huge challenges, domestic and foreign. Performance is where Obama has nothing to show for his political career, either in Illinois or in Washington.
Policies he proposes under the change banner are almost all policies that have been tried repeatedly in other countries — and failed repeatedly in other countries.
Politicians telling businesses how to operate? That’s been tried in countries around the world, especially during the second half of the 20th century. It has failed so often and so badly that even socialist and communist governments were freeing up their markets by the end of the century. The economies of China and India began to take off into high rates of growth when they got rid of precisely the kinds of policies that Obama is advocating for the United States under the magic mantra of change.
Putting restrictions on international trade in order to save jobs at home? That was tried here with the Hawley-Smoot tariff during the Great Depression.
Unemployment was 9 percent when that tariff was passed to save jobs, but unemployment went up instead of down and reached 25 percent before the decade was over.
Higher taxes to “spread the wealth around,” as Obama puts it? The idea of redistributing wealth has turned into the reality of redistributing poverty, in countries where wealth has fled and a lack of incentives has stifled the production of new wealth.
Economic disasters, however, may pale by comparison with the catastrophe of Iran with nuclear weapons. Glib rhetoric about Iran’s being “a small country,” as Obama called it, will be a bitter irony for Americans who will have to live in the shadow of a nuclear threat that cannot be deterred, as that of the Soviet Union could be, by the threat of a nuclear counterattack. Suicidal fanatics cannot be deterred. If they are willing to die and we are not, then we are at their mercy — and they have no mercy. Moreover, once they get nuclear weapons, that situation cannot be reversed.
Is this the legacy we wish to leave our children and grandchildren, by voting on the basis of style and symbolism, rather than substance?
If Barack Obama thinks that such a catastrophe can be avoided by sitting down and talking with the leaders of Iran, then he is repeating a fallacy that helped bring on World War II. In a nuclear age, one country does not have to send troops to occupy another country to conquer it. A country is conquered if another country can dictate who rules it, as the Mongols once did with Russia, and as Osama bin Laden tried to do when he threatened retaliation against places in the United States that voted for President Bush. But he didn’t have nuclear weapons to back up that threat — yet.
America has never been a conquered country, so it may be very hard for most Americans even to conceive what that can mean. After France was conquered in 1940, it was reduced to turning over some of its own innocent citizens to the Nazis to kill, just because those citizens were Jewish. Do you think our leaders wouldn’t do that? Not even if the alternative was to see New York and Los Angeles go up in mushroom clouds? If I were Jewish, I wouldn’t bet my life on that.
What the Middle East fanatics want is not just our resources or even our lives, but our humiliation first, in whatever sadistic ways they can think of. Their lust for humiliation has been demonstrated repeatedly in their videotaped beheadings that find such an eager market in the Middle East. None of this can be prevented by glib talk, but only by character, courage, and decisive actions, none of which Obama has ever demonstrated."
Now, after months and a few years since that was printed by Thomas Sowell, can you see that he was right? If you can’t, then you are still stuck in Obama’s mantra chant of “change change change” because you do not like America as a free nation. But if you are a Patriotic and Freedom loving American, then you can see it only too well.
Obama told us when the Stimulus was being pushed, that if we didn’t pass it, and spend those hundreds of billions of dollars, that we didn’t have, then Unemployment would continue to go up and the economy would crash and burn. He said if it was passed, unemployment would not go above 8%. It has and it continues to hover at or above 10% now. And the government is now telling us that is the new normal. HUH????
It’s just like in Chicago. For generations they were telling the people, get the guns off the streets. If guns are outlawed, there will be no crime. But crime flourished there. Why? Because the people’s ability to defend themselves against the criminals was taken away. When guns were outlawed, only the outlaws had the guns. Where there is no protection for the people, crime WILL flourish, with abandon. As it has in Chicago.
It is then, when they’re ideas do not work, that they turn to the other tactic that they have always used. And that is out and out lying. As with Chuck Schumer in 2008 said, when trying to help the liberal cause, that "Conservatism is akin to porn."
The evidences are all there to tell the American people that Liberalism will NOT work under any circumstances. Yet, the politicians on the left continue to push it on us, and like in the last election, we continue to fall for it.
They have pushed their socialistic health care bill on us, just as Europe is opting out of the same system because it didn’t work! And the same can be said about almost everything that Obama has tried to push on us since becoming president. And yet, even after more than a year in office.....he is still trying the same thing that the Liberals would not allow anyone else to get away with. And that is blame the previous administration, and not taking credit for the fiasco that He himself has caused. And that is the last thing I wish to talk about when it comes to the liberals. Their ideals will never work. But when they don’t work, they place the blame elsewhere. Always elsewhere. Never where the blame actually belongs. And that is the implementation of ideals that will never work. They have historically proven to never work, and those ideals at this very moment, all over the world, are not working and are being stopped because of it. But not here. Obama is pushing these same failed agenda’s saying that we need to do this to save the economy. He is so moronic at times. But so can we be.
When are we going to learn? America is a great country. America is a strong country. But America can be destroyed. The left right now, is on the path to doing just that. Is that what we Americans want? I mentioned to my children just the other day, that for the first time in my time, I can actually say, that if we do not change the path that the liberal government has placed us on, that that I can see a world, where America will NOT exist when they are adults. That to me is a sad thing to consider. I hope it is to all other patriotic Americans.....
"If we cease to be a nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."
-President Ronald Reagan-
Obama has failed.......even as he is pushing his "so called" Summer of Recovery.
If you tell a lie enough times, eventually, the people will begin to believe it as the truth. That is what we have happening now. Obama, is saying over and over again, that this is the summer of recovery, when in fact it isn't happening. But, saying it over and over and over again, does not make it so.
-Robert Garding-
That quote tells it like it is. The Gaffe-o-Matic Joe Biden keeps doing that, too. It seems that the entire left end of the spectrum in our government are there only for progagating the same lie, in the hopes that we, the American people fall for it, as we always have in the past. I will explain this in a bit. But they do not stop there.
Even after a year of working the economy the way they want, they still turn to Bush bashing and blaming Bush for the troubles that they are having. Historically, it has been proven, that liberalism and Socialism do not work. Liberalism, if left to it’s own devices, implodes like we are seeing now. They start out with government programs to help the needy. This in itself is not a bad thing. No one ever said it was. But, like I said, it doesn’t stop there. Liberalism will not work unless it grows government. A big government, and our constitution are not compatible. Just like Sharia Law and our Constitution are not compatible.
This is something that bothers me, and I know it bothers Seane-Anna, and the rest of America who do not like what Obama is doing. The fact is the left is so disconnected from the American people, and that they do not care to get connected to us, is insulting. It's insulting because they feel we are too stupid to know what we want. It is really galling that Obama and his gang really think the American people are dumb enough to fall for their propaganda. And Propaganda is what it all is folks. It’s as if they think we can't see reality, even though we're the ones living it, not Obama and his limousine liberal friends. They cannot seem to tell the truth to us no matter what, but they think that their lies are not detected by us either.
Now it is like I said a few paragraphs ago. They think that we believe their lies, mainly because we have allowed them to be implemented in the past. I have a sort of historical perspective on this, because in my 58 years, I have seen freedom after freedom taken away from us in the name of bigger government and more governmental programs. Freedoms like being able to pray in school. Freedoms like learning America is a great nation. Freedoms like learning the truth, which for the most part isn't taught anymore in government schools. Freedoms like being able to put our children into private schools. That freedom isn't gone yet, but you can see the government trying to take that one too.
In Chicago, the second amendment of the Constitution does not apply anymore because the average person cannot own or possess handguns. This did not happen overnight either. It started out small, with a law to help the police fight crime. When that didn’t work they went to the next step. And on and on, always with the same pretext that if we do this, the desired effect will happen. The trouble is, the desired effect of the government, and the desired effect of the people soon parted ways, and the people didn’t speak up....and we ended up with the second amendment of our constitution being junked in Chicago by the usual thuggish style of politics, and criminal polticians, that has now hit the White House.
Chicagoans allowed their rights to bear arms to be taken away from them. We are now fighting it, because we see what is going on. The difference being is that Chicago had it happen to them over generations. We are seeing it happen in less than a decade. That is the other side of Liberalism. They start out slow, and when they get what they want, which is total power, they go power crazy and start implementing their ideals with no regard to what the people want. And there is the disconnect from the people. It is the same as the analogy of the Frog. Drop it into a boiling pot of water and it will leap out to keep from boiling to death. Put it in cool water, and slowly heat it up, the Frog will sit there and cook because it doesn’t see or feel the danger of what is coming before it’s too late. That is how the liberals have pushed they’re agenda since the beginning. Things that are seen as normal today would have been completely rebuffed 50 years ago if tried then.
We the people, still see the Constitution as the document that forms this Republic into the great nation that she is. They the liberal left, sees the Constitution as a document that is flawed and in the way of the things they want to do. Nancy Pelosi spoke it right out in the open a few months ago, when a reporter asked her if the Health care bill was Constitutional. Her reply was telling if nothing else, when she said, ‘Are you kidding???’ Fortunately, the reporter wasn’t kidding. UNFORTUNATELY, Pelosi wasn’t either. That is how these liberals believe. But there is more.
On October the 29th of 2008, before the election was voted on Thomas Sowell said this about an Obama Presidency. And his words have all but come true. Read them:
"........if Sen. Barack Obama wins, it is more likely to be historic — and catastrophic.
Once the election is over, the glittering generalities of rhetoric and style will mean nothing. Everything will depend on performance in facing huge challenges, domestic and foreign. Performance is where Obama has nothing to show for his political career, either in Illinois or in Washington.
Policies he proposes under the change banner are almost all policies that have been tried repeatedly in other countries — and failed repeatedly in other countries.
Politicians telling businesses how to operate? That’s been tried in countries around the world, especially during the second half of the 20th century. It has failed so often and so badly that even socialist and communist governments were freeing up their markets by the end of the century. The economies of China and India began to take off into high rates of growth when they got rid of precisely the kinds of policies that Obama is advocating for the United States under the magic mantra of change.
Putting restrictions on international trade in order to save jobs at home? That was tried here with the Hawley-Smoot tariff during the Great Depression.
Unemployment was 9 percent when that tariff was passed to save jobs, but unemployment went up instead of down and reached 25 percent before the decade was over.
Higher taxes to “spread the wealth around,” as Obama puts it? The idea of redistributing wealth has turned into the reality of redistributing poverty, in countries where wealth has fled and a lack of incentives has stifled the production of new wealth.
Economic disasters, however, may pale by comparison with the catastrophe of Iran with nuclear weapons. Glib rhetoric about Iran’s being “a small country,” as Obama called it, will be a bitter irony for Americans who will have to live in the shadow of a nuclear threat that cannot be deterred, as that of the Soviet Union could be, by the threat of a nuclear counterattack. Suicidal fanatics cannot be deterred. If they are willing to die and we are not, then we are at their mercy — and they have no mercy. Moreover, once they get nuclear weapons, that situation cannot be reversed.
Is this the legacy we wish to leave our children and grandchildren, by voting on the basis of style and symbolism, rather than substance?
If Barack Obama thinks that such a catastrophe can be avoided by sitting down and talking with the leaders of Iran, then he is repeating a fallacy that helped bring on World War II. In a nuclear age, one country does not have to send troops to occupy another country to conquer it. A country is conquered if another country can dictate who rules it, as the Mongols once did with Russia, and as Osama bin Laden tried to do when he threatened retaliation against places in the United States that voted for President Bush. But he didn’t have nuclear weapons to back up that threat — yet.
America has never been a conquered country, so it may be very hard for most Americans even to conceive what that can mean. After France was conquered in 1940, it was reduced to turning over some of its own innocent citizens to the Nazis to kill, just because those citizens were Jewish. Do you think our leaders wouldn’t do that? Not even if the alternative was to see New York and Los Angeles go up in mushroom clouds? If I were Jewish, I wouldn’t bet my life on that.
What the Middle East fanatics want is not just our resources or even our lives, but our humiliation first, in whatever sadistic ways they can think of. Their lust for humiliation has been demonstrated repeatedly in their videotaped beheadings that find such an eager market in the Middle East. None of this can be prevented by glib talk, but only by character, courage, and decisive actions, none of which Obama has ever demonstrated."
Now, after months and a few years since that was printed by Thomas Sowell, can you see that he was right? If you can’t, then you are still stuck in Obama’s mantra chant of “change change change” because you do not like America as a free nation. But if you are a Patriotic and Freedom loving American, then you can see it only too well.
Obama told us when the Stimulus was being pushed, that if we didn’t pass it, and spend those hundreds of billions of dollars, that we didn’t have, then Unemployment would continue to go up and the economy would crash and burn. He said if it was passed, unemployment would not go above 8%. It has and it continues to hover at or above 10% now. And the government is now telling us that is the new normal. HUH????
It’s just like in Chicago. For generations they were telling the people, get the guns off the streets. If guns are outlawed, there will be no crime. But crime flourished there. Why? Because the people’s ability to defend themselves against the criminals was taken away. When guns were outlawed, only the outlaws had the guns. Where there is no protection for the people, crime WILL flourish, with abandon. As it has in Chicago.
It is then, when they’re ideas do not work, that they turn to the other tactic that they have always used. And that is out and out lying. As with Chuck Schumer in 2008 said, when trying to help the liberal cause, that "Conservatism is akin to porn."
The evidences are all there to tell the American people that Liberalism will NOT work under any circumstances. Yet, the politicians on the left continue to push it on us, and like in the last election, we continue to fall for it.
They have pushed their socialistic health care bill on us, just as Europe is opting out of the same system because it didn’t work! And the same can be said about almost everything that Obama has tried to push on us since becoming president. And yet, even after more than a year in office.....he is still trying the same thing that the Liberals would not allow anyone else to get away with. And that is blame the previous administration, and not taking credit for the fiasco that He himself has caused. And that is the last thing I wish to talk about when it comes to the liberals. Their ideals will never work. But when they don’t work, they place the blame elsewhere. Always elsewhere. Never where the blame actually belongs. And that is the implementation of ideals that will never work. They have historically proven to never work, and those ideals at this very moment, all over the world, are not working and are being stopped because of it. But not here. Obama is pushing these same failed agenda’s saying that we need to do this to save the economy. He is so moronic at times. But so can we be.
When are we going to learn? America is a great country. America is a strong country. But America can be destroyed. The left right now, is on the path to doing just that. Is that what we Americans want? I mentioned to my children just the other day, that for the first time in my time, I can actually say, that if we do not change the path that the liberal government has placed us on, that that I can see a world, where America will NOT exist when they are adults. That to me is a sad thing to consider. I hope it is to all other patriotic Americans.....
"If we cease to be a nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."
-President Ronald Reagan-
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
The McChrystal Affair
General Stanley McChrystal, commander of American forces in Afghanistan, was fired today by President Obama for criticizing the president and members of his adminstration in an article in the left-wing magazine Rolling Stone.
When the news first broke that Gen. McChrystal was in hot water with the president I didn't know what to make of it. I know the military has rules governing what its members can and can't do and say. I know those rules can be far more strict than the rules applied to civilians. So, when I heard that Obama was upset with McChrystal I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. After all, I had no way of knowing if what McChrystal said in Rolling Stone equalled insubordination. If the general's remarks did violate the military's code then Obama acted appropriately today. But I have a problem cutting Chicago BO some slack, and here it is.
Barack Obama is the most thin skinned president in recent history. His epidermis is flimsier than a wet Kleenex. The man does NOT like criticism. Consequently, it's almost impossible for me to believe that his sacking of McChrystal was anything but retribution for the general's dissent. Yes, Obama claimed that "personal insult" had nothing to do with McChrystal's firing, but c'mon. Barack Obama is the president who tried to discredit an entire news channel because he felt it wasn't "sufficiently supportive" of him. But now we're supposed to believe that General McChrystal's gone simply because Obama's devoted to order in the military. Again, come on!
Obama's star is fading fast. In less than two years he's gone from being a messiah to a false prophet. He knows he must salvage his image among the people. Perhaps Obama thought that sacking McChrystal would make him look strong and decisive and allay Americans' increasing doubts about his leadership. It won't. Instead, most Americans will probably see firing a great general when he's needed most as a vindictive act by a president childishly intolerant of dissent. The McChrystal affair could've helped Obama regain some of his lost mojo but the president sabotaged himself with his previous mishandling of criticism. And I actually think that's too bad.
When the news first broke that Gen. McChrystal was in hot water with the president I didn't know what to make of it. I know the military has rules governing what its members can and can't do and say. I know those rules can be far more strict than the rules applied to civilians. So, when I heard that Obama was upset with McChrystal I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. After all, I had no way of knowing if what McChrystal said in Rolling Stone equalled insubordination. If the general's remarks did violate the military's code then Obama acted appropriately today. But I have a problem cutting Chicago BO some slack, and here it is.
Barack Obama is the most thin skinned president in recent history. His epidermis is flimsier than a wet Kleenex. The man does NOT like criticism. Consequently, it's almost impossible for me to believe that his sacking of McChrystal was anything but retribution for the general's dissent. Yes, Obama claimed that "personal insult" had nothing to do with McChrystal's firing, but c'mon. Barack Obama is the president who tried to discredit an entire news channel because he felt it wasn't "sufficiently supportive" of him. But now we're supposed to believe that General McChrystal's gone simply because Obama's devoted to order in the military. Again, come on!
Obama's star is fading fast. In less than two years he's gone from being a messiah to a false prophet. He knows he must salvage his image among the people. Perhaps Obama thought that sacking McChrystal would make him look strong and decisive and allay Americans' increasing doubts about his leadership. It won't. Instead, most Americans will probably see firing a great general when he's needed most as a vindictive act by a president childishly intolerant of dissent. The McChrystal affair could've helped Obama regain some of his lost mojo but the president sabotaged himself with his previous mishandling of criticism. And I actually think that's too bad.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Brave, Brave Obama!
Over the past few days I've been dwelling on the bravery of our dear leader, The Obama. He is very, very dauntless, y'know. It takes courage for a leader to stand against the people and pursue unpopular policies because he knows they're right. The Obama showed such courage when his administration chose to side with law breaking foreigners against fellow Americans.
That's right. Obama has decided to file a lawsuit against the state of Arizona over its strict new anti-illegal alien law. And rather than reveal this principled move to the American people himself, Obama the Brave had Secretary of State Hillary Clinton do it, on Ecuadorean television no less. You can't get more courageous than that!
I can't begin to tell you how thankful I am that America now has such an intrepid president. After eight years of that embarrassing cowboy George W. Bush, it's so refreshing to have a Chief Executive who knows that true courage is turning on your national brethren in order to appease failed Third World countries that ship their poor people here. Yes, this is soooooooo amazing! I wish I could tell the Big O in person how much his bravery has inspired me.
Oh, yes, my fellow Americans. We're in good hands now that Chicago BO is on the job. We can rest assured that The Obama's doctrine of security through appeasement will strike terror in the hearts of our enemies while simultaneously endearing us to our friends. Strength and peace will be the natural results. The Obama figured that strategy out by himself and that just makes me love him even more. Not only is he brave he's smart, too. He's got brawn AND brains. What a combo!
I feel so comfortable now. The sun's shining, birds are singing, and Arizona's gonna get kicked to the curb by the most fearless leader America's ever had. Yep, everything's right with the world and we all can rest easy. The Dauntless One is at the helm. What could possibly go wrong?
That's right. Obama has decided to file a lawsuit against the state of Arizona over its strict new anti-illegal alien law. And rather than reveal this principled move to the American people himself, Obama the Brave had Secretary of State Hillary Clinton do it, on Ecuadorean television no less. You can't get more courageous than that!
I can't begin to tell you how thankful I am that America now has such an intrepid president. After eight years of that embarrassing cowboy George W. Bush, it's so refreshing to have a Chief Executive who knows that true courage is turning on your national brethren in order to appease failed Third World countries that ship their poor people here. Yes, this is soooooooo amazing! I wish I could tell the Big O in person how much his bravery has inspired me.
Oh, yes, my fellow Americans. We're in good hands now that Chicago BO is on the job. We can rest assured that The Obama's doctrine of security through appeasement will strike terror in the hearts of our enemies while simultaneously endearing us to our friends. Strength and peace will be the natural results. The Obama figured that strategy out by himself and that just makes me love him even more. Not only is he brave he's smart, too. He's got brawn AND brains. What a combo!
I feel so comfortable now. The sun's shining, birds are singing, and Arizona's gonna get kicked to the curb by the most fearless leader America's ever had. Yep, everything's right with the world and we all can rest easy. The Dauntless One is at the helm. What could possibly go wrong?
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
The Speech
I watched Obama's speech about the oil spill last night. I hadn't planned on watching it but when I heard Obama would be speaking from the Oval Office I decided to give it a listen. And I wasn't disappointed. The speech, though short, was as full of spin and crisis-exploitation as I thought it would be.
I really can't believe the arrogance of the guy who's occupying the White House.
The BP oil rig explosion happened two months ago. Obama rejected almost immediate offers of help from the Dutch to contain the oil spill. He rejected the use of spill-containing equipment from American companies. He refused to speak with BP CEO Tony Hayward, even though he's more than willing to speak, without preconditions, to some of the world's worst dictators. And he didn't travel to the Gulf states until a couple of weeks ago. Yet Obama swaggered into the Oval Office last night and expected the American people to believe his assertion that his administration has been on top of the crisis from day one. How dumb does he think we are? Very, apparently.
Unfortunately for Obama, however, we the people are not dumb.
We are not dumb! We don't believe his ridiculous claim that he's been on this from day one. And we're incensed at Obama's smarmy politicizing of the crisis, using it to push his big spending clean energy initiatives. Indeed, it seemed half or more of Obama's speech consisted of him hawking his eco-dreams of a future green economy rather than saying what he was going to do to stop the spill and help the Gulf states NOW.
Maybe that's why Obama gave this speech in the Oval Office rather than out in the Rose Garden with reporters present. Maybe he was avoiding having to answer embarrassing questions, like did he purposely drag his feet on tackling this disaster so as to make his demand for green energy look more urgent and justified? Cynical? Maybe, but I wouldn't put anything past this president.
Barack Obama is a left-wing zealot who believes his own messianic con. He truly believes he was elected to do great things and he's justified in using any means, exploiting any tragedy, to achieve his grand goals. That's what was on display last night; messianic zeal, not concern for ending a disaster. Unfortunately for Obama, fewer and fewer people believe in his messiahship or his presidency, and no amount of flowery speeches will stem the erosion of faith in his "change".
Obama's massive mishandling of the Gulf coast oil crisis has revealed his feet of clay, and almost certainly assured sweeping Republican victories this November and in 2012. Not exactly the "fundamental transformation" Obama thought he'd create but it's the one that more Americans understand we need. Obama's arrogant zeal has to be stopped.
Hurry up, November!
I really can't believe the arrogance of the guy who's occupying the White House.
The BP oil rig explosion happened two months ago. Obama rejected almost immediate offers of help from the Dutch to contain the oil spill. He rejected the use of spill-containing equipment from American companies. He refused to speak with BP CEO Tony Hayward, even though he's more than willing to speak, without preconditions, to some of the world's worst dictators. And he didn't travel to the Gulf states until a couple of weeks ago. Yet Obama swaggered into the Oval Office last night and expected the American people to believe his assertion that his administration has been on top of the crisis from day one. How dumb does he think we are? Very, apparently.
Unfortunately for Obama, however, we the people are not dumb.
We are not dumb! We don't believe his ridiculous claim that he's been on this from day one. And we're incensed at Obama's smarmy politicizing of the crisis, using it to push his big spending clean energy initiatives. Indeed, it seemed half or more of Obama's speech consisted of him hawking his eco-dreams of a future green economy rather than saying what he was going to do to stop the spill and help the Gulf states NOW.
Maybe that's why Obama gave this speech in the Oval Office rather than out in the Rose Garden with reporters present. Maybe he was avoiding having to answer embarrassing questions, like did he purposely drag his feet on tackling this disaster so as to make his demand for green energy look more urgent and justified? Cynical? Maybe, but I wouldn't put anything past this president.
Barack Obama is a left-wing zealot who believes his own messianic con. He truly believes he was elected to do great things and he's justified in using any means, exploiting any tragedy, to achieve his grand goals. That's what was on display last night; messianic zeal, not concern for ending a disaster. Unfortunately for Obama, fewer and fewer people believe in his messiahship or his presidency, and no amount of flowery speeches will stem the erosion of faith in his "change".
Obama's massive mishandling of the Gulf coast oil crisis has revealed his feet of clay, and almost certainly assured sweeping Republican victories this November and in 2012. Not exactly the "fundamental transformation" Obama thought he'd create but it's the one that more Americans understand we need. Obama's arrogant zeal has to be stopped.
Hurry up, November!
Saturday, January 09, 2010
People Of Faith
One of the fundamental characteristics of the Left is it's disdain for religion, especially Christianity (but not Islam; religions that inspire their followers to kill Americans are A-ok). Liberals love to mock people of faith, i.e. Christians, and proclaim their commitment to reason and science as the sources of their understanding of the world. No trusting in revelation for them! How interesting, then, to find that liberals themselves are not only people of faith, but the irrational kind of people of faith: those who put their faith in man. And that man is Barack Obama.
While watching Fox News and listening to talk radio I've seen and heard left-wingers expressing the deepest faith in their Anointed One. Liberal pundits and deluded Democrats from Bob Beckel to Alan Colmes are absolutely convinced that Obama is virtually infallible and is saving the country. Seriously.
Bob Beckel, a Dem strategist who appears regularly on Sean Hannity's show, has said at least three times that Obama has saved the economy. Last year Kirsten Powers, another Dem strategist and Fox News regular, said Obama's anti-terrorism policies made her feel "very safe". Ellis Henican, a Newsday columnist and, like Beckel and Powers, a Fox News pundit, was giddy with optimism about Obama's America on a recent episode of The O'Reilly Factor. And it's not just prominent liberals who worship the Big O. Ordinary, no-name ones do, too.
On Michael Medved's talk radio show a Black woman called in incensed that Medved had criticized Obama. She credited Obama with saving her and her unemployed husband's personal economy, even though her husband lost his job after Obama took office. When Medved pressed her on that fact and the dismal state of the national economy, this woman claimed Obama said things would get worse before they got better. And she was certain that things would get better. No matter the reality, Medved's caller saw Obama as the bringer of nothing but good. And, as we've seen, she's not alone in that opinion.
So, how do we explain this phenomenon? Beckel, Powers, Henican, Medved's caller, and the rest of the liberal horde aren't basing their assessment of Obama on the facts. Double digit unemployment, multiple terrorist attacks, ballooning deficits, none of that has any bearing on liberals' judgment of their Messiah. For them it's all about faith. Faith in Barack Obama.
Obama's far-left ideology coupled with his race make him the perfect savior to liberals. Whatever happens in the real world is irrelevant to their view of him. Obama can only do good and be good because that's what the progressive paradigm says. Liberal people of color are endowed with an innate wisdom and moral purity totally absent from even liberal Whites. Whites, however, can access this wisdom and purity by doting on non-Whites. Hence, Obamamania. It will occur to few liberals to question this paradigm, no matter how much Obama screws up. He's Black, he's liberal; therefore, he can do no wrong. Liberals just know it. No facts necessary.
People of faith indeed.
While watching Fox News and listening to talk radio I've seen and heard left-wingers expressing the deepest faith in their Anointed One. Liberal pundits and deluded Democrats from Bob Beckel to Alan Colmes are absolutely convinced that Obama is virtually infallible and is saving the country. Seriously.
Bob Beckel, a Dem strategist who appears regularly on Sean Hannity's show, has said at least three times that Obama has saved the economy. Last year Kirsten Powers, another Dem strategist and Fox News regular, said Obama's anti-terrorism policies made her feel "very safe". Ellis Henican, a Newsday columnist and, like Beckel and Powers, a Fox News pundit, was giddy with optimism about Obama's America on a recent episode of The O'Reilly Factor. And it's not just prominent liberals who worship the Big O. Ordinary, no-name ones do, too.
On Michael Medved's talk radio show a Black woman called in incensed that Medved had criticized Obama. She credited Obama with saving her and her unemployed husband's personal economy, even though her husband lost his job after Obama took office. When Medved pressed her on that fact and the dismal state of the national economy, this woman claimed Obama said things would get worse before they got better. And she was certain that things would get better. No matter the reality, Medved's caller saw Obama as the bringer of nothing but good. And, as we've seen, she's not alone in that opinion.
So, how do we explain this phenomenon? Beckel, Powers, Henican, Medved's caller, and the rest of the liberal horde aren't basing their assessment of Obama on the facts. Double digit unemployment, multiple terrorist attacks, ballooning deficits, none of that has any bearing on liberals' judgment of their Messiah. For them it's all about faith. Faith in Barack Obama.
Obama's far-left ideology coupled with his race make him the perfect savior to liberals. Whatever happens in the real world is irrelevant to their view of him. Obama can only do good and be good because that's what the progressive paradigm says. Liberal people of color are endowed with an innate wisdom and moral purity totally absent from even liberal Whites. Whites, however, can access this wisdom and purity by doting on non-Whites. Hence, Obamamania. It will occur to few liberals to question this paradigm, no matter how much Obama screws up. He's Black, he's liberal; therefore, he can do no wrong. Liberals just know it. No facts necessary.
People of faith indeed.
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Bush Must Be Laughing
When Barack Obama became president much of the country acted like Jesus had returned to earth. Obama's inauguration was worthy of a god and we were promised that his mere presence would save the country. Well, it's almost a year later and a bit of reality has set in, especially for Obama himself.
On inauguration day last year, and during the presidential campaign, nobody believed more in Barack Obama than Barack Obama.
Obama really believed that he would usher in a new America. He would be the post-racial president and bring Americans together. He would close Gitmo and instantly renew America's reputation abroad. He would win friends by acknowledging how rotten America is, thereby showing humility. He would give health care to all Americans and illegal aliens without raising the deficit by one penny. And he would stop terrorism through the force of his charm alone. He would bring hope and change , and the entire world would flourish. What a difference a year makes.
In twelve months Barack Obama has learned some hard lessons. He's learned that his left-wing base won't give up using race to divide people. He's learned that simply being popular abroad doesn't automatically translate to tangible benefits for America. He's learned about the fickleness of the electorate, who will love you one minute and hate you the next. He's learned that charm won't stop terrorism. He's learned that "hope and change" is really just a slogan, not a blueprint for governing. And he's learned that blaming his predecessor for everything wrong is starting to wear REAL thin. In short, Obama's learned that it's easier to campaign for president than it is to actually be president. Which explains why Obama has never stopped campaigning.
There's someone out there who could've warned Obama about this and offered him help. Instead, that someone can now sit back, watch, and say to himself, "I told you so."
Bush must be laughing.
I know I am.
On inauguration day last year, and during the presidential campaign, nobody believed more in Barack Obama than Barack Obama.
Obama really believed that he would usher in a new America. He would be the post-racial president and bring Americans together. He would close Gitmo and instantly renew America's reputation abroad. He would win friends by acknowledging how rotten America is, thereby showing humility. He would give health care to all Americans and illegal aliens without raising the deficit by one penny. And he would stop terrorism through the force of his charm alone. He would bring hope and change , and the entire world would flourish. What a difference a year makes.
In twelve months Barack Obama has learned some hard lessons. He's learned that his left-wing base won't give up using race to divide people. He's learned that simply being popular abroad doesn't automatically translate to tangible benefits for America. He's learned about the fickleness of the electorate, who will love you one minute and hate you the next. He's learned that charm won't stop terrorism. He's learned that "hope and change" is really just a slogan, not a blueprint for governing. And he's learned that blaming his predecessor for everything wrong is starting to wear REAL thin. In short, Obama's learned that it's easier to campaign for president than it is to actually be president. Which explains why Obama has never stopped campaigning.
There's someone out there who could've warned Obama about this and offered him help. Instead, that someone can now sit back, watch, and say to himself, "I told you so."
Bush must be laughing.
I know I am.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
This Wasn't Supposed To Happen!
The attempted bombing of an American airplane on Christmas Day really shook me up when I heard about it. I had family that flew in for the holiday on Christmas Day and I shuddered at the thought that that could've been their plane. But this wasn't supposed to happen.
When Barack Obama was elected president we were told that he would restore America's standing in the world. Obama would close Gitmo, ban "torture" of detained terrorists, brown nose Muslims, surrender in Iraq and engage in unconditional diplomacy with our enemies. This would show the world that Obama's America had repudiated the "cowboy diplomacy" of Bush and was now ready to submit to the world community. Peace and harmony would follow. But something happened on the way to Utopia.
Three times now, Muslim terrorists have killed or attempted to kill Americans on Obama's watch. Apparently, having brown skin, spending part of his childhood in Muslim Indonesia, and not being Bush hasn't impressed the jihadis. Imagine that. Gee, maybe that means something. Maybe that means Islamic terrorists are motivated by oh, I don't know, Islam, and won't be dissuaded from their murderous mission by a grovelling appeaser, not even a Black one.
I don't know what the Anointed One is going to do to combat terrorism now that his mere presence has proven ineffective at the job. I DO know that he'd better snap out of his egomania and PC stupor real fast. The jihadis are already promising more attacks, and if what's not supposed to happen happens again it won't be pretty for the terrorists...nor Obama.
When Barack Obama was elected president we were told that he would restore America's standing in the world. Obama would close Gitmo, ban "torture" of detained terrorists, brown nose Muslims, surrender in Iraq and engage in unconditional diplomacy with our enemies. This would show the world that Obama's America had repudiated the "cowboy diplomacy" of Bush and was now ready to submit to the world community. Peace and harmony would follow. But something happened on the way to Utopia.
Three times now, Muslim terrorists have killed or attempted to kill Americans on Obama's watch. Apparently, having brown skin, spending part of his childhood in Muslim Indonesia, and not being Bush hasn't impressed the jihadis. Imagine that. Gee, maybe that means something. Maybe that means Islamic terrorists are motivated by oh, I don't know, Islam, and won't be dissuaded from their murderous mission by a grovelling appeaser, not even a Black one.
I don't know what the Anointed One is going to do to combat terrorism now that his mere presence has proven ineffective at the job. I DO know that he'd better snap out of his egomania and PC stupor real fast. The jihadis are already promising more attacks, and if what's not supposed to happen happens again it won't be pretty for the terrorists...nor Obama.
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
A Recipe For Victory...
...for our enemies.
I didn't watch Barack Obama's Afghanistan speech last night; I didn't think I could stomach it, and one thing I've heard about the speech has confirmed that thought.
Barack Obama, our great and fearless leader, did announce that he's sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, 10,000 fewer than General McChrystal asked for. However, he also said that America would begin withdrawing those troops in 18 months, presumably without any regard to conditions on the ground. Did you get that? We're going to put in more troops then yank them out according to the date on the calendar, NOT what's necessary for victory.
Now, I'm no general. I'm no military strategist. But even I know that you can't win a war by telling your enemy that you're fighting by the clock. I mean, what does Obama think al Qaeda and the Taliban will do? See his "good will" and throw down their arms? No! They'll lay low for the next year and a half and then take over again once our troops withdraw. Duh!
Then it will be back to square one: the Taliban running Afghanistan and jihadis running their training camps under Taliban protection. What an achievement.
But that's probably what Obama really wants. After all, he cut his political teeth on the hard Left, where hating America is de rigueur. Obama sat for twenty years in a God damn America, Black liberation church. He launched his political career in the home of radical Left terrorist Bill Ayers. He was friends for years with far-left "priest" Father Pfleger who thundered from the pulpit that America was the greatest sin against God. Obama immersed himself in that world. Can we really be surprised that he governs from its America-is-the-problem paradigm?
Barack Obama is like a gay man married to a woman. He's trying to act like what he's not--a patriotic moderate--but his true far-left nature continuously slips out. Eventually Obama will succumb completely to his true self and plunge head first into promiscuous leftism. Oh, wait, he's there already; his speech last night proved that. Last night at West Point, our nation's most prestigious military academy, Barack Obama delivered a recipe for victory...for our enemies.
God help us!
I didn't watch Barack Obama's Afghanistan speech last night; I didn't think I could stomach it, and one thing I've heard about the speech has confirmed that thought.
Barack Obama, our great and fearless leader, did announce that he's sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, 10,000 fewer than General McChrystal asked for. However, he also said that America would begin withdrawing those troops in 18 months, presumably without any regard to conditions on the ground. Did you get that? We're going to put in more troops then yank them out according to the date on the calendar, NOT what's necessary for victory.
Now, I'm no general. I'm no military strategist. But even I know that you can't win a war by telling your enemy that you're fighting by the clock. I mean, what does Obama think al Qaeda and the Taliban will do? See his "good will" and throw down their arms? No! They'll lay low for the next year and a half and then take over again once our troops withdraw. Duh!
Then it will be back to square one: the Taliban running Afghanistan and jihadis running their training camps under Taliban protection. What an achievement.
But that's probably what Obama really wants. After all, he cut his political teeth on the hard Left, where hating America is de rigueur. Obama sat for twenty years in a God damn America, Black liberation church. He launched his political career in the home of radical Left terrorist Bill Ayers. He was friends for years with far-left "priest" Father Pfleger who thundered from the pulpit that America was the greatest sin against God. Obama immersed himself in that world. Can we really be surprised that he governs from its America-is-the-problem paradigm?
Barack Obama is like a gay man married to a woman. He's trying to act like what he's not--a patriotic moderate--but his true far-left nature continuously slips out. Eventually Obama will succumb completely to his true self and plunge head first into promiscuous leftism. Oh, wait, he's there already; his speech last night proved that. Last night at West Point, our nation's most prestigious military academy, Barack Obama delivered a recipe for victory...for our enemies.
God help us!
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Haven't We Been Here Before?
Yesterday I was off work and was going to take my Mom to the movies. I bought my hometown newspaper to see where the movie she wanted to see was playing. Unfortunately, that film wasn't playing at a nearby theater so we didn't get to go, but all was not lost. On the front of the newspaper was the announcement that the Obama administration wants Congress to draft a "jobs bill" and have it ready for Obama to sign in January. Excuse me, but haven't we been here before?
I distinctly remember that less than a year ago Obama scared the American people into supporting his gazillion dollar stimulus package. Wasn't that supposed to have been a jobs bill? I mean, wasn't the stimulus supposed to stimulate the economy, prevent unemployment from going above 8%, and save or create millions of jobs? Well, wasn't it?
The first stimulus or "economic recovery" bill didn't work. Billions of taxpayer dollars were spent and unemployment is now above 10%...and 2010 prospects for many Dems look bleak. No wonder Obama felt compelled to act. He'll do anything for victory for his party (but not his country); plus, this gives Obama the chance to launch a second stimulus package by calling it a "jobs bill". The first "stimulus" didn't stimulate, so Obama seeks to fix that by spending more money! And like with the first "economic recovery" act and like with health care reform, Obama wants this jobs bill pushed through Congress lightning fast, before the American people have a chance to know what hit them.
Barack Obama promised change but his modus operandi never changes. His "solution" to everything is to spend money like a drunken sailor and then, when that doesn't work, to spend even more money. The guy doesn't know how to do anything but spend money...and paint pictures of apocalyptic doom to scare us into supporting his fiscal irresponsibility. I ask again, haven't we been here before? Yes, America, we have. And the only way to ensure that we don't go there again is to oust the whole Dem/lib lot in 2010 and 2012. That's our real hope and our real change.
I distinctly remember that less than a year ago Obama scared the American people into supporting his gazillion dollar stimulus package. Wasn't that supposed to have been a jobs bill? I mean, wasn't the stimulus supposed to stimulate the economy, prevent unemployment from going above 8%, and save or create millions of jobs? Well, wasn't it?
The first stimulus or "economic recovery" bill didn't work. Billions of taxpayer dollars were spent and unemployment is now above 10%...and 2010 prospects for many Dems look bleak. No wonder Obama felt compelled to act. He'll do anything for victory for his party (but not his country); plus, this gives Obama the chance to launch a second stimulus package by calling it a "jobs bill". The first "stimulus" didn't stimulate, so Obama seeks to fix that by spending more money! And like with the first "economic recovery" act and like with health care reform, Obama wants this jobs bill pushed through Congress lightning fast, before the American people have a chance to know what hit them.
Barack Obama promised change but his modus operandi never changes. His "solution" to everything is to spend money like a drunken sailor and then, when that doesn't work, to spend even more money. The guy doesn't know how to do anything but spend money...and paint pictures of apocalyptic doom to scare us into supporting his fiscal irresponsibility. I ask again, haven't we been here before? Yes, America, we have. And the only way to ensure that we don't go there again is to oust the whole Dem/lib lot in 2010 and 2012. That's our real hope and our real change.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Trying KSM
"Hey Obama, here's what I think of trying Khalid Sheik Mohammed in civilian court...and here's what I think of you!"
I was going to write a thoughtful piece on the travesty of Obama treating the mastermind of 9-11 like a common criminal and his act of war like a common crime, but I was a little too discombobulated--spelling?--by all the craziness going on in our great nation. Besides, the above photo "says" exactly how I feel about Obama and his KSM outrage. What a sorry excuse for a president.
Sunday, November 01, 2009
Hey, Barack!
A short note to Barack Obama, ditherer-in-chief: Barack, if you don't want to use your army, General McChrystal would like to borrow it. Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)