Party of The People

Generous Democrats

2012-01-24T13:27:00.000-08:00

WHO'S GREEDY? Obama Gave 1% to Charity, Romney Gave 15%
http://nation.foxnews.com/mitt-romney/2012/01/24/whos-greedy-obama-gave-1-charity-romney-gave-15

Biden gave $369...
http://harndenblog.dailymail.co.uk/2012/01/much-ado-about-nothing-mitt-romney-is-very-rich-he-also-gave-millions-to-charity-and-the-taxman.html

Romney paid 42% of 2011 income in taxes and charity...

Obamanomics: Price Of Gas +83%, Ground Beef +24%, Bacon +22%...

2012-01-24T13:23:00.000-08:00

Under Obama, Price of Gas Has Jumped 83 Percent, Ground Beef 24 Percent, Bacon 22 Percent

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/under-obama-price-gas-has-jumped-83-percent-ground-beef-24-percent-bacon-22-percent

(CNSNews.com) – So far, during the presidency of Barack Obama, the price of a gallon of gasoline has jumped 83 percent, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

During the same period, the price of ground beef has gone up 24 percent and price of bacon has gone up 22 percent.

When Obama entered the White House in January 2009, the city average price for one gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was $1.79, according to the BLS. (The figures are in nominal dollars: not adjusted for inflation.) Five months later in June, unleaded gasoline was $2.26 per gallon, an increase of 26 percent. By December 2011, the price of regular unleaded gas per gallon was $3.28, an 83 percent increase from January 2009.

The price of unleaded gasoline never reached the 10-year high of $4.09 back in July 2008 under George W. Bush’s administration, but it did get close.

By May 2011, gas prices hit a high under the Obama administration at $3.93, about four percentage points away from the July 2008 high.

The U.S. city average retail price for one pound of 100 percent ground beef was $2.36 in January 2009. As of December 2011, that price had risen to $2.92—a 23.7 percent increase and a new peak. (Ground beef prices have risen every month since November 2009 – 26 months of price increases.)

Whole wheat bread prices from January 2009 to December 2011 increased about five percent (5.02 percent) from $1.97 to $2.07. (The inflation rate in December 2011 was 3.0 percent.)

Among the first 36 months of Obama’s presidency, the last four (September, October, November, December) showed the average price of one pound of whole wheat bread hovering slightly above two dollars.

Other refrigerated items like ice cream and bacon have increased by substantial amounts.

Ice cream prices, for a half-gallon, were $4.44 in January 2009 and $5.25 in December 2011, an increase of 19.1 percent.

One pound of sliced bacon in January 2009 was $3.73 and in December 2011 had climbed $4.55, an increase of 22 percent. The price hit a high in September 2011 at $4.82 per pound.

Liberals Are A Minority

2012-01-13T10:12:00.000-08:00

Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.Overall, the nation has grown more polarized over the past decade
http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/Conservatives-Remain-Largest-Ideological-Group.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All%20Gallup%20Headlines%20-%20Politics

by Lydia SaadPRINCETON, NJ -- Political ideology in the U.S. held steady in 2011, with 40% of Americans continuing to describe their views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This marks the third straight year that conservatives have outnumbered moderates, after more than a decade in which moderates mainly tied or outnumbered conservatives.

The percentage of Americans calling themselves "moderate" has gradually diminished in the U.S. since it was 43% in 1992. That is the year Gallup started routinely measuring ideology with the current question. It fell to 39% in 2002 and has been 35% since 2010. At the same time, the country became more politically polarized, with the percentages of Americans calling themselves either "conservative" or "liberal" each increasing.

Gallup measures political ideology by asking Americans to say whether their political views are very conservative, conservative, moderate, liberal, or very liberal. Relatively few Americans identify with either extreme on this scale, although 2 in 10 Republicans self-identify as very conservative -- double the proportion of Democrats calling themselves very liberal.

The 2011 results are based on 20 Gallup and USA Today/Gallup surveys conducted between January and December, encompassing interviews with 20,392 U.S. adults, including 5,912 Republicans, 6,087 Democrats, and 8,064 independents. The trends represent annual averages of multiday Gallup surveys conducted each year.

Obama Doesn't Want to Shake Soldier's Hands?

2012-01-13T10:00:00.000-08:00

Book Depicts Cranky Obama On Baghdad Visit

Michael Hastings' new book, The Operators, jabs at what could be a vulnerable spot for the Obama Administration, the president's relationship with the troops.

The book describes a visit to Baghdad:
After the talk, out of earshot from the soldiers and diplomats, he starts to complain. He starts to act very un-Obamalike, according to a U.S. embassy official who helped organize the trip in Baghdad.

He’s asked to go out to take a few more pictures with soldiers and embassy staffers. He’s asked to sign copies of his book. “He didn’t want to take pictures with any more soldiers; he was complaining about it,” a State Department official tells me. “Look, I was excited to meet him. I wanted to like him. Let’s just say the scales fell from my

eyes after I did. These are people over here who’ve been fighting the war, or working every day for the war effort, and he didn’t want to take fucking pictures with them?"

Lefty vs. Righty TV

2011-12-06T10:31:00.000-08:00

http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/12/06/republican-vs-democrat-tv/
Republicans vs. Democrats TV survey results: Lefties want comedy, right wingers like work
Republicans don’t watch MTV’s Jersey Shore. But they dig ABC’s Castle.

Democrats don’t like Discovery’s Deadliest Catch. But they swoon for NBC’s Parks and Recreation.

Those are a few of the findings of an annual research survey by Experian-Simmons that measures the consumer preferences of various political ideologies. In a report prepared exclusively for EW, the company calculated some of the favorite — and least favorite — TV shows of political partisans (specifically: the report measures which shows among the survey group were watched by the highest concentration of self-identified “Liberal Democrats” and “Conservative Republicans”).
In the findings, “sarcastic” media-savvy comedies and morally murky antiheroes tend to draw Dems. While serious work-centered shows (both reality shows and stylized scripted procedurals), along with reality competitions, tend to draw conservatives.
Leaving out news programs, here’s which current well-known cable and broadcast TV shows win the 2011 prime-time primaries:

LIBERAL-DEMOCRAT FAVORITES:

– The Daily Show With Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report (Comedy Central): As you might expect.
– 30 Rock and Parks and Recreation (NBC): Literate media-savvy comedies score high among Dems in general, notes Experian-Simmons senior marketing manager John Fetto. “Sarcastic humor is always a hook for them,” he adds.
– The View (ABC): Shows that skew female tend to do better among Dems, while male-friendly shows tend to do perform higher among Republicans.
– Glee (Fox)
– Modern Family (ABC): Last year, the progressive Glee and Modern Family scored surprisingly strong among both political leanings. Among conservatives this year, the shows still do fairly well, but have dropped out of their top ranks.
– It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia (FX)
– Treme (HBO): GOP Kryptonite. Not only a Dem favorite, but so unpopular among Republicans that the report scores the show with a “*” because not enough conservatives in the study group had actually watched it.
– Cougar Town (ABC)
– The Late Show With David Letterman and The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson (CBS): Dems favor late-night programming, with one big exception that we’ll see below.
Also: The Soup (E!), Aqua Teen Hunger Force (Adult Swim), Raising Hope (Fox), Saturday Night Live (NBC), The Office (NBC), Project Runway (Lifetime), Shameless (Showtime), Parenthood (NBC), Conan (TBS).

CONSERVATIVE-REPUBLICAN FAVORITES:

– Swamp Loggers (Discovery) and Top Shot (History): Gritty documentary-style work-related reality shows on cable index really strongly with conservative Republicans. Swamp Loggers is particularly polarizing.
– The Bachelor (ABC): They also tend to gravitate toward broadcast reality competition shows.
– Castle (ABC): Ranks fairly high among Dems, too.
– Mythbusters (Discovery)
– Only in America With Larry the Cable Guy, American Pickers, Swamp People (History): If you’re a Republican candidate looking to raise money, put ads on History.
– The Middle (ABC): Does well among libs, too.
– The Tonight Show With Jay Leno (NBC): “Did you hear about this? Yeah, this is true: Jay Leno is the late-night choice among conservatives…”
– The Biggest Loser (NBC)
– Hawaii Five-O (CBS): Popular crime dramas — except the left-wing Law & Order franchise — tend to draw a conservative crowd.
Also: Dancing With the Stars results show (ABC), Man vs. Wild (Discovery), Auction Kings (Discovery), NCIS (CBS), The Mentalist (CBS).

Clinton and Gore 1%

2011-12-06T10:26:00.000-08:00

http://thehill.com/capital-living/in-the-know/197355-bob-woodward-sitting-next-to-gore-is-unpleasant-

Bob Woodward says sitting next to Al Gore is 'taxing, unpleasant’

Describing an event where he was paired up next to the monotone-talking ex-vice president, Woodward said, “Now, sitting next to Gore is taxing.”

After some laughs from the crowd, Woodward continued, “In fact, it’s unpleasant.”

Woodward offered up another tidbit from the conversation with his dinner companion. The investigative reporter asked the politician, more than five years after leaving office, how much the public knows about what went on during the Clinton administration. Gore replied, “One percent.”

Woodward admitted that revelation made him feel a bit icky, saying, “I kind of died inside and have to confess to having an unclean thought.”

He then dug a little deeper, asking Gore, if the former VP were to write a memoir, how much Americans would know then. Gore retorted, “Two percent.”

Obama Beats Carter in Low Ratings

2011-11-29T12:56:00.000-08:00

Obama's Job Approval Drops Below Carter's

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/11/29/obamas-job-approval-drops-below-carters
President Obama's slow ride down Gallup's daily presidential job approval index has finally passed below Jimmy Carter, earning Obama the worst job approval rating of any president at this stage of his term in modern political history.
Since March, Obama's job approval rating has hovered above Carter's, considered among the 20th century's worst presidents, but today Obama's punctured Carter's dismal job approval line. On their comparison chart, Gallup put Obama's job approval rating at 43 percent compared to Carter's 51 percent.

Back in 1979, Carter was far below Obama until the Iran hostage crisis, eerily being duplicated in Tehran today with Iranian protesters storming the British embassy. The early days of the crisis helped Carter's ratings, though his failure to win the release of captured Americans, coupled with a bad economy, led to his defeat by Ronald Reagan in 1980.
According to Gallup, here are the job approval numbers for other presidents at this stage of their terms, a year before the re-election campaign:

- Harry S. Truman: 54 percent.
-- Dwight Eisenhower: 78 percent.
-- Lyndon B. Johnson: 44 percent.
-- Richard M. Nixon: 50 percent.
-- Ronald Reagan: 54 percent.
-- George H.W. Bush: 52 percent.
-- Bill Clinton: 51 percent
-- George W. Bush: 55 percent.
What's more, Gallup finds that Obama's overall job approval rating so far has averaged 49 percent. Only three former presidents have had a worse average rating at this stage: Carter, Ford, and Harry S. Truman. Only Truman won re-election in an anti-Congress campaign that Obama's team is using as a model.

Black Journalist on Obama

2011-09-26T10:36:00.000-07:00

Obama Lies about the ‘Do-Nothing Congress’
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/278069/obama-lies-about-do-nothing-congress-deroy-murdock

This Congress, they are accustomed to doing nothing, and they’re comfortable with doing nothing, and they keep on doing nothing,” President Obama whined at a September 15 Democratic National Committee gathering in a private Washington residence.

Now that his “Blame Bush” hobby horse finally has retired to the glue factory, Obama resorts to pinning America’s woes on the “Do-Nothing Congress.” If only these parliamentarians would stop taking endless lunches, sipping cocktails at Capitol Hill happy hours, and napping at their desks, America might have some chance of returning to normal.
Obama speaks as if the entire Congress were in lock-step Republican opposition to his every initiative. Damn those pesky elephants!

Of course, Obama’s rhetoric cynically turns things upside down.

Congress consists of a do-something House of Representatives, run by Republicans, and a do-nothing Senate controlled by Obama’s very own Democrats. Obama evidently believes that if he can keep spouting clever lies and distortions, no one will call him on it. Well, it’s time to do so.

The 112th Congress has been characterized by a very active legislative pace in the Republican House, featuring the passage of many measures designed to revive America’s exhausted economy.

The Democratic Senate, meanwhile, is a much lazier place, where House Republicans’ measures go to die.

The figures bear this out, beyond debate.

Through September 15, the Republican House had been in session for 120 days. The Democratic Senate through the same date had been in session only 115 days.

In terms of recorded votes, the two bodies are as different as Times Square and the Everglades. Through September 15, the GOP House had voted 711 times. Meanwhile, across the same period, the Democratic Senate had only 137 recorded votes. So, the allegedly lethargic GOP legislators whose sloth dooms the nation actually are five times as energetic as their indolent counterparts in the Democratic Senate.

This distinction might discredit House Republicans if they wasted their time voting on National Apricot Yogurt Month and similar matters of national urgency. In fact, Republicans have approved serious legislation designed to get America moving.

Black Caucus on Obama

2011-09-19T10:03:00.000-07:00

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/182209-cbc-chairman-if-obama-wasnt-in-office-we-would-be-marching-on-white-house
Cleaver: If Obama wasn't president, we would be ‘marching on the White House’

Unhappy members of the Congressional Black Caucus “probably would be marching on the White House” if Obama were not president, according to CBC Chairman Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.).

"If [former President] Bill Clinton had been in the White House and had failed to address this problem, we probably would be marching on the White House," Cleaver told “The Miami Herald” in comments published Sunday. "There is a less-volatile reaction in the CBC because nobody wants to do anything that would empower the people who hate the president."

CBC members have expressed concern in recent months as the unemployment rate has continued to rise amongst African-Americans, pushing for Obama to do more to address the needs of vulnerable communities.

"We’re supportive of the president, but we getting tired, y’all,” Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) said in August. “We want to give [Obama] every opportunity, but our people are hurting. The unemployment is unconscionable. We don’t know what the strategy is."

Rather than targeting Obama’s leadership, many CBC members aimed their fire at the Tea Party movement over the summer’s congressional recess. Waters said in a public meeting in her district that the Tea Party "can go straight to hell." Another member, Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.), called the Tea Party “the real enemy” seeking to hold Congress “hostage.”

Columnist Calls for Obama Withdrawl from 2012

2011-09-19T09:55:00.000-07:00

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-chapman-obama-reelection,0,622512.column

Why Obama should withdraw

When Ronald Reagan ran for re-election in 1984, his slogan was "Morning in America." For Barack Obama, it's more like midnight in a coal mine.

The sputtering economy is about to stall out, unemployment is high, his jobs program may not pass, foreclosures are rampant and the poor guy can't even sneak a cigarette.
His approval rating is at its lowest level ever. His party just lost two House elections — one in a district it had held for 88 consecutive years. He's staked his future on the jobs bill, which most Americans don't think would work.

The vultures are starting to circle. Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, "it's going to be impossible for the president to win." Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: "Panic."
But there is good news for the president. I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he's willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.
That might be the sensible thing to do. It's hard for a president to win a second term when unemployment is painfully high. If the economy were in full rebound mode, Obama might win anyway. But it isn't, and it may fall into a second recession — in which case voters will decide his middle name is Hoover, not Hussein. Why not leave of his own volition instead of waiting to get the ax?
It's not as though there is much enticement to stick around. Presidents who win re-election have generally found, wrote John Fortier and Norman Ornstein in their 2007 book, "Second-Term Blues," that "their second terms did not measure up to their first."

Presidential encores are generally a bog of frustration, exhaustion and embarrassment. They are famous for lowest moments rather than finest hours. Richard Nixon was forced to resign in disgrace, Reagan had the Iran-Contra scandal, and Bill Clinton made the unfortunate acquaintance of Monica Lewinsky
Administration officials get weary after four years and leave in droves. The junior varsity has to be put into service. New ideas are hard to come by.
Someone said that when a man is smitten with a beautiful woman, he should remember that somebody somewhere is tired of her. Likewise, the most inspiring presidents get stale after years of constant overexposure.
In the event he wins, Obama could find himself with Republicans in control of both houses of Congress. Then he will long for the good old days of 2011. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner will bound out of bed each day eager to make his life miserable.
Besides avoiding this indignity, Obama might do his party a big favor. In hard times, voters have a powerful urge to punish incumbents. He could slake this thirst by stepping aside and taking the blame. Then someone less reviled could replace him at the top of the ticket.

The ideal candidate would be a figure of stature and ability who can't be blamed for the economy. That person should not be a member of Congress, since it has an even lower approval rating than the president's.

It would also help to be conspicuously associated with prosperity. Given Obama's reputation for being too quick to compromise, a reputation for toughness would be an asset
As it happens, there is someone at hand who fits this description: Hillary Clinton. Her husband presided over a boom, she's been busy deposing dictators instead of destroying jobs, and she's never been accused of being a pushover.
Not only that, Clinton is a savvy political veteran who already knows how to run for president. Oh, and a new Bloomberg poll finds her to be merely "the most popular national political figure in America today."
If he runs for re-election, Obama may find that the only fate worse than losing is winning. But he might arrange things so it will be Clinton who has the unenviable job of reviving the economy, balancing the budget, getting out of Afghanistan and grappling with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. Obama, meanwhile, will be on a Hawaiian beach, wrestling the cap off a Corona.

Stimulus Trouble

2011-09-17T13:32:00.000-07:00

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/15/despite-stimulus-funding-solyndra-and-4-other-companies-have-hit-rock-bottom/

Solyndra Not Sole Firm to Hit Rock Bottom Despite Stimulus Funding

Solyndra, the solar panel company whose highly publicized failure and consequent investigation by federal authorities has flashed across headlines recently, isn't the only business to go belly up after benefiting from a piece of the $800 billion economic stimulus package passed in 2009.

At least four other companies have received stimulus funding only to later file for bankruptcy, and two of those were working on alternative energy.

Fire Your Staff

2011-09-16T13:32:00.000-07:00

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/44/post/carville-to-obama-fire-your-staff/2011/09/15/gIQATwOdVK_blog.html

James Carville to Obama: Fire your staff

President Obama needs to fire a lot of people. That’s the conclusion of longtime Democratic strategist and TV pundit James Carville, who unloaded on Obama Thursday for failing to change his White House team despite months of lagging poll numbers and stagnant economic indicators.

“For God's sake,” Carville wrote on CNN’s web site , “why are we still looking at the same political and economic advisers that got us into this mess? It's not working.”

Carville, the colorful longtime strategist for Former President Clinton, did not name names. His comments were likely to be read carefully by the small circle of aides and friends that has long surrounded the president – David Plouffe, Valerie Jarrett and (even since leaving the White House) David Axelrod, among them.

“Bill Clinton fired many people in 1994 and took a lot of heat for it,” Carville wrote. “Reagan fired most of his campaign staff in 1980. Republicans historically fired their own speaker, Newt Gingrich. Bush fired Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.”

He added: “It’s not going to work with the same team, the same strategy and the same excuses. I know economic analysts are smart -- some work 17-hour days. It's time to show them the exit. Wake up -- show us you are doing something.”

White House officials did not respond to requests for comment. White House press secretary Jay Carney, asked about Carville’s views, said Thursday that Obama “firmly believes that the American people know that he is doing everything he can to grow the economy, doing everything he can to work with Congress to create jobs, and he will continue at that.”

Carville laid out his prescription for how Obama and his lieutenants should respond to their troubles — most recently, the Democratic losses in special House races this week in New York and Nevada.

“What should the White House do now? he asked. “One word came to mind: Panic.”

“Have you talked to any Democratic senators lately? I have,” Carville continued. “It's pretty damn clear they are not happy campers.”

He called on Obama to bring about a “complete change from the direction you are headed.”

“Fire somebody. No -- fire a lot of people,” he wrote. “This may be news to you but this is not going well. For precedent, see Russian Army 64th division at Stalingrad. There were enough deaths at Stalingrad to make the entire tea party collectively orgasm.”

Dems Lose Seat Held Since 1923

2011-09-14T10:14:00.000-07:00

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/us-house-race-in-new-york-weprin-turner-20110913-apx

Turner Beats Weprin For Weiner's Seat

NEW YORK - Democrats suffered a significant setback early Wednesday with the party losing a New York district it had held for almost a century -- in an upset result seen as a rebuke of President Barack Obama's policies ahead of the 2012 election.

Republican Bob Turner was called as the winner of the special election for the 9th Congressional District, held to replace disgraced former Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner, who resigned in June after admitting he sent sexually-charged messages to women he met online.

Democrats have held the seat since March 1923 -- and Turner's challenger David Weprin was early Wednesday refusing to concede.

With 86 percent of precincts reporting, Turner had 54 percent of the vote and Weprin 46 percent, with about 4700 votes separating the pair, WNYC reported.

After the votes had been seemingly too close to call throughout the night, a number of media organizations declared Turner the victor.

Around midnight, Weprin spoke briefly to his supporters, saying he wasn't yet ready to give in. "This is not over yet. It's going to be a long night, there's still a lot of votes to be counted," Weprin told supporters, according to The Wall Street Journal.

After being introduced as Congressman Turner -- while Frank Sinatra's "New York, New York" played in the background -- the retired media executive and political novice told his supporters at the Roma View restaurant in Howard Beach, Queens, that he was ready to get to work.

As his supporters chanted, "Yes we can!" -- a jab at Obama's 2008 campaign slogan -- Turner told the crowd, "It's still me up here," WNYC reported.

"Maybe we started something. I sure hope so," he said.

"We've been told this is a referendum and we're ready to say, 'Mr. President, we are on the wrong track," he said, according to the New York Daily News.

"We've been asked by the people of this district to send a message to Washington and I hope they hear it loud and clear. We only hope that our voices are heard. We can start putting things right again."

Democrats were once seemingly assured of an easy victory in the race but were forced to scramble ahead of the election because of what Republicans claimed was widespread voter dissatisfaction with Obama, The Wall Street Journal reported.

The district is overwhelmingly Democratic -- by a ratio of three to one -- yet Weprin, a state Assemblyman, trailed by six percent in two polls prior to the election.

Polls in the district also showed that a majority of voters have an unfavorable view of Obama.

Democratic party leaders insisted the loss wasn't a harbinger of things to come. "It's a very difficult district for Democrats," said Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, noting its Democratic margins there tend to be the second lowest of all the districts in New York City.

But House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), dismissed that idea.

"This is a very seriously Democrat district," Boehner said. "This is not a district that Republicans have any right to believe we could win."

Turner worked hard to nationalize -- and internationalize -- the race. Turner had argued voters in the heavily Jewish district should choose him over Weprin as a way to send a message to Obama of their displeasure that he isn't more friendly to Israel. Turner is a Roman Catholic while Weprin is an Orthodox Jew.

And some conservative Jewish groups attacked Weprin, a state legislator, over his vote earlier this year in favor of gay marriage.

Jobs Outsourced and Praised?

2011-09-14T10:08:00.000-07:00

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2011/09/14/obama-tout-jobs-act-company-outsources/

Obama to Tout Jobs Act at Company that Outsources

President Obama today is visiting a small North Carolina manufacturing company that has outsourced half its workforce to Costa Rica and whose president is a Democratic politician who has contributed $2,000 to Obama.

WestStar Precision, a machine manufacturing firm headquartered in the Raleigh-Durham area, has a second plant located in San Jose, Costa Rica. There are 24 employees at each site, according to an NBC affiliate in Raleigh.
Ironically, Obama is traveling to the company’s headquarters to tout his new proposal to create jobs in the United States.
While he’s there, he can thank WestStar President Ervin Portman for his financial assistance.
According to the website Opensecrets.org, Portman, calling himself “Erv,” donated $1,000 to Obama on August 10, 2008. In a separate filing, “Ervin” Portman reported donating $1,000 to help fund Obama’s Inauguration.
Portman, who sits on the Board of Commissioners for Wake County, N.C., has also been a major contributor to other Democratic candidates.
In 2009-2010, Portman gave $5,000 to Democratic North Carolina Secretary of State Elaine Marshall’s failed campaign to unseat Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.). He also donated $250 to the successful 2008 campaign of Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.).
Portman’s company makes no secret of its outsourcing, touting its Costa Rican plant on its website
Our new office and manufacturing facility in San Jose, Costa Rica, also has approximately 10,000 sq. ft. with similar equipment as the main office. This facility is designed for high volume production to support our international and domestic clients.
A big tip of the hat to one of our readers, Lizzy, who first alerted me to the Costa Rica plant.

Obama Job Plan Concerns

2011-09-13T10:03:00.000-07:00

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-14/obama-approval-drops-on-skepticism-of-jobs-plan.html

Obama Approval Plummets on Jobs Plan

By Julianna Goldman - Sep 13, 2011 9:01 PM PT

A majority of Americans don’t believe President Barack Obama’s $447 billion jobs plan will help lower the unemployment rate, skepticism he must overcome as he presses Congress for action and positions himself for re- election.
The downbeat assessment of the American Jobs Act reflects a growing and broad sense of dissatisfaction with the president. Americans disapprove of his handling of the economy by 62 percent to 33 percent, a Bloomberg National Poll conducted Sept. 9-12 shows. The disapproval number represents a nine point increase from six months ago.
The president’s job approval rating also stands at the lowest of his presidency -- 45 percent. That rating is driven down in part by a majority of independents, 53 percent, who disapprove of his performance.
“I don’t think he’s done as good a job as I think he could have,” said Paul Kaplan, 58, an unemployed Democrat from Philadelphia. “We were hopeful that things would improve in the economy and they’ve only gotten worse. People in Washington just don’t seem to want to cooperate with each other and work for the people.”
The poll hands Obama new lows in each of the categories that measures his performance on the economy: only 36 percent of respondents approve of his efforts to create jobs, 30 percent approve of how he’s tackled the budget deficit and 39 percent approve of his handling of health care.

Is Obama a pathological liar?

2011-07-25T08:39:00.000-07:00

CURL: Is Obama a pathological liar?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jul/24/curl-is-obama-a-pathological-liar/

In the weird world that is Washington, men and women say things daily, hourly, even minutely, that they know deep down are simply not true. Inside the Beltway, we all call those utterances “rhetoric.”
But across the rest of the country, plain ol’ folk call ‘em lies. Bald-faced (even bold-faced) lies. Those folks have a tried-and-true way of determining a lie: If you know what you’re saying is patently false, then it’s a lie. Simple.
And lately, the president has been lying so much that his pants could burst into flames at any moment.
His late-evening news conference Friday was a tour de force of flat-out, unadulterated mendacity — and we’ve gotten a first-hand insider’s view of the president’s long list of lies.
“I wanted to give you an update on the current situation around the debt ceiling,” Mr. Obama said at 6:06 p.m. OK, that wasn’t a lie — but just about everything he said after it was, and he knows it.
“I just got a call about a half-hour ago from Speaker [John A.] Boehner, who indicated that he was going to be walking away from the negotiations,” he said
Not so: “The White House made offers during the negotiations,” said our insider, a person intimately involved in the negotiations, “and then backtracked on those offers after they got heat from Democrats on Capitol Hill. The White House, and its steadfast refusal to follow through on its rhetoric in terms of cutting spending and addressing entitlements, is the real reason that debt talks broke down.”
Mr. Boehner was more blunt in his own news conference: “The discussions we’ve had with the White House have broken down for two reasons. First, they insisted on raising taxes. … Secondly, they refused to get serious about cutting spending and making the tough choices that are facing our country on entitlement reform.”
But back to the lying liar and the lies he told Friday. “You had a bipartisan group of senators, including Republicans who are in leadership in the Senate, calling for what effectively was about $2 trillion above the Republican baseline that theyve been working off of. What we said was give us $1.2 trillion in additional revenues,” Mr. Obama said.
That, too, was a lie. “The White House had already agreed to a lower revenue number — to be generated through economic growth and a more efficient tax code — and then it tried to change the terms of the deal after taking heat from Democrats on Capitol Hill,” our insider said.

The negotiations just before breakdown called for $800 billion in new “revenues” (henceforth, we’ll call those “taxes”), but after the supposedly bipartisan plan came out — and bowing to the powerful liberal bloc on Capitol Hill — Mr. Obama demanded another $400 billion in new taxes: a 50 percent increase.

License Plates in NV

2011-07-19T08:38:00.000-07:00

Nevada man sues DMV over rejection of ‘GOPALIN’ license plate

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/jul/18/nevada-man-sues-dmv-over-rejection-gopalin-license/

A Nevada man has filed a lawsuit against the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles alleging his rights were violated when he says the state denied his requests for personalized license plates with conservative political themes.
James Linlor, a Douglas County resident, filed the complaint July 15 in U.S. District Court in Nevada. A state official said the plate eventually was issued late last year.
The complaint alleges Linlor requested a personalized license plate of “GOPALIN” in 2009 and 2010, but the DMV denied his applications, stating the request was "vulgar or obscene or expressing superiority of political affiliation."
Linlor says he tried again in June 2010 — this time requesting “PALIN,” “PALIN12” or “PALIN16.” The DMV’s Special Plates Committee, which reviews applications, again denied his requests, deeming them inappropriate because they were “political,” according to the complaint.
According to the Nevada Administrative Code, the DMV rejects personalized license plates with any combination of letters, numbers or spaces that “express contempt, ridicule or superiority of ... political affiliation.” It can also deny plates it deems “inappropriate.”
After a hearing before an administrative law judge, the lawsuit claims the judge reversed the DMV’s denial of Linlor’s requests for plates with “PALIN,” “PALIN12” and “PALIN16.” The judge determined the DMV wasn't authorized to deny requests simply because they were “political,” according to the complaint.
Despite the judge’s decision, the complaint alleges the DMV again denied Linlor’s request for a “GOPALIN” plate. Meanwhile, Linlor discovered the DMV had issued other politics-related license plates, including “GOGREEN,” “DMOCRAT,” “AL GORE,” “KERRY,” “EDWARDS,” “DEAN,” “HILLARY” and “RONPAUL,” while rejecting requests for “REPBLCN” and “BUSH,” the complaint alleges.
When Linlor applied for a “GO OBAMA” plate, the DMV approved it, he alleges.
“The actions of the DMV in selectively granting some ‘political’ license plate requests while denying others are unconstitutional on grounds of content and viewpoint discrimination, and should be enjoined as a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution,” according to the complaint.
Bruce Breslow, director of the Nevada DMV, said Monday he’s not sure why Linlor brought a lawsuit this month because the “GOPALIN” plate was issued Dec. 30, 2010

The DMV, however, is reviewing its policy about personalized license plates and likely will have the director or a deputy director make decisions about whether to approve such requests in the future, he said.

“I would not have denied it,” Breslow said, referring to the “GOPALIN” plate.
The complaint seeks injunctive relief from the DMV as well as the cost of attorneys’ fees.

Liberal's Dream - Higher Taxes

2011-07-18T08:35:00.000-07:00

Californians' middle class pay 44% in income taxes.

Get Ready for a 70% Marginal Tax Rate

By MICHAEL J. BOSKIN http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304911104576443893352153776.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

President Obama has been using the debt-ceiling debate and bipartisan calls for deficit reduction to demand higher taxes. With unemployment stuck at 9.2% and a vigorous economic "recovery" appearing more and more elusive, his timing couldn't be worse.

Two problems arise when marginal tax rates are raised. First, as college students learn in Econ 101, higher marginal rates cause real economic harm. The combined marginal rate from all taxes is a vital metric, since it heavily influences incentives in the economy—workers and employers, savers and investors base decisions on after-tax returns. Thus tax rates need to be kept as low as possible, on the broadest possible base, consistent with financing necessary government spending.

Second, as tax rates rise, the tax base shrinks and ultimately, as Art Laffer has long argued, tax rates can become so prohibitive that raising them further reduces revenue—not to mention damaging the economy. That is where U.S. tax rates are headed if we do not control spending soon.

The current top federal rate of 35% is scheduled to rise to 39.6% in 2013 (plus one-to-two points from the phase-out of itemized deductions for singles making above $200,000 and couples earning above $250,000). The payroll tax is 12.4% for Social Security (capped at $106,000), and 2.9% for Medicare (no income cap). While the payroll tax is theoretically split between employers and employees, the employers' share is ultimately shifted to workers in the form of lower wages.

But there are also state income taxes that need to be kept in mind. They contribute to the burden. The top state personal rate in California, for example, is now about 10.5%. Thus the marginal tax rate paid on wages combining all these taxes is 44.1%. (This is a net figure because state income taxes paid are deducted from federal income.)

So, for a family in high-cost California taxed at the top federal rate, the expiration of the Bush tax cuts in 2013, the 0.9% increase in payroll taxes to fund ObamaCare, and the president's proposal to eventually uncap Social Security payroll taxes would lift its combined marginal tax rate to a stunning 58.4%.

Call Obama’s bluff

2011-07-16T11:24:00.000-07:00

Call Obama’s bluff

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/call-his-bluff/2011/07/14/gIQAfzFyEI_story.html?hpid=z4

All of a sudden he’s a born-again budget balancer prepared to bravely take on his own party by making deep cuts in entitlements. Really? Name one. He’s been saying forever that he’s prepared to discuss, engage, converse about entitlement cuts. But never once has he publicly proposed a single structural change to any entitlement.

Hasn’t the White House leaked that he’s prepared to raise the Medicare age or change the cost-of-living calculation?

Anonymous talk is cheap. Leaks are designed to manipulate. Offers are floated and disappear.

Say it, Mr. President. Give us one single structural change in entitlements. In public.
As part of the pose as the forward-
looking grown-up rising above all the others who play politics, Obama insists upon a long-term deal. And what is Obama’s definition of long-term? Surprise: An agreement that gets him past Nov. 6, 2012.

Say it, Mr. President. Give us one single structural change in entitlements. In public.

looking grown-up rising above all the others who play politics, Obama insists upon a long-term deal. And what is Obama’s definition of long-term? Surprise: An agreement that gets him past Nov. 6, 2012.

Nothing could be more political. It’s like his Afghan surge wind-down date. September 2012 has no relation to any military reality on the ground. It is designed solely to position Obama favorably going into the last weeks of his reelection campaign.

Yet the Olympian above-the-fray no-politics-here pose is succeeding. A pliant press swallows the White House story line: the great compromiser (“clearly exasperated,” sympathized a Post news story) being stymied by Republican “intransigence” (the noun actually used in another front-page Post news story to describe the Republican position on taxes).

The meme having been established, Republicans have been neatly set up to take the fall if a deal is not reached by Aug. 2. Obama is already waving the red flag, warning ominously that Social Security, disabled veterans’ benefits, “critical” medical research, food inspection — without which agriculture shuts down — are in jeopardy.

The Republicans are being totally outmaneuvered. The House speaker appears disoriented. It’s time to act. Time to call Obama’s bluff.

A long-term deal or nothing? The Republican House should immediately pass a short-term debt-ceiling hike of $500 billion containing $500 billion in budget cuts. That would give us about five months to work on something larger.

The fat-cat tax breaks (those corporate jets) that Obama’s talking points endlessly recycle? Republicans should call for urgent negotiations on tax reform along the lines of the Simpson-Bowles commission that, in one option, strips out annually $1.1 trillion of deductions, credits and loopholes while lowering tax rates across the board to a top rate of 23 percent. The president says he wants tax reform, doesn’t he? Well, Mr. President, here are five months to do so.

Will the Democratic Senate or the Democratic president refuse this offer and allow the country to default — with all the cataclysmic consequences that the Democrats have been warning about for months — because Obama insists on a deal that is 10 months and seven days longer?

That’s indefensible and transparently self-serving. Dare the president to make that case. Dare him to veto — or the Democratic Senate to block — a short-term debt-limit increase.

This is certainly better than the McConnell plan, which would simply throw debt reduction back to the president. But if the House cannot do Plan A, McConnell is the fallback Plan B.

After all, by what crazy calculation should Republicans allow themselves to be blamed for a debt crisis that could destabilize the economy and even precipitate a double-dip recession? Right now, Obama owns the economy and its 9.2 percent unemployment, 1.9 percent GDP growth and exploding debt about which he’s done nothing. Why bail him out by sharing ownership?

You cannot govern this country from one house. Republicans should have learned that from the 1995-96 Gingrich-Clinton fight when the GOP controlled both houses and still lost.

If conservatives really want to get the nation’s spending under control, the only way is to win the presidency. Put the question to the country and let the people decide. To seriously jeopardize the election now in pursuit of a long-term, small-government, Ryan-like reform that is inherently unreachable without control of the White House may be good for the soul. But it could very well wreck the cause.

Gay is OK in CA

2011-07-15T10:48:00.000-07:00

Gay is OK in CA. What can you say. Well, travelling around the country, you often see people roll their eyes when they talk about California. It is well known to all as the land of fruits and nuts.

Bills like this fuel the fire. That is why people call SF things like San Fransicko and San Francespool.

Instead can't we all teach what great Americans accomplish? Must we break down to what every ethnic does? This bill seems idiot not progressive. Let us do the right thing and teach what each great American contributed without stimatizing them with a label. It seems we further separate by this; not integrate.

Way to go again Gov. Brown and crew of crazies.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2011/07/15/MNL61KAHVQ.DTL

New state law requires LGBT history in textbooks

Sacramento --

Public schools in California will be required to teach students about the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans starting Jan. 1 after Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday signed a controversial bill to add the topic to the social sciences curriculum.

Textbooks now must include information on the role of LGBT Americans, as well as Americans with disabilities, though California's budget crisis has delayed the purchasing of new books until at least 2015.

"History should be honest," Brown, a Democrat, said in a statement. "This bill revises existing laws that prohibit discrimination in education and ensures that the important contributions of Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life are included in our history books."
The governor called the legislation, SB48, introduced by Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, "historic."

The law - the first of its kind in the nation - adds the two groups to an existing list of minority and other groups that are required to be part of the social sciences curriculum.

Safer schools

Gay rights supporters heralded Brown's action as a major victory. They said the law will help make public schools a safer place for LGBT students as well as give those students, and their classmates, examples of accomplished and important LGBT people.

Throughout the debate on the measure, backers noted the recent spate of suicides among young LGBT people and said it would help to combat bullying that typically occurs beforehand.

Opponents, however, fiercely opposed the measure, citing religious objections to homosexuality and questioning whether such instruction is necessary. They expressed dismay with Brown's signing of the bill.

"If children in other countries are learning math and science, and American children are learning about the private lives of historical figures, how will our students compete for jobs in the global economy?" said Sen. Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster (Los Angeles County), the vice chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Education.
Beyond California

The provision on inclusion in textbooks could reach beyond California, too, as many book publishers tailor their texts to California's standards because of the state's large population. The bill does not prescribe how schools will teach the subject, and Leno said that decision will be made by local school officials and teachers.
"What the bill calls for is for the contributions of LGBT people to be included," Leno said, adding, "We wrote it broadly for a reason. We would be subject to more criticism than we've already been getting if we were more dictatorial."
Leno said the mandates apply broadly, though, telling reporters it would affect kindergarten through high school curriculum, "and, of course, in an age-appropriate way."
Gay rights advocates said they will be vigilant about making sure schools across California comply.

Carolyn Laub, the founder and executive director of the Gay-Straight Alliance Network, which works to establish gay-straight clubs in schools, said such clubs exist in 55 percent of California's high schools.
"We'll certainly be letting all of our constituents know about this bill, and when it goes into effect I can assure you there will be thousands of students" watching to see how it is implemented, she said.

Proponents have cited slain San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk as a person with historical significance, along with events such as the Stonewall Riots in New York City that helped launch the LGBT rights movement as examples of topics that could be taught.

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson, a Democrat, praised Brown's move, saying, "Our history is more complete when we recognize the contributions of people from all backgrounds and walks of life."

Cutting into class time

Still, opponents questioned the effect the bill would have and the need for explicit instruction for all students about a relatively small group.
The bill "does absolutely nothing to reduce bullying, improve the poor state of our education system, ensure students graduate or prepare them for global competitiveness," said Paulo Sibaja, legislative director of the Capitol Resource Institute, a socially conservative organization in Sacramento. "Instead it diverts precious classroom time away from science, math, reading and writing, and focuses on the agenda of a small group of people."

Can You Believe These Numbskulls?

2011-07-01T11:24:00.000-07:00

This guy just doesn't get it. Who did we vote for? What change?!?!?!

AFRICOM: AF, Navy still flying Libya missions

By Dave Majumdar - Staff writer Thursday Jun 30, 2011 12:33:04 EDT
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/06/defense-africom-air-force-navy-flying-libya-missions-063011/

Air Force and Navy aircraft are still flying hundreds of strike missions over Libya despite the Obama administration’s claim that American forces are playing only a limited support role in the NATO operation.

An Africa Command (AFRICOM) spokeswoman confirmed Wednesday that since NATO’s Operation Unified Protector (OUP) took over from the American-led Operation Odyssey Dawn on March 31, the U.S. military has flown hundreds of strike sorties. Previously, Washington had claimed that it was mostly providing intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and tanker support to NATO forces operating over Libya.

Optimistic Obama: "I Got Five-And-A-Half Years More To Go"

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/06/30/optimistic_obama_i_got_five-and-a-half_years_more_to_go.html

A confident President Obama said he understood that people are frustrated and he has yet to get "everything done," however he said this was only the beginning. "It's only been two and a half years. I got five and a half years more to go," Obama said at a fundraiser in Philadelphia on Thursday night.

First Lady Uses Teleprompter
http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/06/first-lady-describes-toll-job-husband/47iBKS2khmr50CPho3xSqK/index.html
When she spoke, the towering first lady eschewed the platform that had been placed behind the microphone for Elaine Schuster’s introduction.

Yet while Schuster spoke from typed notes, the first lady used a TelePrompTer, despite the relatively small and friendly audience.

The Most Liberal States Least Free

2011-06-16T13:19:00.000-07:00

Land of the Free? New York and California come out at the bottom of individual freedoms study

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2003910/New-York-New-Jersey-California-come-individual-freedoms-study.html

New Hampshire, South Dakota and Indiana ranked at the top

It might be the ‘Land of the Free’, but some states certainly aren’t living up to the words of America’s national anthem.

New York, New Jersey and California are the least free in the U.S., based on an index of public policies affecting your individual freedoms.

The rankings are based economic, social and personal freedoms of Americans - and include measures such as taxes, government spending and regulations.

Drudge Report Least Biased

2011-06-16T12:26:00.001-07:00

Book: Liberal Media Distorts News Bias

By PAUL BEDARD

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/06/16/book-liberal-media-distorts-news-bias

The liberal bias of the mainstream media tilts so far left that any outlets not in that political lane, like the Drudge Report and Fox News Channel, look far more conservative than they really are, according to a UCLA professor's new book out next month.

In a crushing body blow to the pushers of the so-called "Fox Effect," which claims the conservative media is dragging the left into the center, UCLA political science professor Tim Groseclose in Left Turn claims that "all" mainstream news outlets have a liberal bias in their reporting that makes even moderate organizations appear out of the mainstream and decidedly right-wing to news consumers who are influenced by the slant. [Read Fox's Huckabee slams MSNBC's Matthews, Scarborough over bias.]

"Fox News is clearly more conservative than ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and National Public Radio. Some will conclude that 'therefore, this means that Fox News has a conservative bias,'" he writes in an advance copy provided to Washington Whispers. "Instead, maybe it is centrist, and possibly even left-leaning, while all the others are far left. It's like concluding that six-three is short just because it is short compared to professional basketball players."

What's more, he says, "this point illustrates a common misconception about the Drudge Report. According to my analysis, the Drudge Report is approximately the most fair, balanced, and centrist news outlet in the United States. Yet, the overwhelming majority of media commentators claim that it has a conservative bias. The problem, I believe, is that such commentators mistake relative bias for absolute bias. Yes, the Drudge Report is more conservative than the average U.S. news outlet. But it is a logical mistake to use that to infer that it is based on an absolute scale."

Obamanomics Doesn't Work

2011-06-09T12:54:00.000-07:00

The Coming Crash of 2013

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/06/08/the-coming-crash-of-2013#

On Inauguration Day, 2009, President Obama seemed so politically blessed by the timing of developing economic trends. I expected that based on American economic history, recovery from the recession should have occurred some time during 2009. Even the longest previous recession since the Great Depression would have resulted in a recovery in summer 2009, as the recession began in December 2007.
Moreover, prior American history had shown that the deeper the recession the stronger the recovery. So I was expecting President Obama to pass his economic recovery plan, as foolhardy and ineffective as I believed it would be, and then to ride a wave of adulation as the economy roared back later in the year, which it should have done just on its own according to long established rhythms of the business cycle.
So even I have been surprised by the reality that President Obama's economic policies have been so disastrous that they have prevented any real recovery from getting off the ground, at what is now three and a half years since the recession began.
In America, the economy does not fall into stagnation and just lie there for years, which is the narrative of the Obama Administration, thinking the American people are too stupid to know their own country. Our economy has periodically fallen into recessions, but recovers to show robust economic growth within a year or two. That is why chief White House economist Austan Goolsbee, who does know better, is playing with us when he says as he did last Friday in response to the May jobs report, "there are always bumps on the road to recovery, but the overall trajectory of the economy has improved dramatically over the past two years."

The Worst Recovery Since the Great Depression
How much time do Obama and Goolsbee think they have to do their job right for the American people? In every other recession since the Great Depression, the overall trajectory of the economy has been dramatically better after two years. But not this time. Since the Great Depression, recessions have lasted an average of 10 months, with the longest previously being 16 months. Yet, in May, 41 months after the recession began, unemployment rose yet again, to 9.1%. America has now suffered the longest period with unemployment that high since the Great Depression.
The depression for African Americans continued, as unemployment among them rose again to 16.2%. Hispanics continued with unemployment at double digit depression levels as well, with unemployment among them also rising again to nearly 12%. For teenagers, the depression level unemployment persisted at 24.2%; for black teenagers, over 40%. The U6 unemployment rate, counting those marginally attached to the labor force who have given up looking in the Obama "recovery," and those stuck in part time unemployment for economic reasons, continued at nearly 16%.
While the Reagan recovery, a real recovery from a similarly deep recession, averaged 7.1% real economic growth over the first 7 quarters, the Obama recovery has produced less than half that at 2.8%, with the last quarter at a dismal 1.8%. While the Reagan recovery produced nearly 20 million new jobs, and civilian employment rose by almost 20%, today America still suffers 6.8 million fewer jobs than when the recession started over 3 years ago. The labor force participation rate has fallen to its lowest level almost since the Reagan recovery started over 25 years ago. As the Wall Street Journal explained on Monday:
This is an important economic measure because it reflects the opportunities that Americans perceive in the marketplace. In the long boom from the Reagan years through 2000 or so, the labor force participation rate took a historic leap upward as women, immigrants and others entered the job market…. It has now fallen off a cliff, and we doubt that is what Mr. Goolsbee means when he hails the "trajectory of the economy."
I have previously discussed why this happened. Obamanomics doggedly followed the opposite of Reaganomics in every detail. The centerpiece of Obamanomics was the old-fashioned Keynesianism that was a proven failure and left for dead 30 years ago. That was reflected most of all in Obama's February 2009 trillion dollar stimulus package. That didn't work because borrowing a trillion dollars out of the economy to spend a trillion dollars back into the economy does not add anything to the economy on net.
And borrowing two trillion for the stimulus instead still wouldn't have done it, for the same reason. Those calling for still more of the same Keynesian snake oil are just self-identifying themselves as hopelessly deluded fools who must not be taken seriously ever again. Worse than not working, Obama's trillion dollar stimulus already drove us to the brink of bankruptcy. Going for still more now as advocated by the mentally blinded would be walking off the cliff with our eyes closed.
Great Depression 2.0
Hard as it may be to imagine, where we are headed under Obamanomics will be worse than where we have been. The economic indicators are increasingly flashing economic decline already. Once the Bush tax cuts were extended to 2013, I didn't expect to see that until then, for all of the reasons below. But Obamanomics keeps deteriorating faster than even I expected.
Already sculed now under current law in 2013 is the expiration of those Bush tax cuts, which President Obama has refused to renew for single workers making over $200,000 a year, and couples making over $250,000. Also scheduled to go into effect in 2013 under current law are all the tax increases of Obamacare. Together, these job killing tax policies would result in a sharp increase in the tax rates on the nation's small businesses, job creators, and investors for virtually every major federal tax.
These taxpayers would see their income tax rates jump by nearly 20%, the capital gains tax rate increase by nearly 60%, the total tax rate on corporate dividends increase by nearly three times, their Medicare payroll tax rate increase by 62%, and the death tax rise from the grave with a 55% rate. This would go way beyond the outdated Obama talking point about returning to the Clinton tax rates, adding up to a top federal tax rate of 44.8% on wage income alone, besides all the tax increases on capital income, on the way up to a 62% top federal tax rate.

Even the Washington Post Attacks

2011-06-07T12:25:00.000-07:00

President Obama’s phony accounting on the auto industry bailout
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/president-obamas-phony-accounting-on-the-auto-industry-bailout/2011/06/06/AG3nefKH_blog.html

“Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency.” — President Obama, June 4, 2011

With some of the economic indicators looking a bit dicey, President Obama traveled to Ohio last week to tout what the administration considers a good-news story: the rescue of the domestic automobile industry. In fact, he also made it the subject of his weekly radio address.

We take no view on whether the administration’s efforts on behalf of the automobile industry were a good or bad thing; that’s a matter for the editorial pages and eventually the historians. But we are interested in the facts the president cited to make his case.

What we found is one of the most misleading collections of assertions we have seen in a short presidential speech. Virtually every claim by the president regarding the auto industry needs an asterisk, just like the fine print in that too-good-to-be-true car loan.

Let’s look at the claims in the order in which the president said them.

“Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency — and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule. And this week, we reached a deal to sell our remaining stake. That means soon, Chrysler will be 100 percent in private hands.”

Wow, “every dime and more” sounds like such a bargain. Not only did Chrysler pay back the loan, with interest — but the company paid back even more than they owed. Isn’t America great or what?

Not so fast. The president snuck in the weasel words “during my presidency” in his statement. What does that mean?

According to the White House, Obama is counting only the $8.5 billion loan that he made to Chrysler, not the $4 billion that President George W. Bush extended in his last month in office. However, Obama was not a disinterested observer at the time. According to The Washington Post article on the Bush loan, the incoming president called Bush’s action a “necessary step . . . to help avoid a collapse of our auto industry that would have had devastating consequences for our economy and our workers.”

Under the administration’s math, the U.S. government will receive $11.2 billion back from Chrysler, far more than the $8.5 billion Obama extended.

Through this sleight-of-hand accounting, the White House can conveniently ignore Bush’s loan, but even the Treasury Department admits that U.S. taxpayers will not recoup about $1.3 billion of the entire $12.5 billion investment when all is said and done.

The White House justifies not counting the Bush money because, it says, that money was completely spent when Obama was making a tough political decision on whether to extend another loan. In other words, a decision to do nothing at the time would have resulted in the immediate loss of the $4 billion that Bush had extended.

This is chicanery. Under the president’s math, Chrysler paid back 100 percent of Obama’s loan and less than 70 percent of Bush’s loan. A more honest presentation would combine the two figures to say U.S. taxpayers got back 90 percent of what they invested. In fact, that is how the Treasury and other administration officials frequently portray it; it is just when Obama speaks that the numbers get so squishy.

The White House justifies saying that Chrysler will be in 100 percent “in private hands” because there will no longer be government ownership once Fiat completes its purchase of the U.S. stake. For the record, the United Auto Workers will own 46 percent of the company.

“All three American automakers are now adding shifts and creating jobs at the strongest rate since the 1990s.”

The White House says the data to back this claim concerning the Big Three automakers is not public information. The official Bureau of Labor Statistics data refers to the entire auto industry — including foreign auto manufacturers, auto parts manufacturers, auto parts dealers and auto dealers. If you look at the data, the 113,200 jobs added between June 2009 and May 2011 amounts to about a 5 percent increase — from a rather low base.

UPDATE, 10:45 AM: Yen Chen, automotive business statistical analyst at the Center for Automotive Research, says CAR's analysis of Big Three auto data shows this statistic is correct. The Detroit Three are expected to add 10,000 hourly and 5,000 salaried workers this year, from a base of 115,805 hourly workers and 56, 432 salaried workers. That's an increase of about eight percent in each case. More than 16,000 hourly workers were added in 1991, but from a much higher base--440,000-- and 10,000 were also added in 1995, when there were 433,000 hourly workers. Meanwhile, salaried workers have been on a steady decline since 1990 (when the big Three employed 157,000).

“GM plans to hire back all of the workers they had to lay off during the recession.”

This is another impressive-sounding but misleading figure. In the five years since 2006, General Motors announced that it would reduce its workforce by nearly 68,000 hourly and salary workers, creating a much smaller company. Those are the figures that generated the headlines.

Obama is only talking about a sliver of workers — the 9,600 workers who were laid off in the fourth quarter of 2008. About 4,100 were sent home for a few weeks. Another 5,500 were put on indefinite leave, meaning there were no jobs at the time for them. All but 1,000 have returned to work, and the rest should be back at work by year’s end, according to GM spokesman Greg A. Martin.

“In the year before I was President, this industry lost more than 400,000 jobs, and two great American companies, Chrysler and GM, stood on the brink of collapse. Now, we had a few options. We could have done what a lot of folks in Washington thought we should do — nothing.”

This is quite a straw man — that many people wanted to do nothing. It was never so black and white. The debate was over the right course to take in the bankruptcy process.

The Wall Street Journal published Monday an interesting conservative critique of the government’s intervention by David Skeel, a law professor at University of Pennsylvania. Skeel says that the revival of the auto industry “is a very encouraging development,” but “to claim that the car companies would have collapsed if the government hadn’t intervened in the way it did, and to suggest that the intervention came at very little cost, is a dangerous misreading of our recent history.”

To support the claim that “a lot of folks” wanted to do nothing, the White House referred us to statements by the House minority leader, John Boehner (R-Ohio), and Sens. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.).

We do not read Boehner’s quote that way; in this 2009 comment, he is questioning the administration’s approach while saying, “The success of our automotive industry is critical.”Shelby and Kyl in 2008 were protesting the use of taxpayer funds by Bush to delay a bankruptcy filing; they preferred immediately putting the companies through the bankruptcy process.

It will be up to historians to decide what the best solution would have been for taxpayers and the auto industry. We can understand why the president wants to portray himself as making a lonely and tough decision. But the debate was not either/or, bur rather what was the best policy to bring the automakers back to financial health.

The Pinocchio Test

The president is straining too hard. If the auto industry bailout is really a success, there should be no need to resort to trumped-up rhetoric and phony accounting to make your case. Let the facts speak for themselves.

Straight Rights

2011-06-03T13:17:00.000-07:00

Gay softball league limit on straight players OK'd
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015218590_apusgaysoftball1stldwritethru.html

A gay softball organization can keep its rule limiting the number of heterosexual players on each team, but allegations by three players who say they were disqualified from a tournament because they weren't gay enough can proceed to trial, a federal judge said.

The North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance oversees gay softball leagues in dozens of U.S. cities and runs an annual tournament called the Gay Softball World Series. Three men claim in a lawsuit filed last year that their team's second-place finish in the 2008 tournament in Washington state was nullified because they are bisexual, not gay, and thus their team exceeded the limit of two non-gay players.

U.S. District Judge John Coughenour ruled Tuesday that the organization has a First Amendment right to limit the number of heterosexual players, much as the Boy Scouts have a constitutional right to exclude gays.

"It would be difficult for NAGAAA to effectively emphasize a vision of the gay lifestyle rooted in athleticism, competition and sportsmanship if it were prohibited from maintaining a gay identity," the judge wrote.

However, Coughenour did say that questions remain about the way the softball association applied its rule, including whether the questions asked about the men's sexuality at a protest hearing were unnecessarily intrusive. Therefore, the case can proceed toward a trial set for Aug. 1, he said.

The San Francisco-based team the men played on, D2, was disqualified after others at the tournament questioned their sexuality and filed a protest. Under questioning, the men, Stephen Apilado, Laron Charles and John Russ, were evasive or declined to discuss their sexuality, according to the organization.

For example, minutes of the hearing say that Charles claimed to be gay but acknowledged being married to a woman, and Apilado initially said he was both gay and straight but then acknowledged being more attracted to women.

The minutes say rumors had persisted for years about whether D2 was stacking its team with straight ringers. In addition to the three plaintiffs, the team had two designated straight players. The organization says it has always considered bisexuals to meet the definition of "gay" for roster purposes, but the minutes also note that one official involved in the decision to disqualify D2 commented that "this is not a bisexual world series. This is a gay world series."

"Plaintiff's allegations about defendant's treatment of bisexuality remain of central importance to this case," the judge said. "Defendant could still be liable for its actions."

Chris Stoll, a spokesman for the National Center for Lesbian Rights in San Francisco, which is representing the three men, said Friday its lawyers were reviewing the opinion and legal options.

"We think that the law is clear; NAGAAA doesn't have a First Amendment right to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation," he said.

Liberal Media

2011-06-02T12:02:00.000-07:00

Something we all knew.

TV Executives Admit in Taped Interviews That Hollywood Pushes a Liberal Agenda
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tv-executives-admit-taped-interviews-193116

In her video, Carsey also says she insisted on portraying characters smoking marijuana in That ‘70s Show. “If this is a problem for you, we certainly understand, and we just won’t do the show,” she told executives at Fox.

Shapiro released two videos Tuesday, one featuring COPS creator John Langley saying he’s partial to segments where white people are the criminals, and the other has Fred Silverman, the former head of ABC and later NBC, saying “there’s only one perspective, and it’s a very progressive perspective” in TV comedy today. (Those videos are also posted below).

Shapiro said the executives felt comfortable talking about politics with him because they assumed, incorrectly, that he is on the left.

“Most of them didn’t Google me. If they had, they would have realized where I am politically,” he said. “I played on their stereotypes. When I showed up for the interviews, I wore my Harvard Law baseball cap — my name is Ben Shapiro and I attended Harvard, so there’s a 98.7 percent chance I’m a liberal. Except I happen not to be.”

Shapiro said he’ll time the debut of certain videos for maximum effect. One that slams Sean Hannity, for example, is reserved for his scheduled appearance on Hannity’s show on the Fox News Channel.

And conservative pundit Ann Coulter has a new book out June 7. “I have two people ripping her by name, so I’ll release those the day Ann’s book is released,” Shapiro said.

One of those slamming Coulter is George Schlatter, who directed and produced Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In in the 1970s, using the show to knock Republicans and the Vietnam War. “The fact we pissed the Pentagon off, that pleased me enormously,” he says before calling Coulter “the c-word.”

In his video, Schlatter also goes off on right-wing radio hosts Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham.

Shapiro says he didn’t disclose that he’d be releasing the tapes, but that his subjects have no reason to complain.

“I asked them for permission to tape, and there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy when you’re being interviewed for a book,” he said.
“If they’re going to be shocked at something, it should be themselves, not me,” Shapiro said. “They should be shocked that opinion is so one-sided in Hollywood that it’s OK to say, ‘I’m fine with discrimination.’”

“My whole book is a plea for openness in the industry,” he added. “Hire people from the other side of the aisle once in a while, or at least stop mocking them

Kill But Don't Waterboard

2011-05-11T12:38:00.000-07:00

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/05/10/obama_values_kill_but_dont_waterboard_109802.html

Obama Values: Kill But Don't Waterboard
By Debra Saunders
At the end of his "60 Minutes" interview, President Obama said of Osama bin Laden's death, "Justice was done. And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn't deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.
The longer he serves in office, the more Obama sounds like George W. Bush.
New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd also has started to sound like Bush. In her Sunday column, "Killing Evil Doesn't Make Us Evil," Dowd writes that when Navy SEALs shot and killed bin Laden, it seemed like "the only civilized and morally sound response."

To review: Obama and Dowd long have claimed that it was morally reprehensible for U.S. intelligence operatives to waterboard 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. Candidate Obama said that waterboarding was "never acceptable" because it contradicts our values. Obama even dished his now-Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, for having said in 2006 that she would authorize brutal interrogation measures to prevent a terrorist attack.

Apparently, it is consistent with Obama's and Dowd's values to shoot and kill an unarmed bin Laden -- as long as you don't waterboard him to learn possible intelligence that might prevent a terrorist attack first.

It's amazing how partisan politics can make the medicine go down.

Pelosi Flip-Flops

2011-05-04T14:57:00.000-07:00

The Intellectual Dishonesty of Nancy Pelosi
ContentionsThe Intellectual Dishonesty of Nancy PelosiPeter Wehner 05.03.2011 - 9:40 AM

Here’s Nancy Pelosi from a press conference on September 7, 2006:

[E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late. He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But, in fact, the damage that he has done . . . is done. And even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.
And here’s Nancy Pelosi yesterday:
The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida. . . . I salute President Obama, his national security team, Director Panetta, our men and women in the intelligence community and military, and other nations who supported this effort for their leadership in achieving this major accomplishment. . . . [T]he death of Osama bin Laden is historic. . . .

This devastating then-and-now comparison comes to us courtesy of John Hinderaker of Power Line. It underscores the degree to which partisanship can ravage people’s fair-mindedness and, in the process, make them look like fools and hacks. Such things aren’t uncommon in politics—but what is rare is to see such intellectual dishonesty proven so conclusively.

Waterboarding helped

2011-05-04T14:52:00.000-07:00

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/05/03/panetta_open_question_if_waterboarding_helped_find_bin_laden.html

Panetta: "Open Question" If Waterboarding Helped Find Bin Laden

BRIAN WILLIAMS: I'd like to ask you about the sourcing on the intel that ultimately led to this successful attack. Can you confirm that it was as a result of waterboarding that we learned what we needed to learn to go after bin Laden?

LEON PANETTA: You know Brian, in the intelligence business you work from a lot of sources of information, and that was true here. We had a multiple source -- a multiple series of sources -- that provided information with regards to this situation. Clearly, some of it came from detainees and the interrogation of detainees. But we also had information from other sources as well. So, it's a little difficult to say it was due just to one source of information that we got.

WILLIAMS: Turned around the other way, are you denying that waterboarding was in part among the tactics used to extract the intelligence that led to this successful mission?

PANETTA: No, I think some of the detainees clearly were, you know, they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees. But I'm also saying that, you know, the debate about whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always going to be an open question.

WILLIAMS: So, finer point, one final time, enhanced interrogation techniques -- which has always been kind of a handy euphemism in these post-9/11 years -- that includes waterboarding?

PANETTA: That's correct.

Bush Hater

2011-05-04T14:49:00.000-07:00

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/05/04/lib_talker_when_will_navy_seals_take_out_george_bush.html

Lib Talker: When Will Navy SEALs Take Out George W. Bush?

Wicked With of the West on Oil Prices

2011-04-28T12:54:00.001-07:00

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/pelosi-blamed-oil-men-white-house-gas-pr
Pelosi Blamed ‘Oil Men in the White House’ for Gas Prices in ’08, Now Who’s To Blame?

Thursday, April 28, 2011 By Eric Scheiner
(CNSNews.com) - Back in 2008 then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) knew where she wanted to place the blame for high gas prices. “The price of oil is at the doorstep -- 4 dollars plus per gallon for oil, is attributed to two oil men in the White House,” Pelosi said in a CNN interview on July 17th, 2008.
Now that President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are out of the White House, Pelosi has been silent on the issue. She has made no public comments on gas prices over the past few months. President Barack Obama however, has been fielding questions on the issue as he begins his bid for re-election.

The Religion of Tolerance

2011-04-28T01:41:00.000-07:00

As everyone knows, one the five pillars of Islamic faith is tolerance. Apparently, women's rights and liberation is not under the consideration of tolerance. By western standards everyone should be allowed to do about anything without being judged. Yet, we tolerate a religion that does not respect or tolerate liberation or women's rights. See are afraid to say anything about that.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3548816/Muslim-actress-causes-storm-after-posing-naked-for-Playboy-mag.html

A MUSLIM actress has caused a storm by posing naked for Playboy.
Sila Sahin has been branded a "whore" and a "western slut" after appearing topless on the cover of the German edition of the men's magazine.

But Islamic internet sites are being monitored by the BND - the German intelligence agency - after threats were posted about her "shaming Muslim womanhood" and "prostituting herself for money".
One poster on the Jihad Watch website wrote: "She needs to be very careful..." Another simply said: "She must pay."
A kebab shop owner, asked on German TV what he would do if Sila were his daughter, replied: "I would kill her. I really mean that. That doesn't fit with my culture."

The Islamic Community of Germany has called for a boycott of Sila.

Racist Calling a Racist Election

2011-04-27T07:26:00.000-07:00

Ever listen to Tavis? Truly biased and some would call a racist. Well, it takes one to know one Tavis.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/04/26/tavis_smiley_2012_will_be_the_most_racist_election_ever.html
Tavis Smiley: 2012 Will Be "The Most Racist" Election Ever

"I said over a year ago that this was going to be, this presidential race, Lawrence, was going to be the ugliest, the nastiest, the most divisive, and the most racist in the history of this Republic," PBS host Tavis Smiley said on MSNBC.

Obama breaks promise with jobless blacks

2011-04-26T11:33:00.000-07:00

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-04-26-Obamas-broken-promise-to-help-blacks.htm?loc=interstitialskip
Column: Obama breaks promise with jobless blacks

By DeWayne Wickham

This is not an easy column for me to write. It's never easy to tell someone you like that he's a disappointment. I like Barack Obama. I liked him the first time we met back in 2006 when I took a small group of journalism students to Washington, D.C., for a meeting with the then-freshly minted U.S. senator.
I liked Obama even more when an aide to his presidential campaign invited me to a July 2007 speech he gave laying out his commitment to improve life for people in urban America — which for most politicians is a euphemism for black America.

"Today's economy has made it easier to fall into poverty. … Every American is vulnerable to the insecurities and anxieties of this new economy. And that's why the single most important focus of my economic agenda as president will be to pursue policies that create jobs and make work pay," Obama said that day to his mostly black audience.
At that time, the nation's overall unemployment rate was 4.7%. Whites had a jobless rate of 4.2% while the black unemployment rate stood at 8.1%. Today, the black rate is 15.5%, nearly double that of white job-seekers.
I don't blame Obama for the economic conditions that are responsible for so many blacks being out of work. The seeds of this problem were planted long before he moved into the Oval Office. But I do fault him for not doing more to fix this problem.
The poor in urban America, he said in that 2007 speech, "suffer most from a politics that has been tipped in favor of those with the most money, and influence, and power." And then he asked rhetorically, "How can a country like this allow it?" To which he answered, "We can't."
But so far, under his leadership, he has allowed it.
Finding work for the jobless is the best anti-poverty program this nation can mount. But while the Obama administration spends $608 million during the first 17 days of its involvement in Libya's civil war — it can muster neither the money nor the will to combat black unemployment.
The president's failure to fight this problem as vigorously as he wages war abroad gets a pass from black leaders, many of whom complain to me privately but remain silent in public. They're reluctant to challenge Obama the way Martin Luther King Jr. did Lyndon Johnson in 1967.
America "would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor" so long as it was involved in the Vietnam war, King said in a speech in which he called for an end to that bloody conflict.
Last month, as the Obama administration applauded the creation of 216,000 new jobs and a slight dip in the overall unemployment rate, the gap between whites and blacks without work widened as the black unemployment rate inched up.
In December 2009, when the black unemployment rate was just 5.5 percentage points higher than the national rate, Obama told USA TODAY that he didn't think he needed to do anything special to close this gap. Now that it is nearly 7 percentage points higher, black leaders should demand that the president devote as much attention on this problem as he has on ending the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy and in pushing for immigration reform.
They should demand an end to the wasteful spending on wars that can't be won and insist that the resulting peace dividend be used to finance that revitalized urban policy — the one Obama not so long ago promised would be the focus of his economic agenda

No Easter Address?

2011-04-25T15:29:00.001-07:00

What? No Easter Greeting?

by Keith Koffler on April 25, 2011, 11:11 am http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2011/04/25/easter-greeting/

Just when I thought the current team running the White House might have used up all its allotted mistakes comes word that President Obama failed to issue either an Easter or a Good Friday greeting to the nation.
Now, let’s forget for a moment that these greetings, which presidents issue on many holidays and commemorations of events, are largely perfunctory and symbolic gestures that nobody cares about.

Until there’s a problem with them.

Fox News first caught the blunder and put it into context that makes the omission insulting to Christians. The mistake is odd enough to call into question just what Obama’s priorities are.

By comparison, the White House has released statements recognizing the observance of major Muslim holidays and released statements in 2010 on Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha.

The White House . . . did release an eight-paragraph statement heralding Earth Day. Likewise, the president’s weekend address mentioned neither Good Friday or Easter.

Obama, Fox notes, did head out to church yesterday and held an Easter prayer breakfast at the White House last week.

Obama is on a roll for religious holiday greeting screw ups. Fox News writes:

In 2010, Obama was criticized for releasing an all-inclusive Easter greeting. He reached out to Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and people of no faith at all in a statement about a holiday that is uniquely Christian.

And as I noted last week, the president released a Passover greeting this month that compared the ancient Jewish exodus from Egypt to the Arab political awakening this year, which would be a beautiful thing if most Arabs didn’t seek Israel’s destruction.

The president is, of course, hosting the Easter Egg Roll at the White House today. But Easter isn’t really about rolling eggs on a manicured lawn, now is it?

UPDATE: Asked during this afternoon’s briefing about the issue, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney suggested Obama’s “high profile” visit to a church Sunday should suffice.

“I’m not sure if we put out a statement or not, but he obviously personally celebrated Easter with his family,” Carney said, adding ”the president took his family out to church in a very high-profile way.”

Carney added that Obama is a “devoted Christian.”

No Mistakes. Really?

2011-04-21T15:04:00.000-07:00

After criticizing Bush, Obama has make no mistakes he will admit to? Really?

Obama: Mistakes? Can't think of any.

Byron York 04/20/11 11:34 PM

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/04/obama-mistakes-cant-think-any

Seven years ago, in April 2004, President George W. Bush held a formal news conference in which he was asked, "What would your biggest mistake be…and what lessons have you learned from it?" Bush's hemming and hawing answer -- in several minutes of flailing about, he never managed to come up with a single mistake to cite -- was widely criticized in the days that followed.

On Wednesday, President Obama held a town hall at the headquarters of Facebook in Palo Alto, California, during which he was asked, "If you had to do anything differently during your first four years, what would it be?" Obama, it turns out, is no better at analyzing his own missteps than Bush.

Obama Lied About Signing Statements.

2011-04-18T11:40:00.000-07:00

Lordy, Lord how I hate hypocrats. That is what is so disappointing about this president. It was about "Change," it is now about lying. How can this man bold face lie to us? He clearly said, "NO" when asked about this on the campaign trail. Obama is no difference than other presidents and that is what is disappointing. There is no "Hope" or "Change." Obama is about about "Lies."

Jay Carney: Obama Was Never Opposed To Signing Statements http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/04/18/jay_carney_obama_was_never_opposed_to_signing_statements.html

Obama 2008: Bush Used Signing Statements To "Accumulate More Power" http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/04/18/obama_2008_bush_used_signing_statements_to_accumulate_more_power.html

Jay Carney says President Obama was never against signing statements, just when President Bush "abused" them. Watch what then-Senator Obama said in 2008 while running for president and decide for yourself. "His concern was with what he saw as an abuse of the signing statement by the previous administration. So that the positions he took in signing statements on the budget bill entirely consistent with that position, you need to retain the right to, as president, to be able to issue those signing statements, but obviously they should not be abused," White House press secretary Jay Carney told the press on Monday.

Obama Lied; People died

2011-04-04T12:21:00.000-07:00

I thought he was supposed to get us out of this war. 60% of U.S. Military Deaths in Afghanistan Have Occurred Since Obama Was Inaugurated in 2009 Monday, April 04, 2011 By Edwin Mora http://cnsnews.com/news/article/60-us-military-deaths-afghanistan-have-o At least 858 U.S. soldiers have died in the Afghanistan war since President Barack Obama took office in January 2009. That equals 60.13 percent of the 1,427 American soldier fatalities so far in the ongoing 10-year war in that country.

Another Failed Campaing Pledge

2011-04-04T12:13:00.001-07:00

Unfortunately, we are let down again. While on the campaign trail, we trusted the words, the hope, the change Obama promised. Well, no its "liar, liar, pants on fire." He lied again. While he hated on Bush for his "War on Terror," now that he is charge, he finds he is no better than Bush. In fact, he is worse. At least Bush was not dishonest on this issue and wasn't a hippiecrat. Another disappointment from Obama. Obama U-turn: US to try 9/11 accused at Guantanamo http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/9134304/obama-uturn-us-to-try-911-accused-at-guantanamo/ WASHINGTON (AFP) - In a major about-face by the Obama administration, 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four alleged co-conspirators are to be tried by a military tribunal at Guantanamo rather than a civilian court in New York, a US official said Monday. Attorney General Eric Holder will officially announce the U-turn later on Monday, a US official told AFP on condition of anonymity, saying: "KSM will be tried at Guantanamo." Proceedings for co-accused Ramzi Binalshibh, Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, Walid bin Attash, Mustapha Ahmed al-Hawsawi will also be at the US naval base in southeastern Cuba rather than US federal courts, the official added. President Barack Obama has vowed to close Guantanamo, having held it up as a symbol of all that was wrong with the so-called "war on terror" waged by his predecessor George W. Bush. The high-profile trials of Sheikh Mohammed and the four other alleged Al-Qaeda figures -- a date has not yet been set -- provide the latest evidence that the detention center will stay open for some time. In one of his first acts as president in 2009, Obama halted trials at Guantanamo Bay and announced he planned to close the detention camp within a year. But he has been thwarted in his ambition by legal challenges in prosecuting suspects deemed to be at war with the United States and strong opposition from both friends and foes in Congress. Obama's position softened last month when he lifted a two-year freeze on new military trials for Guantanamo terror suspects, paving the way for Monday's decision.

Kill Team - Another Double Standard

2011-03-30T13:59:00.000-07:00

Why can't we get this right Democrats. We whined and whined about impeach Bush, etc. Now it is our turn and do we cry for Obama's impeachment over the Kill Team photos? Not a word. That is hypocrisy at its finest. How can we be taken seriously when we refuse to own up? Shame on us, the democratic party. Rumsfeld on 'kill team' photos: 'Much worse' than Abu Ghraib http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/mar/29/video-rumsfeld-kill-team-photos-worse-abu-ghraib/ Rolling Stone published horrific photos reportedly taken by members of the U.S. Military who allegedly were part of what is being called the "Kill Team." These individuals have been described by the Army, according to Rolling Stone, as a "rogue unit" operating completely on its own, "without the knowledge of its superiors.” Rolling Stone's Mark Boal reports: Indeed, it would have been hard not to know about the murders, given that the soldiers of 3rd Platoon took scores of photographs chronicling their kills and their time in Afghanistan. The photos, obtained by Rolling Stone, portray a front-line culture among U.S. troops in which killing Afghan civilians is less a reason for concern than a cause for celebration. "Most people within the unit disliked the Afghan people, whether it was the Afghan National Police, the Afghan National Army or locals," one soldier explained to investigators. "Everyone would say they're savages." One photo shows a hand missing a finger. Another depicts a severed head being maneuvered with a stick, and still more show bloody body parts, blown-apart legs, mutilated torsos. Several show dead Afghans, lying on the ground or on Stryker vehicles, with no weapons in view. In an interview with the Washington Times on Tuesday, Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense for President George W. Bush, gave his thoughts on the recent Afghanistan "kill team" photos and described the alleged incident as "much worse" than the photos taken of U.S. soldiers posing with detainees and putting the prisoners in humiliating positions at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. TWT: What are your thoughts on the latest kill team photos out of Afghanistan? DONALD RUMSFELD: If they're the ones that I'm thinking of it's where some... there are some allegations that some soldiers killed some people. You know, I feel such a responsibility as an American that when people are in our custody, we treat them properly. It is always heartbreaking when we see that there are allegations and photographs or suggestions that people have mismanaged that process. And of course the courts will decide in this case. But it is interesting, in the case of Abhu Ghraib, that it was such an important press event and nobody was killed. And in this case, it looks like there are allegations that some people were actually killed. TWT: How does this stack up against the Abu Ghraib photos, for example? RUMSFELD: The situation, of course, is much worse if someone dies, but it's a sad thing. It's unfortunate. The overwhelming majority of men and women in uniform are professional. They handle themselves well. They treat people properly in our custody. And no question but that they are punished in the event that the courts and the military commissions under the uniform code of military justice decide that they've done something wrong. They get punished. Following the release of the Abu Ghraib photos between 2004 and 2006, eleven soldiers were all convicted on a number of charges in a court martial, dishonorably discharged and sent to prison. However, numerous left wing web sites like Move On and Antiwar.com, media outlets, and politicians on various levels, like both Democratic California Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, called for not only President Bush to fire Mr. Rumsfeld but also called for Congress to impeach Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney over Abu Ghraib. Even Senator John McCain, Arizona Republican, spoke out against Secretary Rumsfeld in 2004 (h/t Media Research Center) Mr. Rumsfeld finally resigned from his post as Defense Secretary in 2006 after President Bush refused to accept his resignation two times before. While President Obama's Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a hold over from the Bush administration, was never a big favorite among liberals since the beginning of Mr. Obama's term, nevertheless. Compared to the calls for a Bush impeachment and a Rumsfeld firing over Abu Ghraib, few (if any) major media or politicians are currently calling for Secretary Gates' resignation or firing and an impeachment of President Obama over the alleged crimes of the Afghanistan "Kill Team." In fact, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, known for calling on Congress to impeach President Bush, recently pulled away from his call on Congress to impeach President Obama over U.S. airstrikes over Libya, Capitol Hill Blue reported on Tuesday.Secretary Rumsfeld steered clear of making any suggestions about whether or not his successor, Robert Gates, should resign. TWT: You spend a lot of time in your book talking about the Abu Ghraib photos and you offered your resignation to President Bush and he didn't accept it. I believe the quote in the book was: "Don, sometimes heads have to roll over this." Do you think that Sec. Gates should resign immediately over this? RUMSFELD: I'm not going to give anyone else any advice over this. I don't know the facts well I know. I know what I felt and I wrote about it in my book, my memoir:Known and Unknown. Finally, Mr. Rumsfeld gave the Washington Times insight on what he thinks the biggest threat to the United States is presently. TWT:What do you think the biggest threat to the country is? RUMSFELD: I think the biggest problem we face is our intelligence. The weapons are so lethal today, that simply intelligence has to be able to teach us and help us understand the kinds of surprises that could ever occur. It's a big world. It's a complicated world. There are people out there determined to kill innocent men women and children...particularly Americans. The need to improve our intelligence gathering capability is the single most critical thing.

Obama's Abu Ghraib - No one is Talking About It

2011-03-22T12:23:00.000-07:00

Oh my How Words Come Back to Haunt Us. It is a sad day when everything Obama says is hypocritical. Can we no longer trust anyone? How can he say one thing and do the other? We are losing all faith in the Democratic Party. "Yes we can" has turned into "I speak with forked tong."

Obama’s Abu Ghraib: The Stuff Hits the Fan
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/03/21/breaking-obamas-abu-ghraib-the-stuff-hits-the-fan/

When the Abu Ghraib scandal broke in 2003, the mainstream media and liberal blogosphere couldn’t find enough column inches to express adequately their shock and revulsion. The New York Times alone published 56 stories on the hideous revelation that members of the U.S. Army Reserve had tortured prisoners of war and posed for “trophy pictures”—inexcusable acts that the Times placed squarely at the feet of then-president George W. Bush.
Nor could left-leaning sources conceal their delight when President-elect Barack Obama boldly proclaimed:
[U]nder my administration the United States does not torture. We will abide by the Geneva Conventions. We will uphold our highest ideals.
What a difference a president makes. Until you flash forward to today’s bombshell, dropped by the British newspaper The Guardian, noting that members of a self-styled U.S. Army “kill team” posed for photos not with tortured prisoners but with corpses. Of civilians. Whom they had killed.

Peace Peace Revoked

2011-03-21T13:13:00.000-07:00

Take Obama's Peace Prize
http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=592071&vId=

Bolivian President Evo Morales has called for US President Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize to be revoked following his decision to attack Libya.

'Two years ago we heard that President Barack Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize, but is he defending peace in the world now, or isn't he instead fomenting violence?' Morales told reporters, days after Obama ordered the bombing of Libya military targets as part of an UN-approved effort to protect civilians.

'How is it possible to give the Nobel Peace Prize to someone who has launched an invasion, a bombing? It's a violation, an assault, an aggression,' said Morales, one of Latin America's most left-leaning leaders and a vocal critic of the United States.

'Obama is the leader of group of thugs who led an assault and an invasion - and that has nothing to do with defending human rights,' he declared.

Obama receive the prize in December 2009, less than a year after taking office.

In his acceptance speech in Oslo, Obama referred to himself as 'the commander-in-chief of a nation in the midst of two wars' and said armed conflict was at times necessary.

Obama gave his $US1.4 million ($A1.4 million) Nobel Peace Prize award money to 10 charities, including groups working on Haiti relief and supporting military families.

Worst President Ever?

2011-03-17T13:06:00.000-07:00

BARACK OBAMA: THE WEAKEST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY?
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/235196/Barack-Obama-The-Weakest-President-in-history-
Friday March 18,2011 By Anna Pukas

INEFFECTUAL, invisible, unable to honour pledges and now blamed for letting Gaddafi off the hook. Why Obama’s gone from ‘Yes we can’ to ‘Er, maybe we shouldn’t’...

Let us cast our minds back to those remarkable days in November 2008 when the son of a Kenyan goatherd was elected to the White House. It was a bright new dawn – even brighter than the coming of the Kennedys and their new Camelot. JFK may be considered as being from an ethnic and religious minority – Irish and Catholic – but he was still very rich and very white. Barack Obama, by contrast, was a true breakthrough president. The world would change because obviously America had changed.

Obama’s campaign slogan was mesmerisingly simple and brimming with self-belief: “Yes we can.” His presidency, however, is turning out to be more about “no we won’t.” Even more worryingly, it seems to be very much about: “Maybe we can… do what, exactly?“ The world feels like a dangerous place when leaders are seen to lack certitude but the only thing President Obama seems decisive about is his indecision. What should the US do about Libya? What should the US do about the Middle East in general? What about the country’s crippling debts? What is the US going to do about Afghanistan, about Iran?

What is President Obama doing about anything? The most alarming answer – your guess is as good as mine – is also, frankly, the most accurate one. What the President is not doing is being clear, resolute and pro-active, which is surely a big part of his job description. This is what he has to say about the popular uprising in Libya: “Gaddafi must go.” At least, that was his position on March 3.

Obama's State of the Union Was Plagiarism?

2011-01-27T12:33:00.000-08:00

Obama's State of the Union Was Tantamount to Plagiarism
By Alvin Felzenberg

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/alvin-felzenberg/2011/01/26/obamas-state-of-the-union-was-tantamount-to-plagiarism

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, what can be said of plagiarism? President Obama’s second State of the Union address contained enough recycled ideas and lines lifted from speeches of others to make historians wince. I suppose this is what one does when one not only has nothing new to say, but is required by custom and Constitution to come forth with a report of some kind by a certain time and day.

Had Obama or his writers been considerate enough to have informed listeners of where some of the president’s best lines and offered-up ideas originated, the speech might be remembered for its cutting and pasting of great and not-so-great moments of the past performance of others. After quoting Robert Kennedy early on, Obama tried to have his listeners believe that everything else he said that we might remember were his or his writers’ creations. Had the president submitted the text of his second State of the Union Address in the form of a college term paper, he would have been sent forthwith to the nearest academic dean. Once again, our public affairs are such that we have one standard for presidents and another for undergraduates. Now is as good a time as any to let Obama’s listeners in on what the late Paul Harvey would have termed “the rest of the story.” [Take the poll: Was Obama’s State of the Union speech a success?]

Early in his address, Obama said that he wanted the nation he leads to be a "light to the world." The last president who set such a mission for the nation he led, and in those exact words, was Woodrow Wilson.

Obama’s concept of the “American family” may well have had its origins in the first State of the State address New York Governor Mario Cuomo delivered in 1983. Cuomo proclaimed the state of New York as a “family.” He also talked about multiple partnerships, both public and private.

In a 1991 Washington, D.C. address sponsored by conservative groups, including the Heritage Foundation, Margaret Thatcher coined a phrase Obama made his own in his second State of the Union address. Thatcher told her American audience that "no other nation has been built upon an idea." In a slightly revised form, Obama, in his second State of the Union address, all but repeated it, using additional words.

Obama’s pointed mutterings about a second “Sputnik Moment” being upon us and his recollection of how American policymakers responded to the last one with increased expenditures on infrastructure, science, technology, and education were clearly intended to evoke the spirit of Dwight D. Eisenhower. His setting of specific deadlines and goals was vintage JFK, but for the absence of any sense of challenge to his audience, list of benefits the United States would derive from them, or any semblance of a shared adventure the American people were about to embark upon. [Read Robert Schlesinger: Obama Not the First to Use 'Sputnik Moment.']

There was a certain Back to the Future feel to the masterful tributes Obama paid those Ronald Reagan might have described as “ordinary heroes.” After all, it was Reagan who began the practice of inviting citizens who had done extraordinary things to sit beside the first lady in the House gallery as the president recited their achievements. It was also Reagan who reminded his listeners that the greatness of America emerged not from the hand of government, but through the entrepreneurial spirit of the American people. [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on Obama.]

Obama received his most sustained applause when he said, "I know there isn’t a person here who would trade places with any other nation on Earth." Leaving aside the faulty grammar (people change places with people, not with nations), the poaching from John F. Kennedy's immortal inaugural address was obvious enough for the most historical of Obama's listeners to notice. ("I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation.") That Obama could utter almost identical words days after paying tribute to Kennedy on the 50th anniversary of the delivery of that famous speech and not making reference to it suggests a self-absorption rare even among presidents. [See photos of the Obamas behind the scenes.]

Most pointedly, the low point of Obama’s speech came when he brought back government re-organization from the ash heap of failed efforts of previous presidents who sought to save money without inflicting pain on a public that had grown accustomed to government largesse. This one, like all that talk about all those green energy jobs that lay before us, had fallen out of the presidential repertoire with retirement of Jimmy Carter. Obama might have had the decency to have Carter on hand to witness the moment. He will have another chance should he, when he delivers his budget, bring back that other Carter flop from yesteryear, “zero based budgeting.” [See a slide show of 10 worst presidents.]

Even Obama’s feigned attempt at humor had an antecedent in the remarks of a predecessor who spun better yarns than this president. Obama informed his listeners that salmon comes under the jurisdiction of one department when swimming in fresh water and under another when swimming in salt water. He rhetorically inquired what happened to the fish when “smoked.”

Somewhere in the White House library resides a published letter Franklin Roosevelt wrote to an adviser in which he complained that some bears were the property of the Interior Department, while others belonged the National Parks System. FDR, tongue in cheek, warned of a pending custody battle over cubs that emerged from illicit unions of bears crossing departmental jurisdictions. [Read A Brief History of the State of the Union Address.]

It would appear that the only president of note whose imprint was absent in Obama’s long awaited and much-anticipated speech was Obama. This was supposed to have been the moment when the nation found out whether he was at the core a Rooseveltian liberal of a Clintonian centrist. What it got was a cut and pasted version of great and not-so-great State of the Union and other addresses of the past.

Sometime last year, many suggested that Obama would have an easier time getting his message across if he was less dependent on his teleprompter. This may be the year his writers are advised to throw away their books of political quotations. Then we may finally find out what the president truly believes and what he hopes to achieve in the office he so ardently sought.

Obama's Newest Ally - France

2011-01-12T13:06:00.000-08:00

France is our biggest ally, declares Obama: President's blow to Special Relationship with Britain
By Tim Shipman 11th January 2011

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1346006/Barack-Obama-declares-France-biggest-ally-blow-Special-Relationship-Britain.html

The President risked offending British troops in Afghanistan by saying that French president Nicolas Sarkozy is a ‘stronger friend’ than David Cameron.

The remarks, during a White House appearance with Mr Sarkozy, will reinforce the widely-held view in British diplomatic circles that Mr Obama has less interest in the Special Relationship than any other recent American leader.

The comments follow a pattern of coldness towards the UK. When Gordon Brown was prime minister, Mr Obama snubbed his requests for meetings in the U.S.

He also denounced Britain during his inauguration speech.
The UK has lost nearly 350 troops in the war against the Taliban – seven times as many as France.

And there are more than 10,000 British soldiers serving in Helmand province, compared with just 3,850 Frenchmen.Mr Obama's stance was swiftly condemned in Westminster.

Seriously, Mr. President?

2011-01-11T11:28:00.000-08:00

Obama said he would bring a gun to a knife fight?

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/14/obama-if-they-bring-a-knife-to-the-fight-we-bring-a-gun/

June 14, 2008, 1:29 PM ET.
Obama: ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun’

Amy Chozick reports on the presidential race from Philadelphia.

Mobster wisdom tells us never to bring a knife to a gun fight. But what does political wisdom say about bringing a gun to a knife fight?

That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

The comment drew some laughs and applause. But it also struck a chord with his Republican rival. John McCain’s campaign immediately accused the Democratic candidate of playing the politics of fear. They also mentioned that Obama said he would use a gun that would be illegal under Obama’s plans to cut down on illegal firearms.

Left Wing Pothead Murders as a Right Wing Action

2011-01-10T09:39:00.000-08:00

Funny how his classmates describe him as a "left-wing" "ptohead" but the media calls it "right-wing" action

Jared Loughner, Alleged Shooter in Gabrielle Giffords Attack, Described by Classmate as "Left-Wing Pothead"

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/01/jared_loughner_alleged_shooter.php

versus

Gabrielle Giffords shooting reignites row over rightwing rhetoric in US
Sarah Palin at centre of storm over political vitriol after spree leaves six dead and congresswoman in critical condition

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/09/gabrielle-giffords-shooting-rightwing-rhetoric

Dem Congress at Lowest Point Ever

2010-12-15T12:28:00.000-08:00

Congress' Job Approval Rating Worst in Gallup History

Thirteen percent approve of the way Congress is handling its job

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145238/Congress-Job-Approval-Rating-Worst-Gallup-History.aspx

December 15, 2010

PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans' assessment of Congress has hit a new low, with 13% saying they approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The 83% disapproval rating is also the worst Gallup has measured in more than 30 years of tracking congressional job performance.

The prior low approval rating for Congress was 14% in July 2008 when the United States was dealing with record-high gas prices and the economy was in recession.

The current results are based on a Dec. 10-12 Gallup poll, conducted as Congress is finishing work on an important lame-duck session. The session has been highlighted by the agreement on taxes forged last week by President Obama and Republicans in Congress. The tax deal preserves the 2001 and 2003 income tax rates for all Americans for two years, revises the estate tax, extends unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed for a year, and reduces payroll taxes for American workers. It is expected to pass despite vocal opposition from some lawmakers.

Americans are generally more positive than negative toward the deal, but many Democrats in Congress oppose it.

Frustration with the tax deal among Democrats in the general population could be a major reason for Americans' historically low approval rating of Congress. That frustration could be opposition to the bill's particulars or frustration with the Democrats in Congress opposing the president's deal. Democrats' approval of Congress is down significantly, to 16% now, from 29% in November. The November poll was conducted after Republicans won control of the House of Representatives for 2011-2012 in the midterm elections, so the drop in this month's numbers is not a reaction to the Democrats' midterm losses.

Pelosi Party Time

2010-11-09T13:09:00.001-08:00

http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2010/11/celebrating-pelosi.html

Princess Pelosi wants to celebrate the accomplishments of the 111th Congress tomorrow afternoon. Talk about hubris. Pelosi leads the congress into one of the worse political drubbings in history, and she wants to throw a party? Could her tenure as Speaker have a more bizarre ending?

Perhaps we should do a little bit of celebrating right here, genuflecting and giving thanks for all that Nancy Pelosi and her precious Democrats did in the 111th Congress. The $787 billion stimulus, for example. Hooray for turtle tunnels! ObamaCare, which will now cost the tax payers money, increase drug costs and premium rates and place undue burdens on small businesses. Hooray! Whenever I visit the DMV, I always wish that my doctor's office ran just as efficiently and with such great customer service. But perhaps the greatest gift of all, from Nancy Pelosi's 111th Congress has been the 21% increase in federal spending over the last two years. In 2010, Congress spent $3.45 trillion, which was the second largest spending spree on record ... second only to the spending spree of the 111th Congress in 2009.

What does Nancy Pelosi have to celebrate other than the fact that her leadership brought about the biggest party loss in Congress in 72 years. Pelosi should not be celebrating, she should be telling the movers where to send the boxes.

I hope this isn't read by any Democrat members of the House. The absolute best thing that could happen for America - now that the Republicans have control of the House - is for the Democrats to make this woman the minority leader. Do it! Please! Do it!

Obama Lovefest Gone

2010-11-05T11:53:00.000-07:00

http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/mzuckerman/articles/2010/11/05/mort-zuckerman-americas-love-affair-with-obama-is-over.html

Mort Zuckerman: America's Love Affair With Obama Is Over
The administration is running out of time to lower unemployment and fix the economy

By Mortimer B. Zuckerman November 5, 2010

It was the worst of times for the Democrats and the best of times for the Republicans—almost. The GOP did not succeed in capturing the Senate, or dethroning the Democratic leader, but with an energy boost from the Tea Party movement it certainly reflected the anger and dismay of voters who see their country foundering at home and abroad.

The results represent a sharp rebuke to President Obama, who interpreted his 2008 "vote for change" as a mandate for changing everything and all at once. Right from the start, he got his priorities badly wrong, sacrificing the need to help create jobs in favor of his determination to pass Obamacare. It was the state of the economy that demanded genius and concentration, and it just did not get it. The president will now have to respond to public anger, not with anger management and, not, please God, with still more rhetoric. The unusually revealing exit polls spell it all out—how he re-energized the Republican Party, lost the independent center, and failed to overcome the widespread sense that the country is heading in the wrong direction.

The exit polls conducted by Edison Research for the National Election Pool show that the economy was the dominant issue, rated at 62 percent, while healthcare was only at 18 percent. Minority voters remained loyal (9 in 10 blacks and 2 in 3 among Hispanics), but everywhere else Obama was deserted. Independents and women fled the Democrats; among white women, no less than 57 percent chose the GOP. There are some surprises for the conventional wisdom. The case for creating more jobs by government spending was rated within a hair's breadth of reducing the deficit (37 percent to 39 percent) and opinion was evenly divided (33 to 33) on whether the stimulus had hurt or helped the economy. Voters registered their disapproval of Democratic control of Congress and of what the White House promised but failed to deliver. It is apparent that Obama didn't seem to have understood the problems of the average American.

Latinos Turn Republican?

2010-11-02T12:24:00.000-07:00

Latinos return to their family morals and the reason why they left their country. Too much government.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44509.html

Are Latinos turning away from Boxer?

Obamacare Only Looks Worse Upon Further

2010-08-03T10:40:00.000-07:00

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-02/obamacare-only-looks-worse-upon-further-review-kevin-hassett.html

Obamacare Only Looks Worse Upon Further
Aug 1, 2010 6:00 PM PDT Mon Aug 02 01:00:06 UTC 2010

Getting that massive enterprise up and running will be next to impossible. So Democrats streamlined the process by granting Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius the authority to make judgments that can’t be challenged either administratively or through the courts.

This monarchical protection from challenges is extended as well to the development of new patient-care models under Obama’s controversial recess appointment, Donald Berwick, whom Republicans are calling the rationer-in-chief. Berwick will run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, where he can experiment with ways to use administrative fiat to move our system toward the socialized medicine of Europe, which he has at times embraced.

2nd Revolution

2010-08-02T09:03:00.000-07:00

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/542171/201007301830/Will-Washingtons-Failures-Lead-To-Second-American-Revolution-.aspx

Will Washington's Failures Lead To Second American Revolution?
By ERNEST S. CHRISTIAN AND GARY A ROBBINS 07/30/2010 06:30 PM ET

The Internet is a large-scale version of the "Committees of Correspondence" that led to the first American Revolution — and with Washington's failings now so obvious and awful, it may lead to another.

People are asking, "Is the government doing us more harm than good? Should we change what it does and the way it does it?"

Pruning the power of government begins with the imperial presidency.

Too many overreaching laws give the president too much discretion to make too many open-ended rules controlling too many aspects of our lives. There's no end to the harm an out-of-control president can do.

Bill Clinton lowered the culture, moral tone and strength of the nation — and left America vulnerable to attack. When it came, George W. Bush stood up for America, albeit sometimes clumsily.

Barack Obama, however, has pulled off the ultimate switcheroo: He's diminishing America from within — so far, successfully.

He may soon bankrupt us and replace our big merit-based capitalist economy with a small government-directed one of his own design.

He is undermining our constitutional traditions: The rule of law and our Anglo-Saxon concepts of private property hang in the balance. Obama may be the most "consequential" president ever.

What Is He Doing for America?

2010-07-28T08:20:00.000-07:00

This article, from outside our country, sums up Obama's time as President. It outlines what he has(n't) done.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/simonheffer/7913468/If-President-Obama-carries-on-like-this-he-will-turn-into-a-lame-duck.html

If President Obama carries on like this, he will turn into a lame duck
The president hasn't grown into the job - all that's needed to beat him is a serious Republican, says Simon Heffer in New York.

The shock about coming to America after an absence of four months is how, in that time, respect for and confidence in President Obama has slumped. It wasn't good in March; now the effect of what one blogger has called his apparent "impotence" has taken hold. It is not clear what Mr Obama actually does. He isn't engaged with the economy; he certainly isn't engaged with foreign policy; he has abandoned hope of a climate change bill this year (and probably for ever); he has seen his health care bill into law, but America awaits news of how it will be implemented; he is under attack for a casual approach to illegal immigration, notably from the Mexican narco-state. He has only just girded himself to go campaigning for his party in the mid-term elections. Last Sunday was the 100-days-to-go mark, and the talk in politics here is of little else. Joe Biden, the vice-president, has been nominated as "campaigner in chief". Why? What is the President doing?

He appears to be reading the newspapers and the blogs and watching television. Last week, a twisted opponent put out a selectively edited video of a black Department of Agriculture official, Shirley Sherrod, apparently admitting discriminating against a white farmer. Mrs Sherrod had done nothing of the sort – either the discrimination or, therefore, the admission of it – but was immediately sacked, for fear that Fox News was about to broadcast the video. This outrageous act was followed by an even more outrageous apology by the president the next day – outrageous in that Mrs Sherrod was not immediately given back her job. In the White House there were, we are told, great mutual congratulations (to start with) that swift action had stopped this becoming "a story". Well, it's a story now, not least because it exemplifies the incompetence and disconnection of the administration. Mrs Sherrod's husband was a leading civil rights activist and her father was murdered by white racists in 1965, so there is a resonance to this story that is causing discomfort.

This immediate proof of mismanagement adds to the cumulative feeling on so many other fronts that Mr Obama and his team simply don't understand governance. Last month Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Fed, warned America that without more care being taken it could have a Greece-style debt problem. The president seemed to regard this warning as so self-evidently absurd that he quickly asked Congress for another $50 billion for various social projects. Last week, benefits for the long-term unemployed were extended for another six months at a cost of $34 billion. The health care programme is forecast to cost at least $863 billion. The total deficit this year is to be $1.47 trillion. America's debt is likely to be $18.5 trillion by 2020, though it will be so low as that only if growth is maintained at 4 per cent: it is currently 3 per cent, and rocky.

Unemployment is 9.5 per cent and forecast to stay there for the time being. There are three million more jobless than when Mr Obama came to power, and unemployment among teenagers is around 25 per cent. The very constituencies to which he made his greatest appeal – the young and the disadvantaged – still suffer. This is despite the $787 billion stimulus programme last year, much of which was sucked into America's corrupt and inefficient local government system, or did favours for congressmen and senators, or provided wonderful pay days for trade unionists, or in some cases all three at once. The President sought the stimulus on the grounds that it would stop unemployment rising above 8 per cent; so that has been an expensive failure. All Mr Obama appears to have done is wave the money goodbye. Last week, trying not to sound provoked, Mr Bernanke announced that there was "unusual uncertainty" about economic recovery. The dollar fell against sterling and even the euro.

Congress At Its Lowest

2010-07-28T07:51:00.000-07:00

In 2006, our dream began. In 2008, our dream achieved. In 2010, a democratic nightmare. The Democratic House and Senate has made a major achievement, the lowest public confidence EVER. It is quickly becoming a disgrace to be called a Democrat.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/28/grading_congress_106510.html

Why Have We Lost Confidence?
By Jay Ambrose July 28, 2010

A Gallup poll reveals that only 11 percent of Americans have a great deal of confidence in Congress, and though it's the lowest ranking ever, one wonders what malady afflicts the yea-sayers. Might a review of reality correct their misperceptions?

Democrats Magical Thinkers?

2010-07-27T08:23:00.000-07:00

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/magical_thinkers_in_washington_1.html

Magical Thinkers in Washington
By Deane Waldman July 27, 2010

Small children are natural magical thinkers. Ask any psychologist, pediatrician, or parent. Magical thinkers believe that because they want it or can conceive of it, "it" is so, or will be so. The magically thinking child ties a cape on his back and knows that with it on, he can fly. When he jumps off the roof, he will, of course, fall, not soar like Superman. The usual cure for magical thinking is ToT (tincture of time) and evidence.

If House Speaker Pelosi says that HR 3590 will save money, it must save money. If President Obama says his health care "reform" will increase care, reduce errors, and improve quality, it will happen (because he said so).

Dems Produce Bad Candidates

2010-07-24T08:12:00.000-07:00

Here is another example of a bad Dem candidate. First, Gore (man you felt he should be president) gets into sex scandal. Actually, no surprise there, his boss made a great example. Edwards does the same. Second, '04 candidate (man you felt he should be president) tries to avoid paying taxes, yet votes for every tax increase possible. Of course, when it is his turn to pay taxes, he doesn't lead by example.

How can democrats be taken seriously when they are such bad human beings? Hippicrats, everyone of them. No wonder why America has turned sour on the Democratic Party. It is always the same song and dance - do as I say; not as I do. We complain hard about Bush but we had nothing, I mean, NOTHING, to put in his stead. Gore and Kerry. What disgraces to the Democratic Party. We dodge a bullet by NOT electing those two nimwits.

http://bostonherald.com/track/inside_track/view.bg?articleid=1269698

Sen. John Kerry skips town on sails tax
By Gayle Fee and Laura Raposa Friday, July 23, 2010

Sen. John Kerry, who has repeatedly voted to raise taxes while in Congress, dodged a whopping six-figure state tax bill on his new multimillion-dollar yacht by mooring her in Newport, R.I.

Isabel - Kerry’s luxe, 76-foot New Zealand-built Friendship sloop with an Edwardian-style, glossy varnished teak interior, two VIP main cabins and a pilothouse fitted with a wet bar and cold wine storage - was designed by Rhode Island boat designer Ted Fontaine.

But instead of berthing the vessel in Nantucket, where the senator summers with the missus, Teresa Heinz, Isabel’s hailing port is listed as “Newport” on her stern.

More Racism - This Time its Al Qaeda

2010-07-14T11:25:00.000-07:00

President Obama, White House: Al Qaeda Is Racist
July 13, 2010 9:17 PM

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/07/president-obama-white-house-al-qaeda-is-racist.html

In an interview earlier today with the South African Broadcasting Corporation to air in a few hours, President Obama disparaged al Qaeda and affiliated groups' willingness to kill Africans in a manner that White House aides say was an argument that the terrorist groups are racist.

Obama Not Looking Good in Polls

2010-07-14T11:22:00.000-07:00

It's the economy stupid!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/13/opinion/polls/main6675137.shtml

Dems Turning on their Own

2010-07-13T10:24:00.000-07:00

Zuckerman talking trash on Obama

http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/mzuckerman/articles/2010/07/02/mort-zuckerman-obama-is-barely-treading-water.html

Mort Zuckerman: Obama Is Barely Treading Water
The president's problem is simple: the economy and jobs

Even some in Obama's base have turned, with 17 percent of Democrats disapproving of his job performance. Even more telling is the excitement gap. Only 44 percent of those who voted for him express high interest in this year's elections. That's a 38-point drop from 2008. By contrast, 71 percent of those who voted Republican last time express high interest in the midterm elections, above the level at this stage in 2008. And these are the people who vote.

Supreme Court Usurp. Nice Going

2010-07-06T11:05:00.000-07:00

Attack the Supreme Court; that will get you somewhere. Unfortunately it got you going the wrong way.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/07/06/2010-07-06_holdin_court_at_73_justice_kennedy_tells_pals_hes_not_retiring_for_years__thats_.html

Bad news for Obama: Conservative Justice Kennedy tells pals he's in no rush to leave Supreme Court

http://www.latimes.com/news/health/la-na-court-roberts-obama-20100706,0,7184862.story

Obama and Supreme Court may be on collision course
The president's agenda on healthcare and financial regulations sets the stage for a clash with the Supreme Court's conservative majority.

More Bias?

2010-07-06T10:55:00.000-07:00

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/06/ex-official-accuses-justice-department-racial-bias-black-panther-case/

Ex-Official Accuses Justice Department of Racial Bias in Black Panther Case Published July 06, 2010 FoxNews.com

In emotional and personal testimony, an ex-Justice official who quit over the handling of a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party accused his former employer of instructing attorneys in the civil rights division to ignore cases that involve black defendants and white victims.

The department abandoned the New Black Panther case last year. It stemmed from an incident on Election Day in 2008 in Philadelphia, where members of the party were videotaped in front of a polling place, dressed in military-style uniforms and allegedly hurling racial slurs while one brandished a night stick.

Like Prez; like VP

2010-07-01T10:44:00.000-07:00

An we wanted this man to be president.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-gore-sex-abuse-case-reopened-portland/story?id=11059203

Portland Police Reopen Al Gore Sex Abuse Allegations
Masseuse Claimed Former Vice President Subjected Her to 'Unwanted Sexual Touching' in 2006

Racial Payback Time

2010-07-01T10:39:00.000-07:00

I suppose it is understandable Obama and black appointees use their postion to equalize things. These tactics that they tried to hide and sweep under the rug are a throwback to the Reconstuction time after the Civil War

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/30/justice-dept-lawyer-accuses-holder-dropping-new-black-panther-case-political/

Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Case for Racial Reasons

"I mean we were told, 'Drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party,'" Adams told Fox News, adding that political appointees Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division since 2003, ordered the dismissal.

Asked about the Justice Department's claim that they are career attorneys, not political appointees, Adams said "obviously, that's false."

French President Stronger???

2010-06-18T15:33:00.000-07:00

"When the French president is seen as tougher than the American president, you have to know that something is awry."

http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2010/06/18/mort-zuckerman-world-sees-obama-as-incompetent-and-amateur.html

Mort Zuckerman: World Sees Obama as Incompetent and Amateur
The president is well-intentioned but can't walk the walk on the world stage
By Mortimer B. Zuckerman Posted June 18, 2010

Jimmy Carter Redux

2010-06-17T15:42:00.000-07:00

Now the world turns on the messiah

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,701279,00.html

06/17/2010
The World from Berlin
Will Obama Be the 'Jimmy Carter of the 21st Century'?

MSNBC Turns on Obama - No Executive Command

2010-06-16T13:51:00.000-07:00

He is intellectual but has no leadership, command or repsect.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/15/msnbc_trashes_obamas_address_compared_to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html

JUNE 15, 2010
MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command"
Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and Howard Fineman react to President Obama's Oval Office Address on the oil spill. Here are the highlights of what the trio said:

Olbermann: "It was a great speech if you were on another planet for the last 57 days."

Matthews compared Obama to Carter.

Olbermann: "Nothing specific at all was said."

Matthews: "No direction."

Howard Fineman: "He wasn't specific enough."

Olbermann: "I don't think he aimed low, I don't think he aimed at all. It's startling."

Howard Fineman: Obama should be acting like a "commander-in-chief."

Matthews: Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] Chu has a Nobel prize. "I'll barf if he does it one more time."

Matthews: "A lot of meritocracy, a lot of blue ribbon talk."

Matthews: "I don't sense executive command."

Morris: Obama doesn’t have a clue

2010-06-02T14:06:00.000-07:00

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/100913-obama-doesnt-have-a-clue

Morris: Obama doesn’t have a clue

By Dick Morris - 06/01/10 07:03 PM ET

Conservatives are so enraged at Obama’s socialism and radicalism that they are increasingly surprised to learn that he is incompetent as well. The sight of his blithering and blustering while the most massive oil spill in history moves closer to America’s beaches not only reminds one of Bush’s terrible performance during Katrina, but calls to mind Jimmy Carter’s incompetence in the face of the hostage crisis

Idiot in Charge of the Senate

2009-12-08T09:38:00.000-08:00

What is this idiot doing running our Senate? Could the Democrats get anyone more studip? Oh, yeah, Pelosi.

December 07, 2009 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/07/reid-compares-health-care-reform-foes-slavery-supporters/

Reid Compares Opponents of Health Care Reform to Supporters of Slavery
Senate

Majority Leader Harry Reid took his GOP-blasting rhetoric to a new level Monday, comparing Republicans who oppose health care reform to lawmakers who clung to the institution of slavery more than a century ago.

The Nevada Democrat, in a sweeping set of accusations on the Senate floor, also compared health care foes to those who opposed women's suffrage and the civil rights movement -- even though it was Sen. Strom Thurmond, then a Democrat, who unsuccessfully tried to filibuster the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and it was Republicans who led the charge against slavery.

10 Reasons Not to Listen to Rush

2009-11-17T14:53:00.000-08:00

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/11/top_ten_reasons_black_america.html
November 17, 2009

Top Ten Reasons Black America Fears Rush LimbaughLloyd Marcus

I am a black man who, since 1993, has been a regular listener of the Rush Limbaugh radio program. I must caution black America. Be afraid, be very afraid of this powerful white man. Regular listening to him could be devastating to the psyche of the 96% of black Americans who voted for Obama. I have compiled the following Top Ten list of reasons why.

10. If you want to believe blacks are eternal victims in America, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

9. If you do not want to take responsibility for your life, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

8. If you are a dead beat loser who voted for Obama in hope of him redistributing what others worked for to you, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

7. If you believe blacks can not achieve without lowered standards and intervention by government and liberals, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

6. If you believe blacks who speak English correctly and are self sufficient are traitors, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

5. If you believe black liberal Democrats (Sharpton, Jackson, Waters & Co.) are your friends rather than your slave masters, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

4. If you do not believe self respect, pride and true self esteem comes from personal achievement, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

3. If you want to hate your country and believe it is the greatest source of evil in the world, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

2. If you want to believe rich white racist Republicans are burning the midnight oil thinking of ways to keep black America down, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh.

And the number one reason black America should fear regularly listening to Rush Limbaugh; they will become ditto heads.

Lloyd Marcus (black) Unhyphenated American

Obama Gaffe During A Crisis

2009-11-06T08:54:00.000-08:00

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html

Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting
A bad week for Democrats compounded by an awful moment for Barack Obama.
By ROBERT A. GEORGE Updated 9:18 AM CST, Fri, Nov 6, 2009

President Obama didn't wait long after Tuesday's devastating elections to give critics another reason to question his leadership, but this time the subject matter was more grim than a pair of governorships.
After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective.
But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?
Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That's the least that should occur.

Another Obama Appointee Idiot

2009-10-28T15:18:00.001-07:00

Can't you appoint some people WITH brains. Read this idiot.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/10/024805.php

Rocco Landesman is President Obama's handpicked chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts. Last week he gave the keynote address to the 2009 Grantmakers in the Arts Conference. Those of us concerned about the politicization of life and art in the Age of Obama will not be consoled by a reading of Landesman's speech. The speech bears examination in its entirety, but Landesman's tribute to Obama is especially worth a look:
This is the first president that actually writes his own books since Teddy Roosevelt and arguably the first to write them really well since Lincoln. If you accept the premise, and I do, that the United States is the most powerful country in the world, then Barack Obama is the most powerful writer since Julius Caesar. That has to be good for American artists.

Well, so what if Landesman is a bootlicker? Landesman is also an idiot. Lincoln never wrote a book, although I believe he did compile the texts of his 1858 debates with Douglas for publication in book form. And Landesman misses a few presidential authors since Theodore Roosevelt.
Woodrow Wilson wrote several influential books as a Princeton professor. Herbert Hoover wrote books including, I am reliably advised, a classic book on fishing. Richard Nixon wrote books before and after his presidency. And even Bill Clinton wrote his apologia pro vita sua.
Landesman leaves JFK unmentioned by name. JFK was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Profiles in Courage in 1957. My guess is that JFK and Obama share the attribute of authorship in roughly equal measure.
One reader of Landesman's speech wonders: "Isn't Obama the first president since Jefferson to more than double the size of the country? The first since Lincoln to free the slavers? The first since FDR to win a war against fascism?" Betraying the spirit of Rocco Landesman, however, the reader injects a note of caution: "I might be wrong. Can any of you fact check that?"
It would be hard to pack so much ignorance into one short paragraph if one were really trying. We can deduce that Landesman doesn't even have to try.

Dope instead of Hope

2009-10-20T03:22:00.000-07:00

It figures this dopehead would strive to legalize blowing a doobie. Nice job pothead.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091019/D9BED8500.html

Feds to stop prosecuting medical marijuana users
Oct 19, 5:03 PM (ET) By DEVLIN BARRETT

Liberal Media Controlled

2009-10-19T15:27:00.000-07:00

At least they admit it now.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113347

White House boasts: We 'control' news media Communications chief offers shocking confession to foreign government

Al Sharpton / Jesse Jackson - How Dare You

2009-10-19T11:54:00.000-07:00

I love it when a racist calls another person a racist. Al, who is a great guy to listen to, based his whole career, if you can call it that, on racism. I don't know if Rush is one; his actions don't display it. I do know Al's actions display it. Read this.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704322004574477021697942920.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_RIGHTTopCarousel

OCTOBER 16, 2009, 10:27 P.M. ET
The Race Card, Football and Me
My critics would have you believe no conservative meets NFL 'standards.'

It didn't take long before my name was selectively leaked to the media as part of the Checketts investment group. Shortly thereafter, the media elicited comments from the likes of Al Sharpton. In 1998 Mr. Sharpton was found guilty of defamation and ordered to pay $65,000 for falsely accusing a New York prosecutor of rape in the 1987 Tawana Brawley case. He also played a leading role in the 1991 Crown Heights riot (he called neighborhood Jews "diamond merchants") and 1995 Freddie's Fashion Mart riot.

Not to be outdone, Jesse Jackson, whose history includes anti-Semitic speech (in 1984 he referred to Jews as "Hymies" and to New York City as "Hymietown" in a Washington Post interview) chimed in. He found me unfit to be associated with the NFL. I was too divisive and worse. I was accused of once supporting slavery and having praised Martin Luther King Jr.'s murderer, James Earl Ray.

That Idiot Carter

2009-10-16T09:26:00.000-07:00

Why do people listen to the worst president ever?

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=110027

Jimmy Carter and the Elvis Factor
September 17, 2009 1:00 am

Jimmy Carter strikes again!

The former President is not content having left office with high inflation, high interest rates and high unemployment. Nor is he content with having signed into law the Community Reinvestment Act – strengthened by President Bill Clinton – which played a major roll in the eventual housing market meltdown.

Nor is he content with having cut the legs from under the shah of Iran, which led to the establishment of the Islamic theocracy in Iran – a state that pursues a nuclear weapon, funds terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah, and continues to undermine the fledgling democracy of Iraq. Nor is he content – as ex-president – with writing a book in which he likened the state of Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians to South Africa under apartheid.

Obama Wins Nobel Pacifist Prize

2009-10-09T09:36:00.000-07:00

Nonsense and embarrassing. He has done NOTHING so far. What a farce.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125509603349176083.html

The deadline for nominations for the prize was Feb. 1 -- two weeks after Mr. Obama was inaugurated.

"So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far," former Polish President Lech Walesa, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983, said Friday. "He is still at an early stage."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-obama-wins-nobel-peace-prize/story?id=8788973

Two key White House aides were both convinced they were being punked when they heard the news, reported ABC News' George Stephanopoulos.

Times Online http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6867711.ece
October 9, 2009

Comment: absurd decision on Obama makes a mockery of the Nobel peace prize
"It's not April 1, is it?" one said.

Obama's 1984

2009-10-08T11:18:00.000-07:00

Get ready, here it comes.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/ministry_of_truth_obamastyle.html
Ministry of Truth, Obama-style
By John Griffing October 08, 2009

President Obama has been agitating for the authority to criminalize political opponents since he took office. First there was the raft of DHS reports profiling conservatives as terrorists. Then came the push for a new fairness doctrine, subsequently refined to be achieved in diversity regulations to be imposed on local radio stations. Following these attacks on free speech was the much debated hate crimes legislation, considered by many to be a back-door path to silencing critics of the administration. But, while dangerous to free speech, none of these draconian policies could do as much damage as new regulatory czar Cass Sunstein's shocking proposal to ban "falsehoods" -- a term left up to the Obama administration to define. If Sunstein succeeds, free speech will be truly dead in America.

These revelations are found in Sunstein's new book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, in which he attacks the plague of "rumors" besetting the Obama administration. Rumors must be regulated, according to Sunstein. Suspiciously, Sunstein's definition of "rumors" never seems to favor conservatives. To combat "rumors," Sunstein proposes fines, and even obligatory retractions, in the case of Internet publications.[1]

Obama + Michelle x Oprah = Zero

2009-10-02T09:19:00.000-07:00

His power maybe waning. No healthcare pushed through before Congress summer recess and now no Olympics.

http://cbs2chicago.com/olympics2016/chicago.2016.bid.2.1190248.html

O NO!! CHICAGO LOSES 2016 OLYMPICS
Oct 2, 2009 10:27 am US/Central

But the president's pitch, along with the star power of First Lady Michelle Obama and TV queen Oprah Winfrey, couldn't sway enough votes.In the short term, CBS 2 Mike Flannery reports that the Chicago defeated leaves Obama politically wounded by taking on a fight that he really didn't have to take.

Gore Vidal calls Obama Dreadful

2009-10-01T08:44:00.000-07:00

Vidal Gore's time has come and gone. He is a nut case the blackens the democratic and liberal eye. It is the numbskull like this guy that turns people away from the democratic party and makes the average citizen believe liberalism is a mental disorder. It is time for Gore to leave this great country and move to his communist ideal, like Cuba. On your way, please take that dumb, fat bas***d, Michael Moore, with you.

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6854221.ece

Gore Vidal: ‘We’ll have a dictatorship soon in the US’
The grand old man of letters Gore Vidal claims America is ‘rotting away’ — and don’t expect Barack Obama to save it
From The Times September 30, 2009

How’s Obama doing? “Dreadfully. I was hopeful. He was the most intelligent person we’ve had in that position for a long time. But he’s inexperienced. He has a total inability to understand military matters. He’s acting as if Afghanistan is the magic talisman

Another notable Obama mis-step has been on healthcare reform. “He f***ed it up. I don’t know how because the country wanted it. We’ll never see it happen.” As for his wider vision: “Maybe he doesn’t have one, not to imply he is a fraud.

Comment: This really illustrates Vidal's nutiness

Vidal became a supportive correspondent of Timothy McVeigh, who blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City in 1995 killing 168 people. The huge loss of life, indeed McVeigh’s act of mass murder, goes unmentioned by Vidal. “He was a true patriot, a Constitution man,” Vidal claims. “And I was torn, my grandfather [the Democrat Senator Thomas Gore] had bought Oklahoma into the Union.” McVeigh claimed he had done it as a protest against tyrannical government.

Comment: More Vidal nutiness

Republican Party is a party when in fact it’s a mindset, like Hitler Youth, based on hatred — religious hatred, racial hatred. When you foreigners hear the word ‘conservative’ you think of kindly old men hunting foxes. They’re not, they’re fascists.”

Bitter Twisted Old Fruit

2009-10-01T08:07:00.000-07:00

I believe that was a line from the greatest movie of all time, This Is Spinal Tap. Directed by extreme leftist, Rob Reiner.

Michael Moore is the type of sap that gives liberalism and democrats a bad name. This nutcase is a hypocrite to the max. He has made tons of money from capitalism and complains about it. To the best of my knowledge, it doesn't (hasn't) donate much of it to charity. With his bitter rancor, he should donate all of it and be the true communist he is.

How dare he complain that he could get his first movie backed. Did he think that the money and support should just be there because he wants to do it but can't afford it? That's communism. He doesn't believe in hard work and earning your way to the top? What a d***head this guy is.

He is wants gives all liberals and democrats a bad name. Listening to his dribble turns democrats into instant republicans.

Really? Capitalism did nothing for you? You hypocrite idiot!

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54833

Millionaire Filmmaker Michael Moore: ‘Capitalism Did Nothing For Me’
Thursday, October 01, 2009By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter

CNSNews.com then asked Moore: “Critics would say he’s [Moore] been very successful under a capitalist system. How would you justify making a movie where you paint capitalism as evil?” Moore said: “Well, capitalism did nothing for me, starting with my first film.”

Worst President Ever

2009-09-25T09:07:00.000-07:00

I know, I know. You think it is Bush. Far from it. The worst ever was that dumb*ss Jimmy Carter. No one could stand him in the 70's and he has only gotten worse. He is a disgrace to the Democratic Party.

Based on racism? Not even close you jack*ss.

Ok, let's look at racist America: Ummm... black president.
Richest woman in America? Oprah.
Wealthiest athlete? Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan.
Richest couple? Jay Z and whoever she is.
Biggest box office star? Will Smith and Jamie Fox.
Popular music? Gangsta rap

I fail to see America's racism here. Jimmy it is time to pull your head from you behind and get with it. You are stuck in your Jim Crow world. The rest of us have moved on.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/15/jimmy-carter-wilsons-outb_n_288003.html

Jimmy Carter: Wilson's Outburst 'Based On Racism' (VIDEO)

Huffington Post First Posted: 09-15-09 09:10 PM Updated: 09-16-09 09:05

Biden's Math Skills

2009-09-22T13:09:00.000-07:00

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/09/biden_end_of_the_road_for_obam.html

Biden: 'End of the road' for Obama agenda if GOP wins in 2010
Rick MoranSeptember 22, 2009

One of the ironies of our political system is that you don't have to be very smart to be a successful politician.Case in point; Joe Biden. There have been dumber Vice Presidents in our history, but few have had the stupidity - and hubris - to open their mouths and try to disprove that statement on almost a daily basis.

I hesitate to ask but when Biden referred to "35 seats" changing hands, did he believe that would give the GOP a majority rather than the correct number which is 40?No matter. The fact that Biden is deficient in basic math shouldn't worry us. After all, he's the guy in charge of spending the stim bill money, remember? Having a mathematical dunderhead in charge of spending hundreds of billions of dollars shouldn't worry us in the slightest. What could possibly go wrong?At least he got the big part right. A GOP takeover would mean the end of Obamanomics as well as a welcome return (we hope) to fiscal sanity. Then we will be able to test whether Obama and Biden are serious about "bi-partisanship."

Obama's Halliburton?

2009-09-20T03:00:00.000-07:00

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/09/general_electric_obamas_hallib.html

General Electric: Obama's Halliburton?
Lauri Regan September 18, 2009

The hypocrisy permeating the policy decisions emanating from the Obama White House continues. General Electric will directly benefit from Obama’s decision to renege on a deal to provide Eastern Europe with missile defense systems (the obvious implications of which go well beyond the topic in this blog). As reported in the Washington Examiner:

“General Electric may be the company with the closest ties to the Obama administration (if not, GE is second only to Goldman Sachs), and here we see the company benefiting from an abrupt foreign policy change made by President Obama…GE CEO Jeff Immelt sits on Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, and GE owns MSNBC, the network famously friendly to Obama.”

Change Bad Change

2009-09-19T02:51:00.000-07:00

This is the change we hoped for?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/09/obamas_missile_defense_betraya.html

Obama's missile defense betrayal even riles liberals
Rick Moran September 18, 2009

Does anyone begin to see a pattern here? Obama gives away the store unilaterally - to Iran, to Venezuela, to Russia, to any nation with their hand out - while getting absolutely nothing in return.

Is this the change we were promised? Unilateral concessions are sometimes necessary but Obama makes a habit of it - a bad habit. He has, as the Post points out, made a huge concession to Russian interests and has received no promise of getting anything in return.

The separate issue of pulling the rug from underneath the Poles and Czechs has got Europe in an uproar. If the US won't stand against a newly aggressive Russia, who will? Certainly not the militarily insignificant Europeans who won't even fight in Afghanistan (except the Brits, French, and Dutch).

You Did Lie

2009-09-18T09:19:00.001-07:00

You may think that technically you did not lie but you did. Legalize illegals so they can get free healthcare. You are deceitful at the very least. You are not giving us HOPE but, rather, PAIN.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/18/obama-ties-immigration-to-health-care-battle/?feat=home_cube_position1

Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care
Friday, September 18, 2009 Stephen Dinan

President Obama said this week that his health care plan won't cover illegal immigrants, but argued that's all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage.

Mr. Obama added, "If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all."

Is Obama a Narcissist?

2009-09-17T03:00:00.000-07:00

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/is_obama_a_narcissist.html

Is Obama a Narcissist?
September 16, 2009 By Robin of Berkeley

Racism

2009-09-16T14:56:00.000-07:00

Former president (and still nitwit) Jimmy Carter is screaming "racism" and it appears to be the Democratic Party mantra. Let's see what the facts reveal.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/democrats_jumping_the_racecard_1.html

Democrats Jumping the Race-Card Shark
By Kyle-Anne Shiver September 16, 2009

Tuesday, a Congressman from my home state of Georgia, Rep. Hank Johnson said that if the House didn't censure Joe Wilson, then folks would "put on the white hoods and roam the countryside." Congressman Johnson seems to have forgotten that most of the KKK men, to whom he is referring, were Democrats, the architects and masters of real Southern Apartheid, Jim Crow. Heck, Senator Byrd is still there and he was one.

A rather inconvenient fact, however, is that the only reported act of racial violence so far happened on Tuesday on a public school bus in St. Louis and the offenders were black, the victim white. An apparently unprovoked attack on a high school student took place over - get this - a seat on the bus. The irony is downright nerve-wrenching. A black student beat the white student to the cheers of his black classmates and the bus driver supposedly did nothing to intervene. KKK in reverse? That's a lot more violence than Rosa Parks got over her seat on the bus. In fact, Rosa Parks wasn't on the receiving end of anything more than arrogant stares. Police suspect race was the motivating factor in the St. Louis school-bus attack.

NYT & Wash. Post Refuse to Review This Crap

2009-09-15T13:32:00.000-07:00

Why would anyone want to review this million-selling piece of conservative crap. The numbers are certainly not there.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54079

Never Reviewed by NYT or WashPost, Mark Levin's 'Liberty and Tyranny' Has Now Sold 1 Million Copies
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

Without ever having been reviewed by either the New York Times or the Washington Post, Mark Levin’s Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto has now sold one million copies, according to its publisher, Threshold Editions.Levin is a nationally syndicated radio host, president of the Landmark Legal Foundation, and served as chief of staff to Atty. Gen. Ed Meese in the Reagan Justice Department. Liberty and Tyranny has been riding high on non-fiction bestseller lists ever since it was released in late March.

It debuted at No. 1 on the New York Times best seller list and has remained in the Top Ten on that list for 24 straight weeks. It is currently No. 7. (Levin's previous two books, Men in Black: How the Supeme Court is Destroying America and Rescuing Sprite: A Dog Lovers Story of Joy and Anguish, were also New York Times best sellers.)

The Obama Youth

2009-09-03T11:42:00.000-07:00

I remember this one well from my history class. Didn't the leader from Germany also ask the nations children for help???

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/03/white-house-withdraws-students-help-obama/

White House Withdraws Call for Students to 'Help' Obama
President Obama's plan to speak to the nation's schoolchildren in a video address next week erupted into controversy as critics claimed he was trying to indoctrinate America's kids.
FOXNews.com
Thursday, September 03, 2009

The Obama administration is rethinking its course recommendations for students ahead of President Obama's address to the the nation's schoolchildren next week, rewriting its suggestions to teachers for student assignments on how to "help the president."
White House aides said the language was supposed to be an inspirational, pro-education message to America's youths, but its unintended consequences were evident.

Among the activities initially suggested for pre-K to 6th grade students was to "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president."

Another assignment for students after hearing the speech was to discuss what "the president wants us to do."
The suggestion about writing letters has since been changed to: "Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals."

"If they can't administer a program like this, I'd be a little concerned about my health insurance"

2009-07-31T10:33:00.000-07:00

http://wcbstv.com/consumer/cash.clunkers.success.2.1108544.html

Government Suspends 'Clunkers' Program
At Current Rate, Giving Out $3,500 Or $4,500 Per Vehicle Would Burn Through $1 Billion Allocated In No Time
ReportingLou Young NEW YORK (CBS)

"If they can't administer a program like this, I'd be a little concerned about my health insurance," car salesman Rob Bojaryn said.

The "Clunkers" program was being administered by the National Highway Safety Administration, which has seemed overwhelmed from the get-go. Some in Congress are expected to push for expansion of the $1 billion budget on Friday. If you have a "Clunkers" deal in the works, don't worry. The government said Thursday any transactions already made between dealers and consumers will be honored.

Obama's Race Record - Not Good

2009-07-30T08:49:00.000-07:00

So, he sweeps one issue under the rug. His solution is let's have Gates and Crowley at the White House and have a cold beer together. Yeah, right. Alcohol always solves the problem. Good call.

Here is one angry woman's take on this.

http://hnn.us/articles/107379.html

What's Been Missing from Obama's Response to the Arrest of Henry Louis Gates
By Arica L. Coleman 7-29-09

My disillusionment with Obama would return again as his visits to various Black churches during the general election yielded didactic speeches of personal responsibility, a message many felt condescending and only designed to garner white votes (i.e. the controversial Father’s Day speech). As appalled as I was at Rev. Jesse Jackson’s remarks that such condescension made him want “to cut his [Obama’s] nuts off,” I could identify with Rev. Jackson’s frustration. Why is it that Obama and others resort to scolding Black parents for not doing their part to insure their children’s success, but never acknowledge that there are Black parents who are actively engaged in their children’s lives? Yes, there are fathers who need to “step up,” but what about acknowledging those who have indeed steeped up and are taking care of their parental responsibilities? Such people are not an exception, but rather the rule in Black communities all over the country.

Issue two: The biggiest Civil Rights voting violation since Reconstruction and the administration drops it. Why? Because they are Black Panthers and the "Man" has been keeping them down. No, it is because you are afraid. Prosecute these bums.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/30/no-3-at-justice-okd-panther-reversal/?feat=home_cube_position1

EXCLUSIVE: No. 3 at Justice OK'd Panther reversal
Case involved polling place in Philadelphia
By Jerry Seper Thursday, July 30, 2009

Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli, the No. 3 official in the Obama Justice Department, was consulted and ultimately approved a decision in May to reverse course and drop a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party of intimidating voters in Philadelphia during November's election, according to interviews.
The department's career lawyers in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division who pursued the complaint for five months had recommended that Justice seek sanctions against the party and three of its members after the government had already won a default judgment in federal court against the men.

Why National Health Care Won't Work

2009-07-30T01:00:00.000-07:00

While Obama plans his ascendency to godhood with national healthcare, maybe we should learn a lesson from our neighbors to the north.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/why_public_health_care_is_phil.html

Why public health care is philosophically wrong
By Michael Prell July 29, 2009

Forget all the scare stories about waiting lines and denied services. I live in Canada, and I have a million such stories to tell. Like my mother wanting to commit suicide due to her excruciating pain -- even though she wore a morphine patch the size of her back -- all because she had to wait three long years for a simple disc operation.

Biden At It Again Pt. II

2009-07-29T09:13:00.000-07:00

Hippiecrat movement awakens again. For all the complaining Biden did about Chaney, one would think you wouldn't have closed, secret meetings. But then, Biden isn't all that smart.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/07/joe-biden-update-2.html

Joe Biden update: Lots of closed meetings, a poll number under Cheney

While the president hops down to North Carolina and back to Virginia today, selling more healthcare plans whose billions of dollars will absolutely positively not add one Chicago dime to the deficit, Vice President Joe Biden has another full day of secret closed meetings in Washington.

Biden At It Again

2009-07-28T12:35:00.000-07:00

He can't keep his out of his mouth. However, he is correct and honest here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/27/AR2009072701154_pf.html

US Vice President Biden hits nerve in Russia
By LYNN BERRYThe Associated PressMonday, July 27, 2009 12:16 PM

MOSCOW -- An interview U.S. Vice President Joe Biden gave to an American newspaper was front-page news Monday in Moscow, where his characterization of Russia as a weakened nation hit a raw nerve.
Biden said Russia's economic difficulties are likely to make the Kremlin more willing to cooperate with the United States on a range of national security issues.
"I think we vastly underestimate the hand that we hold," he said in an interview to The Wall Street Journal published Saturday.
Biden's comments appeared to catch the Kremlin by surprise, coming less than three weeks after President Barack Obama said on a visit to Moscow that the U.S. wants to see a "strong, peaceful and prosperous Russia."
"It raises the question: Who is shaping U.S. foreign policy? The president or members of his team, even the most respected ones?" said Kremlin foreign policy adviser Sergei Prikhodko.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs on Monday downplayed suggestions that Biden was setting a different U.S. policy from that laid out by the president.
When asked whether Obama thought Biden had gone too far in his remarks, Gibbs said the president stated his views on Russia during his recent visit and the vice president agrees with those views.
Gibbs said both leaders believe Russia will do its part to improve relations with the U.S.
Most Russian newspapers put Biden's interview on their front pages Monday, with headlines casting doubt on Washington's commitment to forge a more constructive relationship with Moscow.
"Joe Biden unexpectedly returned to the rhetoric of the previous Bush administration," the newspaper Kommersant wrote.

Genius or Goof

2009-07-27T11:40:00.000-07:00

There is a very good point here.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/just_how_smart_is_obama.html

Just how smart is Obama?
By Clarice Feldman July 27, 2009

Just how smart is the President? Famous presidential historian Michael Beschloss, a regular on PBS's Newshour show, says his IQ is "off the charts" and that he is "probably the smartest guy ever to become president," while admitting he doesn't know what his IQ is. I say: let's look at the evidence.

Obama's books
Jack Cashill has expended a great deal of effort at American Thinker to blast holes in the "foundational myth" that President Obama is a "literary genius".

It Makes One Wonder

2009-07-24T12:29:00.000-07:00

Has his luck run out?

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104833

Has Obama's luck run out?
Posted: July 23, 200910:30 pm Eastern

From North Korea to Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Honduras, and from the economy to health care to carbon emissions, things are not going Obama's way. He is 10 points below where Nixon was after a full year, and on economic issues – unemployment, the deficit, spending – he is under 50 percent.
This presidency is not yet in trouble, but it is sure headed that way.

Stimulus Fiasco

2009-07-22T12:26:00.000-07:00

Stimulus bill was a wasteful sham that we should have known better about.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/usda-760000-lbs.-of-ham-for-1.2m-2009-07-20.html

USDA: 760,000 pounds of ham for $1.2MBy Sam Youngman
Posted: 07/20/09 11:33 AM [ET]

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack pushed back Monday against reports his agency spent $1.2 million in economic stimulus funds on a two-pound ham.Vilsack said the department actually bought 760,000 pounds of ham with funds from the $787 billion stimulus, which the GOP has attacked as wasteful spending.“Press reports suggesting that the Recovery Act spent $1.19 million to buy ‘2 pounds of ham’ are wrong,” Vilsack said in a statement. “In fact, the contract in question purchased 760,000 pounds of ham for $1.191m, at a cost of approximately $1.50 per pound.”

Polls

2009-07-20T12:29:00.000-07:00

Not doing so well

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/presidential-approval-tracker.htm