on Sunday, November 1, 2009

Barack Obama, November 2008: "Change We Can Believe In"

Barack Obama, November 2009: "Change is Hard"

Underpromise, Overdeliver

on Thursday, October 29, 2009

...at least that's what my father always taught me. Yet it seems that this administration has consistently done just the opposite. They promised to be the most transparent administration ever. They promised to post each bill on a website for several days before allowing Congress to vote on it so that the pubic would have the chance to properly vet it first. They promised to be decisive in Afghanistan. They promised to not raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year.

And yet now, a full 9 months after that sweet quesadilla-flavored "hope and change" reached the White House, we have yet to see the president keep a single one of those promises. This White House has been more secretive than any in modern history, with Congress going as far as to not even allow Repubicans into the room when bills are being drafted. They have not yet posted any major legislation online, nor allowed the public sufficient time to read it (in fact, even Congress themselves haven't been reading the bills before signing them). It's been over a month since General McCrystal begged Obama to send additional troops to Afghanistan "lest we lose", but Obama has yet to act (I guess he's been too busy spending more time on the golf course in 9 months than Bush did in 3 years and making commercials for George Lopez's new show on TBS). And as for taxes, the cap and trade (global warming) legislation that passed this past summer is expected to increase the average American's taxes by $1,800 a year - including everybody making less than $250,000 a year. And don't forget to carry the one into the next column when adding into that figure the fact that Obama is going to intentionally allow the Bush tax cuts to expire...

...and now we have the economy. Obama and crew promised that, if we passed his crappy $1 trillion stimulus (yes, that's trillion with a 'T'), unemployment would not exceed 8% and that millions of jobs would be saved. Yet unemployment is now expected to be at 10% before year's end with the possibility to go even higher. And according to the White House's own estimate, the stimulus only saved a measly 30,000 jobs - a figure that even the AP admits is actually an overestimate to the tune of about 5,000 jobs.

But if all you did today was watch MSNBC or follow any other sycophantic Obama-loving media outlet, you'd think that today's news that the GDP grew by 3.5% last quarter signals that Obama has healed all.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Home sales fell (again) last month and home inventories are not growing. Reconcile that with the fact that the housing tax credits expire in a few weeks, and you've got a recipe for disaster in the housing market for the next few quarters. And according to the Reuters column linked above, business investment fell 2.5% while investment nonresidential structures dropped 9%. Jobless claims are still holding steady as well.

"But Mike, why you gotta so pessimistic, man? This president has done some good things for the economy. Like Cash for Clunkers, man. That was a success. LOL"

You mean the Cash for Clunkers program that took billions of taxpayer dollars and sent them to Japan and Korea? Read what Edmunds has to say today about Cash for Clunkers:

A total of 690,000 new vehicles were sold under the Cash for Clunkers program last summer, but only 125,000 of those were vehicles that would not have been sold anyway, according to an analysis released Wednesday by the automotive Web site Edmunds.com...

The average rebate was $4,000. But the overwhelming majority of sales would have taken place anyway at some time in the last half of 2009, according to Edmunds.com. That means the government ended up spending about $24,000 each for those 125,000 additional vehicle sales.
Read the whole article if you wish to know how they calculated which cars "would have sold anyway". But basically Edmunds sums up to the fact that we spent almost as much as the cost of an average new car to incentivize each legitimate new sale. How in the world is that smart economics? And now that those who were in the car market have purchased, new car inventories will sit stale on the showroom floors this next year. And instead of allowing lower income families to purchase the old clunkers, the government just destroyed them instead to keep Al Gore happy, meaning that 700,000 less cars are available on the market right now for families struggling through the recession. Brilliant, Washington.

So to those who voted for hopenchange last year I ask: Is this the kind of change you can believe in?


on Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Remember when the left seethed at Bush for daring to spend time on the golf course? Our favorite hypocrite, Keith Olbermann, even delivered an entire 10-minute "special comment" devited solely to harping on Bush for daring to play golf while American troops were dying in Iraq.

And then today, in a complete stroke of irony, after getting word that this month is offically the deadliest month on record for American troops in Afghanistan post 9/11, we also have this:

President Barack Obama has only been in office for just over nine months, but he's already hit the links as much as President Bush did in over two years.
Actually it was 2 years 10 months to be exact, so it would be more fair for the article to have stated "in almost 3 years". But why do I even waste time in pointing that out? I mean, after all, I'm sure the media will point that out for me in their ongoing effort to be just as harsh on Obama's golf addiction during a war as they were on Bush's.


Health Care Reform 101: The Facts

on Thursday, September 10, 2009

Unless you've been floating on a raft in the middle of the Pacific for the last several months, you probably know that health care reform is being pushed quite heavily by Obama and his minions on the left. While health care reform has been tried in several United States presidencies, none have has as much momentum as this... which leads me to conclude that if it doesn't pass this time, it never will.

But with both sides of the argument screaming at each other over whether or not this health bill will raise taxes, add "death panels", and provide free medical coverage to illegal immigrants, the question begs to be asked: What is true and what is not?

For starters, both sides are guilty of distorting the facts to a certain degree, albeit the Democrats take the cake on Pinocchio-esque rhetoric concerning the health care bill currently under debate. Among the largest of these falsehoods from the left are the notions that this will not add to the nation's deficit and that you can keep your current health plan if you like it. Below are a series of facts to help you debunk the lies that Obama is trying desperately to sell you.

LIE #1: Barack Obama - “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period.”

Are you really going to believe a statement like that from a guy whose own deficit this year is $1.6 TRILLION in the hole after promising "change" in the way government is spending? According to the Congressional Budget Office, ObamaCare will increase the deficit by over a trillion dollars, pushing Obama's tab on the American taxpayer up to $2.3 trillion - and that's just within the first decade.

LIE #2: If you like your current health care plan, you can keep it

Impossible. The director of the Congressional Budget Office has officially stated that, while this health care bill will extend coverage to roughly 39 million new people, it will almost immediately force 23 million off their current plan, bringing the net total of newly insured people from this health care bill to a measly 16 million at a huge cost. Add that to the fact that at least 4 predominant Democratic politicians and White House aides, including Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, are on tape admitting that this health care bill is just a means to an end - the end being full-blown government run single-payer health care... the very same kind of health care that dictates when and to which doctors you are allowed visit. Besides, think about it for a moment, how can a private insurance company compete financially against a government run program backed by the Treasury Department's printing presses?

LIE #3: Your tax dollars will not be used to fund abortions

Brace yourselves, Catholics. Even the Obama-loving Associated Press couldn't swallow this one. In a "fact-checking" article a few weeks ago, they found that under Obama's proposed health care plan, your tax dollars will be used in the form of premiums to pay for abortions - a direct violation of the Hyde Amendment.

LIE #4: The American health care system is broken

Really? According to the CIA world factbook, the death rate in America is 20% better than that of the UK's health system that Obama keeps praising. And the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have just released figures confirming that the U.S. just reached record high life expectancy levels for both males and females in 2007. Also, mortality rates in the U.S. reached an all-time low after a continuous 8-year trend of falling. The American Cancer Society also noted earlier this year that cancer death rates dropped 19.2% and 11.4% in men and women respectively between 1990 and 2005. No wonder Canada (the other country with a government run health care system that Obama lavishly praises) is currently sending their citizens to the U.S. for better treatment. It should also be noted that Canada is also currently revamping their health care system to one they think is better - ours. Couple that with the fact that 83% of the insured public is satisfied with the care they receive from their doctors and are 81% satisfied with their current insurance company, and you have all the evidence you need to debunk this myth with ease.

LIE #5: Health Care reform will not extend insurance benefits to illegal immigrants

Technically, it already does. Having worked in an emergency room during college, I can safely say that illegal immigrants are taking advantage of the system that obligates ERs to treat illegal immigrants with your tax dollars under a "no questions asked" doctrine. Now, there are two schools of thought regarding this statement from Obama: Either he's not lying because a) he's planning on granting amnesty to all illegal immigrants anyway, thereby making it impossible to provide coverage to illegals since there is no such thing anymore, or he IS lying because b) the Congressional Research Service notes that HR3200 (the House version of the health care bill) goes out of its way to ensure that people won't be required to establish proof of citizenship or legal residency before applying to exchanges for health insurance, including the public option. The same bill also includes text granting that illegal immigrants "would be eligible for emergency Medicaid" and that some families of illegal immigrants would qualify for subsidies if other members of the household are eligible for those benefits.

LIE #6: There are 47 million uninsured Americans in this country

This fabrication is an incredibly shameless distortion of actual figures. Here is a breakdown of who is included in that number according to the U.S. census (the figures below add up to more than 47 million because some categories overlap):

  • Illegal immigrants: 9.4 million
  • People who make between $50,000 and $75,000/yr and choose not to buy insurance even though they can afford it: 8.3 million
  • People who make over $75,000/yr and choose not to buy insurance even though they can afford it: 8.7 million
  • "Indestructible" 18-25 year olds who choose not to buy it for themselves: 8.4 million
  • People in-between jobs who are only without insurance for a temporary period as small as one day: 9.4 million
  • Children actually covered, but whose parents simply haven't signed them up yet: 8 million
  • People eligible for a government health care aid who have simply not signed up for it: 3.5 million

    In actuality, there are only between 8.9 and 14 million Americans that make less than $50,000/yr who are not eligible for government aid and are truly "uninsured". That's a far less number than the 47 million figure Obama keeps strapped to his belt at all times. Even if it was the highest figure of 14 million, that's only 4.6% of the American population, meaning that 95% of the American public is either already insured or has access to and/or the means to provide insurance for themselves and is choosing not to.

    LIE #7: If you choose not to be insured, that's your decision and we support it

    According to the bills currently being circulated in Congress right now, if you decide to forgo insurance coverage, you will be fined $3,800 by the government.

    Even the most basic analysis of Obama's health care plan reveals that the plan is a total boondoggle, a waste of money that is likely to cause more problems than it relieves. Remember when Obama demanded with fear-mongering that his stimulus be passed immediately lest the economy die that week? Congress, being the tools they are, passed it in two days leaving the public no time to investigate and question it. But once the "emergency" bill was passed and safe from critique, Obama left it on his desk for 3 days and went on vacation before signing it. And here he is trying to do it again. Why else do you think he tried to pass the health care bill in mere hours before Congress took their August recess? Answer: He didn't want to give you the time to find all of the above information out. I also find it interesting that this "emergency" health care bill that needed to be passed before Congress recessed in August won't even go into effect until 2013. If it's such an "emergency", Mr. President, why avoid congressional hearings on the pros and cons and pass it in such a hurry? And why not implement it before 2013?... Hmm... 2013, why is that number so significant? Oh yea, it's because that's right AFTER the next presidential election and the public won't be able to see the horrible effects of his health care bill until he is safely re-seated in the oval office for a second term. Well played, sir.

    Yes, our health care system has its flaws, but why are we willing to hand the keys to 1/6th of the entire economy over to a government that has yet to successfully manage the finances of JUST ONE government program? I think Michael Ramirez sums it up nicely in this comic from IBD:

  • Private Health Care: RIP

    on Monday, August 3, 2009

    A little slow on the blogging lately. Between summer, finals, and being sort of a beta tester for the newest version of Windows Mobile on my phone, there's been little time for this.

    But don't think that I've stopped following politics regularly... So in the interest of keeping things fresh on the front page, here's a video of our fearless president admitting on video that his health care plan will kill private insurance, thereby ultimately turning our health care system more like into the ones in Canada and the UK:

    Politician. President. Pontiff?

    on Sunday, July 12, 2009

    Newsweek asks: Is a guy who's only been to church once in the last 16 months a better spiritual leader than the Pope?

    In truth, though, Obama’s pragmatic approach to divisive policy (his notion that we should acknowledge the good faith underlying opposing viewpoints) and his social-justice agenda reflect the views of American Catholic laity much more closely than those vocal bishops and pro-life activists. When Obama meets the pope tomorrow, they’ll politely disagree about reproductive freedoms and homosexuality, but Catholics back home won’t care, because they know Obama’s on their side. In fact, Obama’s agenda is closer to their views than even the pope’s...

    Notre Dame awarded the president an honorary degree because it saw the need to highlight the best of Catholic teaching as applied to politics: the ability to open the eyes of those who would prefer to keep them closed, and to open the hearts of those who would prefer not to know the pain that their actions cause. The pope has a lot to learn about Catholic politics in America. Barack Obama can teach him.
    This takes media swooning to an entirely different level. I seriously have no further comment on this ludicrous and offensive story. Am I'm not even a Catholic...


    on Tuesday, June 23, 2009

    In a delicious follow-up to my last post on the media's love-fest with President Obama, the news comes out that ABC and NBC have both hit rock-bottom in viewership.

    TVNewser has learned the CBS Evening News has once again set an all-time low last week with 4.89 million Total Viewers and 1.42 million A25-54 viewers. But it was also the lowest (since records began in the 1991-'92 season) for ABC's World News with Charles Gibson. The Gibson program drew 6.42 million Total Viewers and 1.77 million A25-54 viewers.
    To watch ABC, CBS, and NBC scramble for a reason is both amusing and heart-wrenching at the same time:

    Update: Insiders tell us at least one network is looking into the continued impact of the digital TV transition which occurred June 12.

    Update (2): NBC averaged 7.75m Total Viewers Mon-Wed but on Thursday and Friday gave their program a different Nielsen code -- "Nitely News." (The correct spelling is "Nightly News"). This is despite the fact that the network had regular coverage on those days. We're trying to determine if the U.S. Open Golf Championship had something to do with the coding change. Had Thursday and Friday been included, the average would have been lower. On Friday "Nightly" averaged 6.29m Total Viewers.

    Update (3): An NBC insider tells us, even though the broadcast had full national coverage, the U.S. Open tends to affect viewership so the Thursday and Friday shows were not in the average. NBC says this is normal procedure.
    "It was the US Open. No wait, it was the different spelling of the program's name. No, I got it, it was the digital transition. Yea that's it!"

    ...or it's the fact that 46% of us voted for the other guy last November and are sick of watching you sycophants grovel over every little thing the president does. You finally jumped the shark last week when you guys virtually interrupted normal programming with a special report on how President Obama just killed a fly (gasp) with his bare hands. You showed us your true colors when you decided to give a prime-time slot to Obama to run an infomercial on health care - and then refused to run opposing Republican ads before, during, and after said infomercial. And weren't you the ones who just finished running reports on how cool Obama is for playing golf, even though you chided the former president for doing the exact same? You guys are so biased that even Obama, the venerable anti-Bush himself, had to call you out on your excessive Bush bashing.

    Look, you morons can continue to stretch excuses as to why your viewership is down. But as long as you continue your quest to be an unwavering squad of myrmidons in Obama's army, don't whine or be surprised when we stop watching.

    Brian Williams Hearts Obama

    on Wednesday, June 3, 2009

    I don't think we need any more evidence of the fact that the media is in the tank for The One, but here's a little extra fodder to toss onto the fire for when the nights get cold...

    Last night NBC's Brian Williams aired a "job shadow" of the POTUS to see what a day is like for him in the White House (why wasn't he ever interested to do that when Bush was in office?). I originally wanted to turn it off when the sycophantic swooning began, but then my wife convinced me to watch arguing that it might be interesting just to see what goes on behind the scenes at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. She was right, it was fairly interesting. Among the highlights of the show: (1) Obama taking his media team and half the motorcade to 5 Guys for burgers just to impress NBC by showing them that he can, (2) NBC spotlighting how cool Rahm Emanuel is even though he constantly chided the camera crews and even told them to "F off" at one point (I wonder if they would've thought Josh Bolten or Karl Rove was cool had they told NBC to "F off"), and my personal favorite (3) Brian Williams actually bowing to President Obama at the end of the day (see vid below). Here's to the unbiased reporting at NBC:

    More of Obama's Change

    on Tuesday, May 19, 2009

    Are you a financially responsible adult with good credit? Congratulations! Now you get to be penalized for it:

    Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other perks in recent years.

    Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies are going after those people with sterling credit.

    Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups.

    “It will be a different business,” said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation’s biggest banks. “Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems.”
    In Obama's ideal world, those of us who did things right with our financial investments the first time are labeled as "selfish" and asked (or forced) to pay the tab for those who wanted the 6-bedroom house and new Audi on their $50K a year salary. And since we're already paying for the loser's mortgages anyway, why not take on all their credit card debt too. 3 cheers for financial responsibility!

    Confirmed: Pelosi Is, Indeed, A Shameless Liar

    on Tuesday, May 12, 2009

    Nancy Pelosi, April 23, 2009 -

    "We were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used."
    And to any doubters who may think that I've skewed her words or taken them out of context, I present you with the damning evidence from the mouth of the Madame herself as she tries to play dumb in a failed attempt to appease the nutroots:


    Nice try Pelosi, but you forgot about one little thing: Internet archives, wherein we find this -

    Washington Post, December 9, 2007 -

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.

    Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.

    "The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough," said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.

    ...And this:

    New York Times, April 21, 2009 -

    “We were briefed, and we certainly understood what C.I.A. was doing,” Mr. Goss said in an interview. “Not only was there no objection, there was actually concern about whether the agency was doing enough.”

    ...And this:

    Washington Post, April 25, 2009 -

    Let me be clear. It is my recollection that:

    -- The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four (which included Pelosi -ed.), were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists.

    -- We understood what the CIA was doing.

    -- We gave the CIA our bipartisan support.

    -- We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities.

    -- On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.

    I do not recall a single objection from my colleagues. They did not vote to stop authorizing CIA funding.

    *Sigh* ...And this:

    2002 DNI Report via ABC News, May 7, 2009 -

    The report details a Sept. 4, 2002 meeting between intelligence officials and Pelosi, then-House intelligence committee chairman Porter Goss, and two aides. At the time, Pelosi was the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee.

    The meeting is described as a “Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of particular EITs that had been employed.”

    EITs stand for “enhanced interrogation techniques,” a classification of special interrogation tactics that includes waterboarding...

    “The briefers described these techniques, said they were legal, but said that waterboarding had not yet been used,” Daly said.

    ...And even this:

    Washington Post, May 9, 2009 -

    A top aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attended a CIA briefing in early 2003 in which it was made clear that waterboarding and other harsh techniques were being used in the interrogation of an alleged al-Qaeda operative, according to documents the CIA released to Congress on Thursday...

    A Democratic source acknowledged yesterday that it is almost certain that Pelosi would have learned about the use of waterboarding from Sheehy. Pelosi herself acknowledged in a December 2007 statement that she was aware that Harman had learned of the waterboarding and had objected in a letter to the CIA’s top counsel.

    ...And finally this:

    Politico, May 11, 2009 -

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi learned in early 2003 that the Bush administration was waterboarding terror detainees but didn’t protest directly out of respect for “appropriate” legislative channels, a confidant of the San Francisco Democrat said Monday...

    [T]here’s no dispute that on Feb. 4, 2003 — five months after Pelosi’s September meeting — CIA officials briefed Pelosi aide Michael Sheehy and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), then the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, on the specific techniques that had been used on Zubaydah — including waterboarding.

    But other than the fact that both she and her staffers were briefed on all of the techniques used - including waterboarding - and besides the fact that she was even given a personal tour of the waterboarding facility, she insists that she wasn't told about any waterboarding...

    I'm just curious, California, why do you keep electing this woman?

    Confirmed: Sky Is Not Falling

    on Thursday, May 7, 2009

    For all the rhetoric Obama has been throwing around about this crisis being, in many ways, as bad as the Great Depression, CNN Money corraborates what I was saying several months ago. That is to say, this crisis is nowhere near the Great Depression. (if needed, click the image to open a larger view)

    Optional Donations?

    Remember that little box on your tax return that asks if you would like to donate a few bucks to the campaign of your choice?

    Well, Nancy Pelosi and cronies have decided to go ahead and check that box for you anyway:
    The House wants to increase Members’ office budgets next fiscal year by almost 15 percent, partly because 2010 is an election year and lawmakers anticipate a surge in franked mail.

    In a recently released budget request, the House Chief Administrative Officer asked appropriators to raise the Members’ Representational Allowances — which fund everything needed to run offices, including salaries, travel and supplies — by $90 million, citing increases “due to the election year cycle.”
    Bear in mind that, even though it is illegal for members of Congress to use tax dollars to get re-elected, Pelosi decided she was gonna go ahead and do it anyway.

    Most ethical Congress evah!

    Obama Has "Pork" Flu

    Be ye warned: Pork Flu is infinitely more dangerous than Swine Flu because of its ultra-high degrees of contagiousness. In fact, it's so contagious that even my unborn grandchildren will be suffering the effects of Obama's horrifying disease. After promising to never pass a bill with any pork in it, he passed the Omnibus bill without even reading it - a bill that contained close to 9,000 earmarks. After which he proposed the largest one-year budget in American history laden with even more of that smoked-pork flavor than the Omnibus had.

    Ah, but fear not. For our fearless leader has, once again, promised to make everything ok by vowing to remove a lousy 0.5% of the crap in his crap sandwich, leaving you and your kids with 99.5% of the sweet, wholesome goodness that is Obama's $3.5 trillion budget.
    U.S. President Barack Obama's budget suggests $17 billion in spending cuts for fiscal year 2010, but Congress already has rejected some of those proposals and the savings do little to dent a projected $1.17 trillion deficit.

    Obama on Thursday released details of the spending cuts, most of which were announced during or after the initial roll-out of his $3.5 trillion budget in February. Fiscal year 2010 begins on October 1.
    Also take note that, instead of cutting money out of wasteful projects like remodeling government offices and giving free money to the radical fraud group ACORN, Obama decided to cut almost all of the money from defense.

    You know, because the world is safe now or something.

    Aww, The Media's In Love

    on Wednesday, May 6, 2009

    How else could you explain such sycophantic hypocrisy?

    Behold the purest form of true love as the White House press stands for one president and not the other:

    Add this vid to last week's Pew Research panel confirming that the fawning media has given Obama almost double the favorable coverage than they did to Bush 43 and Clinton combined, and you have a delicious double-dose of the media's love potion that has so enchanted them.

    Ah, what the heck, let's go for the trifecta: While campaigning, the Huffington Post, and eventually CNN, dedicated entire segments on how evil and hypocritical John McCain was for spending $520 on his shoes.

    Read it and weep, you morons. Barry and Michelle just dropped a cool $540 on a pair of kicks for the First Lady. Will the Huffington Post and CNN carry stories on the Obamas' hypocrisy and lavish spending like they did to McCain?

    Happy Atheist Day

    Not too long ago I speculated that our president just might be an atheist...

    Dude. I was right...

    President Obama is distancing himself from the National Day of Prayer by nixing a formal early morning service and not attending a large Catholic prayer breakfast the next morning.
    The article later mentions that "the president prays every night". Yea right. If he refuses to pray on the National Day of Prayer, why should I believe he prays every other day? And let's not forget that our fearlessly "Christian" president still hasn't picked a church 14 months after leaving his last one.

    God help us.

    What I Get For Voting...

    on Monday, May 4, 2009

    You are reading this instead of a new post today because of jury duty. Thanks, America

    Pinocchio Would Be Proud

    on Thursday, April 30, 2009

    After 100 days in office the President still hasn't figured out that Americans can fact check his lies:

    "That wasn't me," President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One.

    It actually was him - and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years - who shaped a budget so out of balance...

    His assertion that his proposed budget "will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term" is an eyeball-roller among many economists, given the uncharted terrain of trillion-dollar deficits and economic calamity that the government is negotiating.
    Remember this handy graphic from the Washington Post?

    We're not as dumb as you want us to be, Barry. When even an uneducated person takes a 5 second look at your plans to implement Great Society 2, it's easy to see that you're the worst thing to ever happen to the deficit. What with your spending packages on bank bailouts. And the auto industry. And energy. And education. And increased social programs. And college tuition. And health care...

    Well, maybe I'm being too harsh on Obama's apparent lack of finance knowledge. After all, he did ask his staff to cut that $100 million out of the budget, no?

    Just A Thought...

    on Wednesday, April 22, 2009

    By now everybody has heard about Miss California's response to a question about gay marriage at the Miss USA pageant. All she said was the following:

    "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."
    Whether or not you agree with gay marriage, my question is this: Perez Hilton has an opinion on gay marriage and nobody has a problem. But Miss California has an opinion and she's ripped to shreds over it. Why is it that one person is allowed to have an opinion on a political issue and the other person isn't?

    Waterboarding Works

    on Tuesday, April 21, 2009

    I know, I know... there's still the whole argument about us stooping to their level when we employ such tactics. But dude, when a guy who masterminded an attack that killed 3,000 people gets waterboarded a few hundred times, I don't call it torture. I call it karma.

    From the CIA:

    The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) -- including the use of waterboarding -- caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.

    Before he was waterboarded, when KSM was asked about planned attacks on the United States, he ominously told his CIA interrogators, “Soon, you will know.”

    According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack -- which KSM called the “Second Wave”-- planned “ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles."
    Anti-waterboarders seem to be more worried about some murderer's feelings getting hurt than they are about their own countrymen getting hurt. You guys are so backwards it just blows my mind.

    By the way, if I ever get captured by these guys on their side of the fence, I can only hope that waterboarding is the worst thing I get. Just ask Daniel Pearl.

    President Atheist

    on Thursday, April 16, 2009

    Alright, maybe 'atheist' is too strong of a word, but certainly our fearless president isn't as devoted to the Christian religion as he led us to believe during the campaign.

    First he goes to Jeremiah Wright for 20 years and doesn't seem to have a problem with what is preached there. That is, until what is preached there finds its way to YouTube and everybody sees the hate speech emanating from the pulpit that Obama chose to attend. So he tosses Wright under the boss and vows to find a new church in D.C.

    Then almost 13 months later, our incredibly religious Christian president finally finds the spare time to pick a place to worship his god. But only for Easter - he doesn't plan on continuing his attendance to church.

    Obama shills might argue that his refusal to attend church services is due to the fact that the president doesn't have a lot of spare time on Sundays or that the decision about which church to attend is a deeply personal one which requires extra time to decide...

    Ah, but what say ye of this:

    Amidst all of the American flags and presidential seals, there was something missing when President Barack Obama gave an economic speech at Georgetown University this week -- Jesus.

    The White House asked Georgetown to cover a monogram symbolizing Jesus' name in Gaston Hall, which Obama used for his speech, according to CNSNews.com.

    The gold "IHS" monogram inscribed on a pediment in the hall was covered over by a piece of black-painted plywood, and remained covered over the next day, CNSNews.com reported.
    Maybe I was wrong earlier. Maybe the man is atheist.

    Malpractice (UPDATED)

    It just keeps getting better. My post yesterday on Susan Roesgen's shamefully biased CNN coverage of yesterday's tea-parties showcased Roesgen criticizing a man with an Obama/Hitler sign and vehemently checked him by saying that the sign was "offensive" and that the president deserves more respect.

    Ah, but apparently President X/Hitler signs are only "offensive" if they make fun of the messianic Obama:

    In video posted by Paul Chesser from yesterday's CNN broadcast, Roesgen harassed a man who had a sign in which Obama was portrayed as a fascist with a Hitler mustache. "Why be so hard on the President of the United States though with such an offensive message?" an indignant Roesgen hollered.

    Yet back in 2006, when she was covering protests against the Bush administration's response to Katrina, she jokingly referred to this photo of a man wearing a mask with devil horns and a Hitler mustache as a Bush "look-alike."
    It's almost like they aren't even trying to hide their bias anymore. Meanwhile the executives at CNN are wondering why they're last place in the ratings.

    UPDATE: My brother writes to add another example of the media's hypocritical special treatment of The Leader from butt-boy himself, Keith Olbermann.

    In 2006 Olbermann made a special comment on how Bush had killed Habeas Corpus in America, adding that Bush had evily "succeeded where no one has before".

    Yet Obama himself plans to violate Habeas Corpus in his dealing with the Somali pirates.

    When Bush did it, Olbermann devoted an entire 15-minute special comment on how horrible of a man Bush was for doing so. Who here thinks Olby will do the same for Obama?

    Be Afraid of Republicans

    on Wednesday, April 15, 2009

    A few days ago the Department of Homeland Security released a report warning the public of the dangers of "right-wing extremists". Pay no attention to the fact that the report fails to list any specific reasons as to why we should be afraid of right-wingers. On the contrary, the report even specifially states "The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic right-wing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence..." Also pay no attention to the fact that this report came from one Janet Napolitano, a woman with a personal vendetta for Republicans. So if you see no bias in a report submitted by a republican-hater which contains no specific evidence about why you need to be afraid of us, then by all means be afraid. Be very afraid.

    Meh. I assume that part of that report was making referrence to instances like these tea-parties, for example, currently happening across the fruited plain. Look, if Republicans want to peacefully protest taxes while their government spends themselves into oblivion, that is well within their constitutional rights. In fact, I have yet to see any reports of any damage to personal property caused by a single one of these tea-parties. Nevertheless, this whole thing has been shamefully slanted by the mainstream media. For example, when leftist group ALF released flocks of herds not beloning to them, the media has no problem with it. When leftist group PETA vandalized fur coat stores, the media looked the other way. When leftist group ELF burned down an entire new home development becuase they used wood to build houses, the media barely covered it.

    ...But when Republicans gather to protest Barack Obama's wasteful spending, and all while he asks for more of the public's money so he can waste it even further, well:

    When this country's founders threw the first tea party to protest taxes, it was hailed for years and years as one of the greatest moments in American history. But now when people throw a tea party to protest taxes, media nitwits come out to bash them and label them as unpatriotic. My, how far we've come...

    Obama: America Only Gets Mad When I Tell It To

    on Monday, April 6, 2009

    A Tale of Two Obamas:

    Tale #1 - AIG: AIG has contracts to pay $160 million in bonuses. AIG gets stimulus money. Stimulus bill contains text forcing them to pay $160 million in bonuses. AIG pays $160 million in bonuses. Obama call press conference to tell Americans to be outraged over said bonuses. Americans express presidentially mandated outrage.

    Tale #2 - Fannie and Freddie: Fannie and Freddie virtually cause the downward spiral of the entire economy. Like AIG, Fannie and Freddie get stimulus money. Fannie and Freddie pay (or are scheduled to pay) $210 million in bonuses - $50 million more than AIG. Obama suspiciously says nothing. Americans express no outrage.

    Power Grab

    As if anyone ever needed any more proof that Obama is just using this financial crisis as a means to expand government power, we now have word that Obama is refusing repayment of any TARP money that banks received as part of the stimulus so that he can maintain his power over them. This WSJ editorial sums it up nicely, I think:

    I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

    My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future.
    My brother works for Wells Fargo, one of the few banks that specifically told the gov't that they didn't want or need any bailout money as they were doing just fine. What was the government's response to WF? They locked up Wells Fargo's executives in a room and told them they weren't leaving until they agreed to take the money. And now Obama is refusing them the chance to give it back so he can maintain his power over them.

    Could it be any more clear how Obama is playing this? After all, Tim Geithner has declared himself Chairman of the Board of every single financial company in America and thinks he now has the power to fire any executive or seize any company he wants to. And as the article notes, surely the auto and health care industries are next. Soon, any doctor or car salesman making over $150,000 a year is going to have their income over that amount taxed at 90%. Don't believe me? Well they already did it to AIG, so what's going to stop them from repeating it in every other industry they're forcing themselves into?


    on Thursday, April 2, 2009

    Obama already screwed up royally with the Brits once when he decided to gift the PM with a bunch of DVDs that were in the wrong regional format.

    Well ol' Barry is back in Britain again for the G20 party, but it looks like he didn't learn his lesson the first time:

    President Obama has given the Queen an Ipod during their private meeting at Buckingham Palace. It contains footage of her state visit to the US in May 2007. The Queen has given the president a silver framed photograph of herself and her husband. The official picture is what she gives all visiting dignitaries.
    It should also be noted that the ipod was preloaded with a bunch of crappy Obama speeches... Cuz you never know when the Queen of England might get that 2 A.M. hankering to listen to Obama's 2004 speech at the DNC.

    P.S. - She already has an ipod.


    on Tuesday, March 31, 2009

    Too many CodePink hippies toss the word around from time to time. But do you know what the word actually means?

    From Webster's:

    Fascism - A political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation ... above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
    But can this term be applied to Obama's America? Lets see:

    Centralized autocratic government? Check.

    Dictatorial leader? Check.

    Severe economic and social regimentation? Checkity check check.

    With Obama forcing CEOs to resign, Timothy Geithner wanting the power to seize any company in America, and with Congress now mulling the option of controlling how much each and every employee in America is paid (yes really), we are steamrolling head-on into a socialist/fascist government faster than anyone would have dreamed just 5 short years ago. At this rate, Obama will be declaring himself king and tyrant in 6 months.

    Be afraid, people. Be very afraid.

    Hillary Clinton is a Retard

    on Friday, March 27, 2009

    ...and yes, thanks to the 1st amendment, I can, in fact, say that.

    Anyway, the illegal drug war in Mexico has reached its breaking point. So who does Hillary think is to blame for Mexico's drug problem? Why, America, of course:

    The Obama administration wants to crack down on the sale of assault weapons that are arming Mexican drug cartels, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in an interview with NBC television.

    Clinton late on Wednesday called letting a previous US ban on the sale of assault weapons expire "a mistake."

    "I think these assault weapons, these military style weapons, don't belong on anyone's street," said Clinton who pushed for the ban as a New York senator.
    Hillary's brain: "I know how to fix the drug problem! Let's make assault weapons illegal. Sure, drug lords have no shame in creating drugs illegally, and then shipping them to America illegally, and some drug lords have no moral objection to even living in America illegally... but I bet that if we make assault weapons illegal, they'll respect that law. Besides, even though they sell contraband on the black market, I bet they don't know how to buy an AK47 on the black market."


    Great news! Thanks to Obama's rather apparent lack of common sense, terrorists at Club Gitmo could be coming to a neighborhood near you!

    President Barack Obama's intelligence chief confirmed Thursday that some Guantanamo inmates may be released on US soil and receive assistance to return to society.

    "If we are to release them in the United States, we need some sort of assistance for them to start a new life," said National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair at his first press conference...

    Obama has vowed to close the controversial prison camp by next January and has ordered individual reviews for cases against each of the over 240 remaining prisoners...

    The Obama administration is currently evaluating what could be done with the prisoners, he said, but pledged that if they are sent to another country, "we have to be sure that that country will treat them in a humane fashion."
    Well isn't that just lovely. Many of these men were directly involved in plots to attack the United States and many more were caught conspiring against the U.S. So what better way to keep America safe than by releasing these men freely onto American soil in the interests of political correctness? After all, what could possibly go wrong?

    Oh and by the way, to help fund their newly found freedom, your president wants to give them your tax money in the form of welfare. Awesome! Pray they don't use it to buy fertilizer and diesel fuel.

    Punishment for Thee, But Not For Me

    on Thursday, March 26, 2009

    When AIG received the full blunt of the Obama administration last week, many in Barry's own cabinet demanded that the execs return the money. The outcry has since reached the point of calling for a return on any "bonus" received by any bailed-out company.

    Ah, but how about now Rahm?

    Before its portfolio of bad loans helped trigger the current housing crisis, mortgage giant Freddie Mac was the focus of a major accounting scandal that led to a management shake-up, huge fines and scalding condemnation of passive directors by a top federal regulator.

    One of those allegedly asleep-at-the-switch board members was Chicago's Rahm Emanuel—now chief of staff to President Barack Obama—who made at least $320,000 for a 14-month stint at Freddie Mac that required little effort.
    I wouldn't expect ol' Rahmy to return the money any time soon.

    Blame Game

    on Wednesday, March 25, 2009

    Last night in his address, Barack Obama lied to the American public about how he "inherited" this out-of-control deficit.

    Read it and weep, jerk. The figues don't lie:


    The following speech was given by British MEP Daniel Hannan to his own country's prime minister yesterday, but I feel safe in saying that 99% of what is said here could be applied to Obama and his cabinet as well:

    Help Wanted

    on Tuesday, March 24, 2009

    While millions of unemployed Americans are looking for new work, the Treasury Dept has a huge 'help wanted' sign in their window. After promising to execute better fiscal reform in Washington and committing to hold regulatory meetings in the Treasury each month, as of last night Barack Obama has still failed to fill 17 out of the 18 positions at the Treasury - and the only man seated there is currently being called upon from both sides to resign. If that alone doesn't speak leaps and bounds as to how much Barack Obama is in over his head with this financial crisis, then I don't know what does.

    Power Grab

    Obama just keeps inching more and more towards that slippery slope:

    The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.

    The government at present has the authority to seize only banks.
    Fantastic. Obama wants to power to seize any company in America that he deems as an "unsuccessful" company. How can anybody not see about a dozen problems with that statement?

    Heck, why stop with financial companies, Barry? Why not start seizing the assets of each and every one of the millions of Americans working at those companies? And then why not take it a step further by seizing all of the earnings of small businesses making over $200,000/yr? After all, that is your ultimate plan, isn't it?.. To take from the wealthy and redistribute it to the lazy. Why not just get it all over with in one fell swoop instead of trying to be sneaky about it?

    Pants on Fire

    on Monday, March 23, 2009

    Damning evidence, indeed.

    Pair the clip above with the WSJ's article on how Geithner's crew has been working with AIG on the bonuses for months, and you've got a president caught in a lie big enough to make Pinocchio ashamed. Obama claimed a week ago today that he and his cronies in Washington had no clue about the bonuses until after they were paid. Hey Barry, check the timestamp on the video above - it's Dec. 30, 2008 which was several months before AIG ever paid them. You still holding to the story that your cabinet didn't know about them?

    Now That's Bipartisanship!

    Didn't Barack Obama promise during his campaign that he would end this kind of stuff in Washington:

    Senior members of the Obama administration are pressing lawmakers to use a shortcut to drive the president's signature initiatives on health care and energy through Congress without Republican votes, a move that many lawmakers say would fly in the face of President Obama's pledge to restore bipartisanship to Washington...

    "That would be the Chicago approach to governing: Strong-arm it through," said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), .. "You're talking about the exact opposite of bipartisan. You're talking about running over the minority, putting them in cement and throwing them in the Chicago River."

    The shortcut, known as "budget reconciliation," would allow Obama's health and energy proposals to be rolled into a bill that cannot be filibustered, meaning Democrats could push it through the Senate with 51 votes, instead of the usual 60. Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton both used the tactic to win deficit-reduction packages, while George W. Bush used it to push through his signature tax cuts.
    While the last sentence of the article suggests that this isn't the first time this tactic has been used by a president, it is, however, the first time that it has been used by a president who promised not to use it and even dedicated a portion of his biography to condemning the practice.

    I'm now accepting everyone's guesses on how many more of his promises Barack Obama will break during his first 100 days.


    on Friday, March 20, 2009

    Remember that blissful time just a few short months ago when $800 billion seemed like an insane amount of money for government to spend.


    President Barack Obama's budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year over the next decade, according to the latest congressional estimates, significantly worse than predicted by the White House just last month.

    The Congressional Budget Office figures, obtained by The Associated Press Friday, predict Obama's budget will produce $9.3 trillion worth of red ink over 2010-2019. That's $2.3 trillion worse than the White House predicted in its budget.
    As I pointed out yesterday, the total amount of debt accumulated by this country from George Washington's days til the end of W's era totaled a staggering $10.7 trillion. Now Obama plans to double our entire 225+ years' worth of debt in just 8 short years.

    Hope your great-great-grandkids enjoy paying for Obama's out of control spending.


    on Thursday, March 19, 2009

    When Bush handed the reigns to King Obama the national debt totaled about $10.7 trillion. Keep in mind that that's the entire amount of debt we have accumulated from the time George Washington ran the show all the way up until D-Day when Rookie-in-Chief Obama took over.

    And in 8 short weeks, Obama has spent the following:

    1. $1.2 trillion (including interest) on his pork-laden spending bill

    2. $1.5 trillion to implement his universal health care reform

    3. $2 trillion on new cap-and-trade regulation

    4. $1 trillion created out of "thin air" to purchase Treasury bonds and mortgage securities

    5. TOTAL SPENT IN 8 SHORT WEEKS: $5.7 trillion - more than half of the total debt accumulated in the first 225+ years of this country's existence

    So I ask: Why then is Congress and the White House freaking out about a measly $160 million in bonuses (which they all authorized) - only 0.0028% of the total amount spent by Barack Obama to date on complete crap?

    Answer: Because it is a populist technique designed to make a crappy administration look good in the eyes of the uninformed American public.

    Sure, the AIG guys probably don't need the extra cash and shame on them for taking my tax dollars as a bonus, but there's a bigger point that people are missing here. We have reached a terrifying new era in American politics. That is, to punish people after the fact for an act which was 100% legal and authorized by the government when it was committed.

    Imagine you are driving down the freeway today at the correct speed of 65 MPH. Now imagine that three years from now Congress decides that the new speed limit is 55 MPH. So they go knock on your door and try to issue you a ticket for speeding that same three years ago. You argue that when you were driving 65 MPH three years ago it was perfectly legal. They reply that that may be true, but now they like lower speed limits and want to exercise ex post facto and punish you anyway.

    That is EXACTLY what is happening here. And once this is done, what's to stop them for punishing gun owners who legally purchased firearms in years past? Or folks whose great-great-great-grandaddy was slave owner?

    Semi-related exit thought: It's nice to know that, while the economy is collapsing all around us, Barack Obama still has time to pick his NCAA bracket and go showboating on Jay Leno. Way to prioritize there, Chief.

    PS - Did you know that Fannie and Freddie execs get big-time bonuses too? Where's your outrage over that, Obama?

    Promises Made, Promises Broken

    on Wednesday, March 18, 2009

    Obama, February 12, 2009, while digging to find any possible reason he could to implement his ridiculous spending bill:

    Yesterday, Jim, the head of Caterpillar, said that if Congress passes our plan, this company will be able to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off.
    Caterpillar, March 17, 2009:

    Caterpillar to lay off 2,454 workers in 3 states
    Remember, Obama: Underpromise, overdeliver.

    Pelosi = Traitor

    This is from the woman running Congress and who is currently 3rd in line from the Oval Office

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently told a group of both legal and illegal immigrants and their families that enforcement of existing immigration laws, as currently practiced, is "un-American."

    The speaker, condemning raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, referred to the immigrants she was addressing as "very, very patriotic."

    "Who in this country would not want to change a policy of kicking in doors in the middle of the night and sending a parent away from their families?" Pelosi told a mostly Hispanic gathering at St. Anthony's Church in San Francisco.

    "It must be stopped....What value system is that? I think it's un-American. I think it's un-American."
    I'm just curious, Nancy... Since when did enforcing America's laws become "un-American"

    Obama = Greenie

    This guy has no clue what he's doing:

    For the first time since last fall's election, Democrats and the Obama administration are backpedaling furiously on an issue easily understood by financially strapped taxpayers: $165 million in bonuses paid out at bailed-out AIG...

    "It's shocking that they would -- the administration would come to us now and act surprised about these contracts," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the Senate GOP leader. "This administration could have and should have ... prevented this from happening. They had a lot of leverage two weeks ago."

    That would be when the Treasury Department decided to make an additional $30 billion available to American International Group Inc., the huge insurance conglomerate deemed too big to fail by two administrations....
    Allow me to sum up the AIG timeline for you:

    1) AIG needs money

    2) AIG is granted money in the stimulus bills

    3) AIG has contractual obligations to pay the bonuses

    4) Chris Dodd adds amendments to the bills that allow AIG executives to pay bonuses through Feb 2009

    5) Obama and the Democrats in Congress (along with a few RINOs) pass the bill without even reading it, thereby missing the loophole allowing for the bonuses

    6) White House press secretary Robert Gibb's tells America it "knows where the AIG bailout billions are going" and not to worry because it is on top of it all

    7) AIG pays the bonuses that it was contractually bound to do and that the White House said it (supposedly) knew about

    8) Obama gets mad that AIG pays the bonuses even though the bill that explicitly allows them to do so has his signature on it (again, this is what happens when he signs the bill without even reading it)

    9) Obama goes out on Monday and hammers AIG in populist rhetoric while praising the new CEO (who just happens to be the guy authorizing the bonuses, might I add)

    10) The White House is then forced to crawl back into its gopher hole when it realizes that it knew about the bonuses all along and had the ability to stop them, but chose not to

    11) Obama and cronies try to find a way to take the money back in the form of massive taxes

    12) (This step hasn't occurred yet, but will) Obama will be challenged by the United States Supreme Court for his unconstitutional taxes employed to recoup some of the bonus money that, again, HE AUTHORIZED WITH HIS SIGNATURE TO BEGIN WITH!

    Like others, I myself am beginning to seriously question the competency of Obama and his cabinet.

    Complete Ineptitude

    on Monday, March 16, 2009

    Even the more leftist Obama shills are starting to figure it out...

    Not long ago, after a string of especially bad days for the Obama administration, a veteran Democratic pol approached me with a pained look on his face and asked, “Do you think they know what they’re doing?”

    The question caught me off guard because the man is a well-known Obama supporter. As we talked, I quickly realized his asking suggested his own considerable doubts.

    Yes, it’s early, but an eerily familiar feeling is spreading across party lines and seeping into the national conversation. It’s a nagging doubt about the competency of the White House.
    I'm stumped. People are just now starting to realize that electing a guy with no executive, economic, or business experience and an ultra-thin resume in the middle of a tough recession might have been a bad idea?

    Note to Obama: The polls don't lie, champ. You're approval ratings are now lower than public hero George Bush's were at this point. Good luck with that.

    More Bad News for Al Gore

    on Saturday, March 14, 2009

    Remember in 2005 when Al Gore boldly declared that, because of global warming, hurricanes would be so common and severe that people in Colorado would have to seek shelter from them?


    Tropical cyclone (TC) activity worldwide has completely and utterly collapsed during the past 2 to 3 years with TC energy levels sinking to levels not seen since the late 1970s.
    Add to this the fact that global warming skepticism in America has now reached an all-time high and that Discovery.com now even thinks that global warming is "on hold", and you have a perfect trifecta devastating enough to make Al Gore crawl into the fetal position on the floor of his incredibly energy-inefficient home.

    ACLU Hard at Work Again

    on Friday, March 13, 2009

    Our friends at the ACLU (you know, the same people who provide legal help to suspected terrorists and want to grant the rights to Code Pink to protest veterans' funerals) have outdone themselves yet again with this latest embarrassment of a fiasco aimed at your children. A district in California has made it illegal for children to leave school for medical treatment without notifying parents. But the ACLU aims to reverse that, while slipping in a little something extra of their own:

    The ACLU is threatening to sue a California school district after it changed a policy to require teenagers get parental consent to leave campus for confidential medical services.

    The Vista Unified School District board voted unanimously Thursday to change its existing policy that allowed students to be excused for confidential appointments — including abortions — without notifying parents, according to the North County Times.
    The government already provides condoms and sex ed training in schools, making the process now complete, and all thanks to the great efforts of the ACLU. Your kids can now get condoms and sex ed training in 1st period health, leave campus during lunch, and get a abortion during 6th period gym - and all without having to notify parents. How efficient!

    Of Course!

    To anyone out there who wants more evidence that Obama is the most backwards man to run this country, here's a cold splash of water for your weekend:

    President Obama has just released the name of his pick to head the Justice Department’s Civil Division. Who is it? John Walker Lindh's defense attorney - the same John Walker Lindh who trained and ultimately became a member of the Afghan Taliban and even sat at the feet of Osama Bin Laden himself.

    So there you go. The lawyer who defended a member of the Osama Bin Laden's Taliban is now Obama's pick to work for justice in America. My, how far we've come since 9/11.


    Headline of the Day: Obama's Poll Numbers Are Falling to Earth

    Heh. Maybe it's because, instead of fixing the economy, he's decided to spend his valuable time coordinating attacks on Rush Limbaugh, holding important meetings on how to keep up appearances with the local glitterati, insulting our strongest ally, shafting our veterans, and trying to use this economic crisis as an excuse to pass his radical agenda that is, in fact, hurting the market more than helping it. The DOW has sunk as much as 15% under his watch - a travesty that the majority of economists have attributed directly to his implemented policies.

    Don't consider me to be surprised here. I knew this was gonna happen. In fact, most out there who voted against Obama knew this was gonna happen too. Only now are large numbers of Obama supporters beginning to feel some buyer's remorse for their November ballot cast proudly for The One on his empty promises of hope and change.

    Friday morning tip to Obama: My father used to always tell me "Underpromise, overdeliver." And yet, Obama, you have instead decided to do the exact opposite thereby alienating both your wavering democratic base and frustrated republicans across the board. Well played, sir.


    on Thursday, March 12, 2009

    Fearless champion of liberty and financial freedom Barack Obama has spent the last 6 weeks of his incredibly productive presidency declaring from the rooftops the impending doom of the next depression that is surely right around the corner.

    ...Except today:

    Confronting misgivings, even in his own party, President Barack Obama mounted a stout defense of his blueprint to overhaul the economy Thursday, declaring the national crisis is "not as bad as we think" and his plans will speed recovery.
    What is this guy smoking? I want some.

    More Priorities

    I already hammered Obama once for his apathetic response towards the rotten markets by choosing to host White House meetings on how to attack Rush Limbaugh instead of how to attack the economy?

    But alas, The Leader has outdone himself yet again with this latest act guaranteed to get blood shooting from your eyes:

    While publicly identifying with the nation's have-nots, the Obama administration has been quietly cultivating the Beltway social elite behind the scenes.

    Earlier this year, the Obama administration invited top editors of Washington's three local luxury lifestyle magazines, Capitol File, DC Magazine and Washington Life to a meeting where, among other things, they discussed how the President and first lady can embrace Washington's glittery social scene...

    The outreach to the luxury lifestyle glossies, which cater to the region's highest socioeconomic strata with knowing coverage of everything from the choicest real estate and most exclusive parties to the plushest resorts and spas, is not the only recent evidence that the Obama administration is eager to forge ties with the nation's social and style arbiters.
    This man is on a light-speed path to epic failure, and we're in the backseat with him. If the economy was tanking and President Bush, instead of tackling to issues of real priority like this coming year's almost $2 trillion deficit, was hosting meeting after meeting and party after party to practice his skills on blinging with the local glitterati, Keith Olbermann would be breathing into a paper bag.

    Obama Gets an F

    ...And it may not be his first seeing as he is still refusing to show us his grades from his Ivy League education he keep flaunting. Bush showed us his, after all...

    Anyway, the WSJ has released their poll on Obama's handling of the economy. It should be added, for whatever extra gravitas, that this wasn't some bunk poll of random, uninformed Americans. This poll asked only economists how Obama stacks up. Their response:

    U.S. President Barack Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner received failing grades for their efforts to revive the economy from participants in the latest Wall Street Journal forecasting survey...

    [E]conomists’ main criticism of the Obama team centered on delays in enacting key parts of plans to rescue banks. “They overpromised and underdelivered,” said Stephen Stanley of RBS Greenwich Capital. “Secretary Geithner scheduled a big speech and came out with just a vague blueprint. The uncertainty is hanging over everyone’s head.”...

    The economists’ negative ratings mark a turnaround in opinion. In December, before Mr. Obama took office, three-quarters of respondents said the incoming administration’s economic team was better than the departing Bush team. However, Mr. Geithner’s latest marks are lower than the average grade of 57 that former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson received in January.
    No shock here. I mean, for heaven's sake, President Obama, the man that is calling the shots on how to fix the markets and economy, thinks that a P/E ratio is a "profits and earnings" ratio... a ratio that doesn't even exist! How is that supposed to build confidence in the markets? Clearly this guy is a total financial novice!

    Sure, this all started under Bush's watch, but Obama is prolonging this recession by trying to simultaneously implement his radical agenda. For example: Obama was championing health care reform a full year before this recession even started. Why then is he including health care reform as a "necessary" component of his economic recovery plan when health care had nothing to do with the recession to being with? Clearly he's using this crisis as a means to bring about his own "social engineering". After all, didn't his own chief of staff admit to that?

    Look, Obama, if you want to pass you ultra-radical policies (what you and your followers call "change") then that is in your authority. But please, for the love of everything that is good and holy, PLEASE wait until this crisis is over before you start piling more weight on the economy's back with your policies.


    What does Obama's cabinet think the best way is to reward our troops for their sacrifice to this country?

    Answer: Make them pay for their own injuries:

    Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama administration is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance...

    No official proposal to create such a program has been announced publicly, but veterans groups wrote a pre-emptive letter last week to President Obama voicing their opposition to the idea after hearing the plan was under consideration.

    The groups also cited an increase in "third-party collections" estimated in the 2010 budget proposal -- something they said could be achieved only if the Veterans Administration started billing for service-related injuries.

    Asked about the proposal, Shinseki said it was under "consideration."

    "A final decision hasn't been made yet," he said.
    Ed at HA makes a great point: The same government that had no problem giving $100 million to research lead-based paint or $400 million to STD research or $600 million to refurnish government offices or who knows how much money to AIG and to "rebuild" Gaza, now wants veterans injured in the service of their country to pay for their own battle-related injuries??

    Is it even physically possible for Obama's cabinet to be any more backwards lately? Obama keeps this garbage up and 2012 will be a walk in the park.


    on Wednesday, March 11, 2009

  • September 11, 2001 (Just minutes before the attack occurred): James Carville, Democratic Strategist - “I certainly hope he doesn’t succeed.” (regarding President Bush)

    Media Outrage: None

  • August 9, 2006: Fox News Poll asking Democrats "would you say you
    want President Bush to succeed or not?" wherein 51% of Democrats said "No."

    Media Outrage: None

  • January 25, 2009: Rush Limbaugh - "I hope he fails." (regarding President Obama)

    Media Outrage: Plentiful. In fact, it was the number 2 news story in America last week (beaten out only by the economy) with pundits, politicians, and punks alike calling for everything from a ban on Limbaugh, to the revocation of his radio license, and all the way to calls for him to be hanged for treason. An effort that the White House admits was both coordinated and "explicitly authorized" within its walls by Obama's advisers.

  • Egregious double-standard anyone?

    More Stimulus?

    on Tuesday, March 10, 2009

    Such are the words of Queen Pelosi and crew, who seem to be having plenty of fun spending your grandchildren's money these days:

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday she is open to introducing a second stimulus bill, but it's too early to determine the size of such a package and the timing on another major economic measure.

    “We have to keep the door open to see how it goes,” Pelosi told reporters Tuesday following a House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee hearing on the economy...

    “We hope it will be sooner rather than later that [the stimulus] catches fire in Washington, D.C.
    I'm confused. I remember Washington promising us that the first TARP bill would save the economy. Then we were promised the second bill would fix everything. Now we need a third? When are these guys going to stop? Stimulus #9?

    As I've already noted, the numbers from this recession mirror those of the 1981 recession that Jimmy Carter left as a parting gift to Reagan. And yet, somehow, we didn't need oodles of spending bills to pull us out back then. Why then do the Dems in Congress need a new weekly stimulus bill paid for by my great-great-great grandkids before they are satisfied?

    Insult, or Just Plain Incompetence?

    on Thursday, March 5, 2009

    Often times when high-level international government officials meet for the first time, they exchange gifts. For example, when Britain Prime Minister Gordon Brown recently visited Washington, he gave President Obama an ornamental pen holder made from the timbers of the Victorian anti-slave ship HMS Gannet - once called HMS President. The gift holds significant meaning as the timbers come from the sister ship of the HMS Resolute - the same HMS Resolute whose remnants became the Resolute desk which serves as the president's personal desk in the oval office - yet another gift from the Brits.

    So what thoughtful gift did President Obama give to Gordon Brown on his trip to Britain? A 25 pack of DVDs. And not even Blu-Ray for that matter:

    For despite being leader of the world's most bountiful nation, President Obama handed over nothing more thought-provoking than 25 classic American films on DVD.

    It was the equivalent of receiving a pair of socks from an unfamiliar aunt at Christmas - and a less-than-glowing affirmation of the UK-US bond

    Despite being a 'special collector's box set', any film buff could have picked up the movies from their local video store for just £250.

    It is not clear what the Prime Minister - not believed to a great fan of cinema - thought about receiving the films.
    What a slap in the face to our strongest world ally. And to top it all off, I bet Obama doesn't even know that they probably weren't even for the right DVD region, meaning PM Brown wouldn't even be able to watch them in the UK.

    Well, maybe Michelle Obama did better with her gifts to the Brown's children

    Mr Brown and his wife also showered gifts on the Obama children giving Sasha and Malia an outfit each from Topshop and six children's books by British authors which are shortly to be published in America.

    In return, the Obamas gave the Browns two models of the presidential helicopter, Marine One, to take home to sons Fraser and John.
    A couple of plastic replicas of the presidential helicopter? I'm a poor college student and even I get my kids better gifts than that! Way to go family Obama.


    on Wednesday, March 4, 2009

    Wall Street is in shambles. Retirement funds are all but gone. And there's some talk that a full-blown depression may be around the corner.

    So what's your courageous president up to these days:

    Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, a full-scale effort first hatched by some of the most familiar names in politics and now being guided in part from inside the White House.

    The strategy took shape after Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville [as well as White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who is listed later in the story - ed.] included Limbaugh’s name in an October poll and learned their longtime tormentor was deeply unpopular with many Americans, especially younger voters. Then the conservative talk-radio host emerged as an unapologetic critic of Barack Obama shortly before his inauguration, when even many Republicans were showering him with praise.

    Soon it clicked: Democrats realized they could roll out a new GOP bogeyman for the post-Bush era by turning to an old one in Limbaugh, a polarizing figure since he rose to prominence in the 1990s.
    The markets have lost almost 20% of their value since Obama took over (with much of that loss being directly attributed to his implemented policies). But instead of working on real issues of merit, we are now learning that the White House is the one leading the charge on the recent vicious attack on Rush Limbaugh. The story linked above details how White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was even conducting conference calls from the White House to discuss with democratic strategists on how to successfully attack Limbaugh.

    How in the world is this "the change we can believe in" Mr Obama? You promised us real leadership and change over how politics is done in Washington. And many in America believed you. But instead, you've shamelessly become the very type of attack machine you promised to abolish. For heaven's sake, we are in a serious financial crisis!! And yet your only top priority right now is to bash conservative talk-show hosts?