Sunday, January 31, 2010
If Beck's ratings are going up, it is from other Libtardarians or far left wingers, because REAL conservatives have abandoned his show in droves due to him aiding Obama and Soros sweep the eligibility issue under the rug. I hate to break the news to you all, but Beck is not a conservative.
Beck is an obstacle to my goal, a Special Prosecutor to investigate Obama aka Barry Soetoro's ineligibility status. Therefore; he is now fair game. I am coordinating a movement to demand that Beck, Bill O', Katie Couric, Williams and Matthews just to name a few to testify under oath regarding any links to a conspiracy to feed disinformation and lies to the American people about Obama's eligibility.
Why am I targeting the media? It is their lies that allowed Obama to skate attention prior to the election on his eligibility issue and they are also aiding in the cover up after the fact. There are multiple felonies alleged against Obama and this is much bigger than Watergate ever was. Phil Berg stated that Nixon resigned due to the scandal of Watergate, because it was on the news 24/7. That is what we are lacking here. Once this topic is in the news 24/7, Obam will be forced to resign.
I suspect that they are aiding in the greatest fraud against the American people and the biggest threat to national security in our history. I also think that they should be thrown into jail if it is proven that they aided in this fraud. It is alleged that this president has ties to foreign countries such as Indonesia, Kenya, Saudi Arabia and Russia.
Beck cries on the constitution as he attacks people calling for an investigation into the greatest violation against the constitution. Beck is no patriot you fools, wake up, he is a TRAITOR. He has also claimed that this is a left wing conspiracy? Beck knows damn well that I WAS the one that created Operation Flood It and that punk is a flaming libtard compared to me.
The other day I orchestrated another Operation Flood it against Judge Napolitano's radio show. The woman answered and she asked me what my name was and my location. She than asked what I would like to say. I was going to be on, UNTIL I said. "I wanted to ask the judge about the Chrysler lawsuit where they are challenging Obama's eligibility to be president. The woman said "Oh, we do not talk about that." Then she realized what she said and then she said, "That is not the topic we are discussing right now."
I answered her back by saying, "I know that you never discuss this and that is why I am bringing it up." She said "SORRY" and hung up in my face.
Beck and Napolitano are the biggest frauds of them all, because they whine about the constitution all the time, but they ignore this issue? They are puppets for the Saudi's, wake up you idiots.......
Eric Holder appointed a Special Prosecutor to investigate what? THE CIA. Holder, is the enemy within as well....
This is just one of the letters that I have gotten from furious former fans of the giggling libtardarian, Beck.
And most critical, Glenn Beck has sent out e-letters to everyone making fun of the "birthers" as he calls it. A left wing radical name thrown to anyone who questions Obama's probable illegal status. Behind the scenes Beck and O' Reilly are covering for the liar and thief and have become "appeasers" for their fans.
If you take sincere patriots down one path while the socialist are
coming in the back door to take over America then it is all being done in the dark of night while we sleep. Van Jones and Anita Dunn are still under Obama, they just moved over to a different position. I used to like Glenn Beck and O' Reilly but they are blocking the truth from coming out on Obama.
The controlling interest in Fox News is owned by a Saudi Prince named Alwaheed
bin-Tatal, and the largest contributor to Obama's '08Presidential campaign is a radical Muslim named Dr. Khalidel-Mansour!!! So we have a Muslim controlled media, an illegal Muslim in the highest office in America. THIS IS THE STORY AMERICA!!! WAKE UP!!! While Beck is giddy about his book tour with O' Reilly we are in serious danger and sooner than you think.
If Beck can continue to appease the masses then he is not really helping us out. He has hinted over and over again he is just an entertainer. More bad news for all of us true patriots, George Soros has posted on his website that he commends Glenn Beck for attacking the birthers!!! Good old Communist/Socialist Soros!!! Still like Beck? Not much more I can say.
This is all documented and true. Do not let your guard down with Beck or O' Reilly!!! Complete TV media blackout on the subject. Beck mentioned it briefly the other day because he is under fire from tea party delegates who have noticed his silence, but he did not use the words "natural born citizen" which is what is in the hundreds of lawsuits against Obama. Every time Beck
walks to his blackboard or starts whining about our Constitution , he has become silly yet this issue is "the" issue before all Americans. An illegal muslim in the White House and he will not pursue it. Beck, O' Reilly and the rest of the Fox crew's pockets are lined with Saudi Arabian Gold and "We the People" need to think for ourselves and turn off our TV's to all Muslim
controlled media. Rupert Murdoch works for them!!!! This is a lot to absorb but you have been betrayed!!!
The Mystery of Barack Obama Continues
By Steve Baldwin, Exclusive to Western Center for Journalism
Most Americans dont realize we have elected a president whom we know very little about.
Researchers have discovered that Obamas autobiographical books are little more than PR stunts, as they have little to do with the actual events of his life. The fact is we know less about President Obama than perhaps any other president in American history and much of this is due to actual efforts to hide his record. This should concern all Americans.
A nation-wide network of researchers has sprung up to attempt to fill in the blanks, but at every opportunity Obamas high-priced lawyers have built walls around various records or simply made them disappear. It is estimated that Obamas legal team has now spent well over $1.4 million dollars blocking access to documents every American should have access to. The question is why would he spend so much money to do this?
The president who campaigned for a more open government and full disclosure will not unseal his medical records, his school records, his birth records or his passport records. He will not release his Harvard records, his Columbia College records, or his Occidental College recordshe will not even release his Columbia College thesis. All his legislative records from the Illinois State Senate are missing and he claims his scheduling records during those State Senate years are lost as well. In addition, no one can find his school records for the elite K-12 college prep school, Punahou School, he attended in Hawaii.
What is he hiding? Well, for starters, some of these records will shed light on his citizenship and birth.
For example, Obamas application to Punahou School now mysteriously missing would likely contain a birth certificate. And, according to attorney Gary Kreep, his Occidental College records are important as they may show he attended there as a foreign exchange student. Indeed, Obama used his Indonesian name Barry Soetoro while attending Occidental. Kreep has filed lawsuits challenging Obamas eligibility to be president and as part of his lawsuit he requested Obamas records from Occidental. However, Obamas lawyers quickly moved to stop Occidental from honoring this request.
Furthermore, now that at least three document authentication experts have declared the scanned Certificate of Live Birth Obamas campaign team gave to a pro-Obama website to be an obvious phony; we know that he is hiding something here as well.
Over 49 separate law suits have been filed on the eligibility/birth certificate issue alone, with several of the suits making it all the way the United States Supreme Court, only to be denied a full hearing.
Whats more, there are questions about how he paid for his Harvard Law School education since, despite a claim by Michele Obama, no one has produced any evidence that he received student loans. The Obamas will not release any student loan details despite repeated requests from the Chicago Tribune. However, it appears that his Harvard education may have been paid for by a foreign source. Khalid Al-Mansour, an advisor to Saudi prince Al-Walid bin Talah, told Manhattan Borough president, Percy Sutton, that he was raising money for Obamas Harvard tuition. Incidentally, Prince Tala is the largest donor to CAIR, a Muslim group declared by the U.S. Government in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorist financing trial. At least three of CAIRs leaders have been indicted for terrorist activities. Al-Mansours admission opens up speculation as to whether Muslim interests have assisted Obamas career in the hope he would eventually be in a position someday to promote their interests.
More recently, it was discovered that Obamas Selective Service card may have been doctored. Federal law requires all American males to register for the Selective Service (the draft) in case a major war broke out. Blogger Debbie Schlussel has discovered solid evidence that Obamas Selective Service registration form was submitted not when he was younger as required, but rather in 2008 and then altered to look older. Indeed, the forgers forgot to alter the Document Location Number which shows that it is clearly a 2008 form. This is fraud and its a felony and Schlussel allegations are backed up by Stephen Coffman, a former high-ranking Federal agent. Moreover, the document shows a September 4th, 1980 date and the location of the transaction as Hawaii, but at that time Obama was thousands of miles away attending Occidental College in Los Angeles.
The real reason why Obama probably did not submit this form as a teenager is that he assumed his Kenyan or Indonesian citizenship exempted him from this requirement. But clearly, as he grew older and entered politics, he saw that any documents revealing a foreign birth Selective Service registration, birth certificate, school applications, etc would be problematic if he ran for the presidency. Thus, it is not a coincidence that every document which contains information about his birth or citizenship is either missing, sealed, or has been altered.
Indeed, everywhere one looks into Obamas background, we find sealed records, scrubbed websites, altered documents, deception and unanswered questions. Can anyone imagine for a second if John McCain or George Bush had blocked access to his school, medical, and birth records? It would have been headlines but as with everything else concerning Obama, the media has given him a pass on this.
Of all these marvels, the latest mystery and probably most perplexing is that of Obamas social security number. It appears that Obama has multiple identities in term of possessing numerous social security numbers. Orly Taitz, an attorney who has filed numerous suits against Obama regarding his eligibility to serve as president, appears to be the first to discover this. In her suit, representing a number of military officers who are refusing to serve under an ineligible commander in chief, she hired private investigator Neil Sankey to conduct research on Obamas prior addresses and Social Society numbers. Using Intelius, Lexis Nexis, Choice Point and other public records, Sankey found around 25 Social Security numbers connected with Obamas name.
However, it may not be as many as 25, since Sankey also searched using closely related names such as: Barak Obama, Batock Obama, Barok Obama, and Barrack Obama. There may very well be some Kenyans living in America with the same last name and a similar first name. In any case, I will exclude these records for the purpose of this research and focus only on names spelled exactly like his name. Moreover, we can verify many of the Social Security numbers as valid since theyre connected to addresses at which we know Obama resided. Needless to say, there are also a slew of address and social security numbers connected to addresses in states that Obama has no known connection to.
In Obamas home state, Illinois, Sankey tracked down 16 different addresses for a Barack Obama or a Barack H. Obama, of which all are addresses he was known to have lived at. Two Social Security numbers appear for these addresses, one beginning with 042 and one starting 364.
In California, where Obama attended Occidental College, there are six addresses listed for him, all within easy driving distance of the college. However, there are three Social Security numbers connected to these addresses, 537 and two others, each beginning with 999.
There are no addresses listed in New York where he attended Columbia University, but there is one listed for him in nearby Jackson, NJ, with a Social Security number beginning with 485.
In Massachusetts where Obama attended Harvard Law School we find three addresses, all using the 042 Social Security number. After Obama was elected to the United States Senate in 2005, he moved into an apartment at 300 Massachusetts Ave NW; the Social Security number attached to that address is the 042 one. Yet, three years later, Obama used a different Social Security number for an address listed as: 713 Hart Senate Office Building. This was the address of his United States Senate office. This Social Security number began with 282 and was verified by the government in 2008.
This mystery grows even stranger as other addresses and Social Security numbers for Barack Obama appear in a dozen other states not known to be connected to him. Again, I am excluding those records names not spelled exactly like his name.
Tennessee, one address with a Social Security number beginning with 427
Colorado, one address, with a Social Security number beginning with 456.
Utah, two addresses, with two Social Security numbers beginning with 901 and 799.
Missouri has one address and one Social Security number beginning with 999.
Florida has two addresses listed for his him, three if you count one listed as Barry Obama. One is connected to a Social Security number beginning with 762.
In Georgia there are three addresses listed for him, all with different Social Security numbers: 579, 420, and 423.
In Texas there are four different addresses listed for him, one is connected to Social Security number 675.
There are two addresses listed for Barack Obama in Oregon and one address listed for him in
the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania.
All told, there are 49 addresses and 16 different Social Security numbers listed for a person whose name is spelled Barack Obama. In some cases, the middle initial H is listed. If you were to expand the search to include closely related names such as: Barac, Barak, and Barrack Obama, you would find more than a dozen additional addresses and Social Security numbers.
Finally, the one Social Security number Obama most frequently used, the one beginning with 042, is a number issued in Connecticut sometime during 1976-1977, yet there is no record of Obama ever living or working in Connecticut. Indeed, during this time period Obama would have been 15-16 years old and living in Hawaii at the time.
Nevertheless, all this mystery surrounding Obama appears to be a generational thing. Researchers have discovered nearly a dozen aliases, at least two different Social Security numbers, and upwards of over 99 separate addresses for Ann Dunham, his mother. We do know she worked for the ultra liberal Ford Foundation ( I redacted some information about Obama’s mother, as it is embarrassing, and I am not 100% sure it is true OT)
But we also know that Obamas mother and grandparents associated with Communist Party leaders such as Frank Marshall Davis, a man who, according to Obamas book, Dreams from my Father, was his main mentor during much of his Hawaiian boyhood (although Obama tried to disguise his identity in his book). During the Cold War, Davis was named by congressional investigators as a key member of a secretive pro-Soviet networked that existed in Hawaii at that time.
The lack of documents regarding Obama also extends to his mother and to his grandparents. Indeed, researchers have been unable to find marriage licenses for his mothers two marriages, assuming she was ever legally married. Ditto goes for the marriage license for Anns parents. They cannot find birth certificates for her, her parents, or for even for her grandparents. Even more so, despite Obamas boast of his grandfathers military service, theres no record of that either. For reasons no one knows, much of Obamas life, his mothers life and his grandparents life has been erased from the records as if they never existed.
But why would someone obtain so many Social Security numbers? According to investigators, those who create additional Social Society numbers are typically engaged in criminal activities such as Social Security fraud, tax fraud, real estate fraud, campaign contributions fraud, voter fraud and so on. While the private investigator who compiled this list says multiple social security numbers does not automatically prove theres criminal activity involved, he states that having said that, I have personally experienced many, many cases where such information has led to subsequent exposure of fraud, deception, money laundering and other crimes.What is interesting to note is that Obamas grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, was a volunteer at the Oahu Circuit Court probate department and had access to the Social Security numbers of deceased people.
It is clear that more research needs to be done on this issue. The Western Center for Journalism
( http://www.westernjournalism.com) is inviting our readers to join the search for the truth. If you have any information about any of the addresses listed, we would love to hear from you. To find a complete list of all the addresses and Social Security numbers listed in the public record for Obama and family, please go to the Western Center for Journalism.
Now is the time to start knocking on doors, making phone calls and sending donations to candidates that you support.
Don't limit your support to local candidates . If you notice a race that needs some help in another part of the country, get involved by being part of their phone bank. Your friends, family members, members of your church, or other organizations you belong to are resources you might enlist to help.
We all want to take our country back, this is the expressway. If you make phone calls during the year, hang on to your call lists, when election day nears, reuse the call list as a Get Out the Vote list.
On Election Day, spend some extra time at the polling location, watch for any activity that doesn't belong.
...and she needs to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law...including her complicity in the election fraud of 2008...the eligibility coverup!...
'U.S. Military Serving as Chauffeurs, Babysitters for the Pelosi Kids: Receipts That Will Blow Your Mind
Pelosi needs to resign as Speaker.By Online: Jim Kelly Sunday, January 31, 2010
- Jim Kelly, Patriot Freedom
This article has too many photos and other items to load here. However, you have to go and look at the evidence.
Meet the Pelosi family! Using Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, Judicial Watch uncovered thousands of pages of travel documents related to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s use of military aircraft.
What hasn’t been revealed so far is that military aircraft are being used to shuttle Pelosi’s kids and grandkids between DC and San Francisco without any Congressional representatives even onboard! Put simply, the United States Air Force is serving as a multi-billion dollar chauffeur- and baby-sitting service for Nancy Pelosi’s kids and grandkids—presumably because commercial travel is beneath the families of the autocrats.With the economy in a shambles and teetering on the brink of disaster thanks to the insane policies of the Democrats, this kind of waste is an outrage.
Nancy Pelosi—Air Force Documents
These documents were produced by the U.S. Air
AGAIN…PATRIOT FREEDOM SAYS Pelosi needs to resign as Speaker.
The scandal-plagued Speaker of the House has alienated nearly half of the country, earning an all-time low approval rating that makes her the least popular member of the Democratic Party
ADDITIONAL Nancy Pelosi Scandals and incriminating Documents
An Atlas reader, Chuck, has a student in the eleventh grade in an Ohio High School. Her government class passed out this propaganda recruiting paper so students could sign up as interns for Obama’s Organizing for America (OFA is the former mybarackobama.com site.)
Obama is using our public school system to recruit for his Alinsky-inspired private army. Organizing for America is (and I quote) recruiting in our high schools to “build on the movement that elected President Obama by empowering students across the country to help us bring about our agenda” …………of national socialism.
AKA OBAMA NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE AND PROSECUTED TO THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LAW FOR TREASON...
President Obama frequently operates outside the Constitution
Presidential AuthorityBy Terry P. Wise Sunday, January 31, 2010
I have received emails in response to my Article in the CFP regarding the recent State of the Union. Some of you have criticized me for stating my opinion that “President Obama frequently operates outside the Constitution”. I am admonished for saying such a thing without providing examples of that opinion.
The Constitution in its entirety, including all Amendments, was never directed at “citizens,” or “people.” It actually applies to the Government, both Federal and State. It tells the Federal Government what it “can do” in the “original body” (Articles I through VII), and what it “can’t do” in the Bill of Rights (Amendments 1 through 10) and several other Amendments as well. Amendment 10 to the Constitution says “the powers not delegated to the United States[Federal Government] by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people”. This solidified the premise that if the Constitution, with all of its Amendments, does not specifically provide the Federal Government with the authority to “DO SOMETHING”, than the Federal Government “CAN’T DO IT”. It was specifically designed this way by the Founding Fathers, and their successors, to protect the “rights and prerogatives” of the States and the People, and to guard against Central Government tyranny.
President Obama has at least 30 so called “Czars”, and in aggregate these folks control in access of somewhere around Two-Trillion Dollars. Is this compliant with Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution: “...who’s Appointment are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law; but the Congress may by Law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President,...”. Congress has vested no such “power” I’m aware of, and most certainly many of these Czars have the “authority” to qualify as “Officers”. Don’t some of these “titles” make you wonder about the “limits of constitutional authority” in the Executive Branch? How about “Health Czar”; “Information Czar”; “Faith-Based Czar”; “Regulatory Czar”; “Pay Czar”; “Green-Jobs” Czar”; “Climate Czar”; “Car Czar”; or “Urban Affairs Czar”. Where in the Constitution is authority and purview over these areas provided? It certainly isn’t in Article I, II or any of the Amendments. You tell me why this shouldn’t worry me.
An individual mandate to enter into a contract with or buy a particular product from a private party, with tax penalties to enforce it, will in my opinion, most certainly be found to be unconstitutional. Yet, the President has already indicated he will sign a Health Bill that contains such a provision. Is that the President behaving within the spirit of his oath under Article II Section 1? Is that the President “preserving, protecting and defending” the Constitution? Until he explains exactly how and why it is constitutional, I don’t think so.
“Private property” under the ownership and control of the Federal Government
Is the President of the United States acting constitutionally when he proposes, encourages and signs Law that effectively puts massive amounts of “private property” under the ownership and control of the Federal Government (Big Business, Big Banks, etc.)? Is that in compliance with Article V of the Constitution? I certainly have my “reasonable doubts”...
Under the president’s authority, is it constitutional when the underlings he has appointed began attempting to exercise control over private sector “business policies and compensation”? Is that in compliance with article V of the Constitution? Not from my seat it’s not!
In 1996, the Supreme
Full Citizenship protection in our Criminal Court System
What provision in the Constitution is consistent with granting “full Citizenship protection in our Criminal Court System” to four non-citizens captured while engaged in Armed Combat against the United States? I can’t find it in Article I, II, III or any of the Amendments. Can you? If so, please enlighten me. If not, the President and his Attorney General are “operating outside the authority of the Constitution”.
A segment of “We-The-People”, the President’ Bosses, have demanded that this President re-verify his eligibility to be President, and the Issue has entered our Court System. Thus far, the President has refused to even respond. Is he compliant with the Constitution when he refuses to comply with article II, Section 1: “no person except a natural born citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution…”? Are we really “unreasonable BIRTHERS” when we believe that it is a serious, fundamental problem when the President can’t or won’t eliminate this doubt by simply producing the proof?
Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution: “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” Is not the President of the United States accepting and acting on a Title bestowed by not only one, but multiple Foreign States when he accepts the UN “Title”? I would love to hear an explanation of “how this is not in violation of the Constitution”.
Do you still want to criticize me for having the opinion that the President frequently operates outside of his authority under the Constitution? I’m not a Constitutional Scholar; I’m just an alarmed Citizen who thinks that we have a President who does not respect the authority or “confines:” of the Constitution. I would enjoy entertaining any opinion that factually discredits the eight examples I have provided here.
AKA OBAMA NEEDS TO BE IMPEACHED WHEN THE REPUBLICANS TAKE THE HOUSE IN 2010 ASSUMING THE COURTS CONTINUE TO IGNORE ELIGIBILITY...AND PROSECUTED!...
“Man-Caused Disaster”By Sean Osborne Friday, January 29, 2010
As the old adage goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. The image above is worth all of that and more, but is neatly summed up with just three:
It is this man, wrapped head to toe in his radical, America-hating leftist politics and the assorted buffoons, clowns and feckless cabinet officals who will be directly responsible for the coming disaster that will befall our floundering Consititutional Republic. More responsible than the America-hating terrorists who will actually perpetrate the damage upon us.
How can I say such a thing?
I can say such a thing because it’s plain as day that during the past 12 months he has systematically dismantled the defenses put into place over the past eight years to defend our nation, defenses designed apprehend those who seek to murder us and our children, to interrogate the captured enemy in order to obtain the critical intelligence required to prosecute the war and prevent murder on a mass scale. On top of all this he has given these cold-blooded murders, these very deadly enemy combatants, the same rights as those they seek to murder. Terrorists have become “lawyered-up” and mirandized on his watch. This is sheer insanity that is intentionally designed to cause this nation incredible harm and damage.
No man in the history of this Constitutional Republic has done such irresponsbile things, things which are diametrically opposed to the oath of office he swore to faithfully execute. Contrary to his haughty words, I do not believe he loves this country. I believe the exact opposite is true and it would take nothing short of a major miracle to convince me otherwise. He is as unpresidential as any sitting American President has, can or will ever be. God help us until the next election when we can exercise our enfranchised rights to throw this bum and his entire cadre out. God grant that we can arrive at that future point unharmed. That’s all I have to say about the matter except for, in case you haven’t noticed, the fact that the man so infuriates and disgusts me that I no longer can bear to utter the sylables let alone put his name into print.
For the rest of the story and an excellent, must see video I direct you now to the Hot Air blog for this report.
Inept? We think he knows full well what he is doing!...he's a USURPER...GUILTY OF TREASON...A TRAITOR!...intent on destroying America!
Resident’s ineptness quite clear after a yearBy E. THOMAS McCLANAHAN
The Kansas City Star
What happened to the bright dreams, the hope and change? A year ago, fate handed President Obama one of the most tantalizing political opportunities in history.
His party enjoyed a blowout election. The Republicans were leaderless and devoid of ideas. The Democrats had hefty majorities in both houses of Congress. Obama had stratospheric approval ratings and the support of a nation profoundly fearful of the future.
And then he threw it all away. He outsourced chunks of his job to a left-wing congressional leadership that has learned nothing and forgotten nothing for the past 35 years.
What came next was one appalling legislative blob after another: the stimulus package that hasn’t stimulated, the cap-and-trade monster, the health care power-grab.
When Obama assumed office, he was still something of an enigma. Many asked: Who is this guy?
Well, now we know a lot more. The bottom line: He isn’t a good politician. Politics is an art, and Obama’s basic competence is highly suspect. He lacks the personal radar an effective politician must have — the instinct to know when you’re on solid ground and when you’re tilting at windmills. Obama has spent a year tilting at windmills.
The “art of the possible” isn’t static. With steady accomplishments, an effective leader can expand the zone of the possible. A winner draws new adherents, builds coalitions, acquires new strength for the next challenge.
For a weak leader, the opposite applies: His credibility shrinks, and so do the ranks of his followers. His ability to accomplish anything becomes doubtful.
This is the vicious circle that now ensnares Obama. He has succeeded mainly in uniting his opposition and dividing his own camp. House and Senate Democrats are openly sniping at one another. The hard left — Obama’s base — is writing him off as inept.
The sense of disarray was only reinforced by his State of the Union speech.
Let’s give a cheer or two for the proposed cut in the capital gains tax for small businesses and the spending freeze plan — while noting that the latter applies to only a small part of the budget, doesn’t begin until next year and comes only after spending was recklessly accelerated. Obama wants to “freeze” outlays at stratospheric, stimulus-package levels.
If Obama is serious about two of his main points — a second stimulus package and his renewed call for Congress to pass health care reform — then he has learned nothing from the last year and the political earthquake in Massachusetts.
Despite its enormous cost, last year’s stimulus package has failed to live up to expectations. So, his response is: Do it again?
On health care, he offered no suggestions to deadlocked Democrats as to how they should pass a bill disliked by most Americans. The House can’t pass the Senate bill and the Senate couldn’t pass the House bill. Obama’s advice: Keep trying what isn’t working.
Like Jimmy Carter, Obama squandered much of his political capital in his first year. Before last week’s speech, it was possible to argue that it wasn’t too late for him to adopt a new approach and move toward the center. Now it’s clear he has no such intention.
A big clue to Obama appeared long before his election, when he was still a senator.
He’s stubborn. With the tide indisputably turning in Iraq, he remained opposed to the troop surge and claimed it was bound to fail. When he took office, the economic landscape was completely transformed. But he refused to put off health care and cap-and-trade, even though voters thought the economy was a much higher priority.
He has another problem, most evident in his handling of foreign policy.
He sold out the Czechs and Poles on missile defense to appease Russia — and got nothing in return. He stuck with “engagement” on Iran, missing an opportunity to voice full-throated support for the Iranian opposition. In dealing with China, he shrank from the topic of human rights.
The question raised by French President Nicolas Sarkozy — “Is he weak?” — must be answered in the affirmative.
The media portrait of Obama during the campaign made much of his cool, unflappable temperament. But that ignored his most telling qualities. Stubborn and weak is not what you want in a president. No wonder he’s already talking about the prospect of a single term.
Barack Obama, commander in chief of the free world, gave notice that if things don't work out in politics then he just might end up behind the microphone doing basketball commentary.
President Obama spent several minutes today during the second half of the Georgetown-Duke basketball game at the Verizon Center in Washington with broadcast team Verne Lundquist and Clark Kellogg. He provided insightful analysis as well as getting off a few jabs and zingers, such as:
"After retirement, I'm coming after your job, Clark. I'm just letting you know. So you either have three more years or seven more years."
"I went to the Republican House caucus just yesterday to prove that I could go to my right once in a while."
-- Dan LoumenaPhoto: President Obama greets fans at the Verizon Center, where he spent several minutes with the television broadcast team. Credit: Alex Brandon / Associated Press
From the STEADY DRIP I got this picture from another source, and I cannot guarantee its authenticity.
That's the whole problem. One can't be certain about tnything when it comes to AKA Obama.
The Question Remains: Who is Barack Obama?
Submitted by Phil on Tue, Jan 26, 2010356 Comments
Ahead of the State of the Union speech by America’s 44th President, questions continue to swirl concerning who Mr. Obama is and exactly for what he stands.
The most liberal Senator in America gets elected in the most crooked election in the nation’s history and the lamebrains who support him think he is opposed because of his race. These same halfwits think a phony document posted on the Internet proves this same con man is eligible to hold the highest office in the land. He is opposed because he is a crooked big city con man with a socialist agenda. Alan Keyes is strongly opposed to Obama. Is he a racist? Is Michael Steele a racist? Is this guy a racist? http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/12/we-were-tricked-in-2008-now-fix.html
Are these women racists? http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-obama-racist.html
Do you really think AKA Obama would have won the election if all the things he is hiding were made known?
Do you really think AKA Obama will be able to finish his first term if all the things he is hiding are made known?
Why aren’t the polls on the birth certificate issue 100% in favor of AKA Obama practicing the virtue of full disclosure? It makes sense that supporters of AKA Obama would want the issue settled along with everyone else. I guess there is a significant portion of the population who are opposed to releasing the birth certificate because they are afraid of what it will reveal. I would conclude that those opposed to releasing all of Obama’s history are frightened of the truth just like AKA Obama.
If you are not suspicious of a man who hides his history I have a bridge in the desert I want to sell you. If you are unwilling to call for an investigation of a man who attempts to sell you a bridge in the desert I have some beach front property in Florida at the intersection of I75 and Florida # 29 that I want you to buy. If you place a down payment on a contract for the bridge in the desert and the beach front property in the swamp I would conclude that you voted for Obama.
In 1961, the Public Health Services, U. S Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Division published the "Vital Statistics of the United StatesHere is a blank copy of the Standard Certificate of Live Birth. This is the information being hidden by Obama
Plus read the article that is included with the blank copy.
Somehow, you know its coming. That OMG moment is just around the corner. You can feel the inescapable reality creeping up on you. Something will leak. Someone will spill the beans. “For nothing is hid that shall not be made manifest, nor anything secret that shall not be known and come to light.” Luke 8:17 Obama “I have nothing to hide but I’m hiding it.” http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/04/aka-obama-fans-all-together-now-say-omg.html
Can you pass the: Obama Eligibility Logic Test? http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/09/obama-eligibility-logic-test.htm
For those who are non historic, a sugar tit which Dick Wolf and Chevy Chase smeared Mel Gibson with in his calling a California Police Officer that, is a term from the good olde days when babies were given a cloth dipped in sugar to pacify them to give the mother a break in nursing.
One can in real data in female police officers being too light and beaten up by suspects are in fact sugar tits to the feminist movement, putting women, other officers and the public into jeopardy (criminals also as criminals who beat on female officers get shot for doing it), is something which should indeed be examined, because I have always ascribed to the fact that Police Officers and Firemen must be males due to the heavy and dangerous work, at least six feet three inches and be a fit 230 pounds.
I was stunned the other day in a store to see a kid I had not seen for decades in his being almost 7 feet, had to have been 250 pounds fit and this is the type of Fireman and Officer I would mandate America be served by.
What this all leads into is the Sweet Teets of Nancy Pelosi who has developed a 2 million dollar nursing of public money in her travels and a pacifier of over one hundred thousand dollars in booze.
From the list of booze Nancy and her Democrats have stocked in her pantry, the Democrats do not drink anything cheap. They drink straight shots, because one does not mix expensive liquors with coke or water.
When this blog noted it looked like the Democrats and especially Queen Pelosi appeared stoned or drunk at Obama's State of the Scrotum speech, the data appears exactly that they were.
Why this matters is, I have seen enough Obama suckling in my days to know once they get on the sugar tits their hands start grabbing discounts too. By this I mean, when Nancy Pelosi develops a taste for DeWars Scotch which is $200 for 750mls, she is not going to be paying for it, but a bottle will end up in her purse from the wet bar in every trip she and her drunks take as taxpayer expense.
This blog exclusively noted this in the Obama hidden funds of almost a trillion dollars in travel in 2009. This is not White House money, but it is Pentagon funding hidden for Obama. These scoundrels are always loading up on free first dates, Copenhagen junkets and living high off the lipstick hog. They pay for nothing and stick Americans with these lavish bills hidden away.
Judicial Watch uncovered the Pelosi spending, but what MUST BE REQUIRED NOW is a complete audit of Pelosi flights in manifest and lodgings to determine just what is and is not disappearing from the travel supplies.
The FBI must be brought in and a search made of the Speakers office and her home to ascertain if there is anything from toilet paper to expensive booze which she is stealing from the government which is ending up in private use.
I put nothing past these folks in lifting toiletries even. This must all be reviewed by the GAO and IRS also, to match what Speaker Pelosi is spending and what is appearing at her homes, vacations, offices and what is disappearing from Air Force flights.
Any Nancy who can not make things easier for the Air Force, but demands she be picked up at federal military base instead of the public San Francisco airport is going to be helping herself to other goodies.
Plainly put, Nancy Pelosi, should be forced to step down as Democrat Jim Wright was. She though will not in her lavish queenly spending of taxpayer's money. It therefore must come to a criminal audit of the Speakers finances, what is and what is not disappearing from Air Force flights, all for the purpose of finding the criminalities involved with Ms. Pelosi and the Democrats around her.
Democrats should try drinking tap water as God intended. It certainly is cheaper than two hundred dollar a bottle whiskey and 3 dollar Mexican Corona beer.
In that too, the Democrats booze choices are mostly expensive foreign imports.
They can't even buy American booze to get drunk on.
Audit these crooks.
I know how frustrating it must be for Dr. Taitz to continue this process. And, I am sure that I am only one of millions and millions of Americans that are hoping and prying that this case continues forward.
To many of us, just the thought that there is an imposter, and a socialistic one at that, ’squatting’ in our White House is sickening. I am certain that I am far from alone when I state that proving obama’s Constitutional qualifications to serve as president is of utmost importance.
You and I, as former Marines, had to prove our legal status when we enlisted in our beloved Marine Corps. Is it too much to ask this (imitation) ‘commander in chief to do the same? He is admitting his guilt simply by his continuing failure to provide those he serves with his legitimate qualifications. There is no other possible reason that he will not provide, happily, the required documentation. He is a total fake, and this situation MUST be cleared up.
AMERICA BUYS THE NEW AND IMPROVED OBAMA!...PICKS UP 14 POINTS IN 5 WEEKS!...NOT BAD FOR A USURPER AND CHICAGO THUG!...
Chicago Tribune supports David Hoffman, Obama endorsed Alexi Giannoulias in 2006 Democratic primary, IL Democrat Senate primary, Giannoulias gave $10000 to Obama’s campaign, Obama Giannoulias Progressives
The Chicago Tribune supports David Hoffman, opponent of Alexi Giannoulias, who had close ties to Barack Obama and Chicago corruption figures. Hoffman and Giannoulias are competing in the Democrat primary for the former senate seat of Obama.
From the Chicago tribune, January 28, 2010.
“Once again: Hoffman”
“An honest mistake, yes, and a careless one. But it was handled with the forthright integrity we’ve come to expect from Hoffman. And for all the whining from the Giannoulias camp about negative attacks, it’s the only statement whose factual basis has been challenged successfully. Unless you count this: In a press release this week, Giannoulias accuses Hoffman of citing a “non-existent Daily Herald story” in an ad that references loans made by Giannoulias’ family bank to convicted influence-peddler Tony Rezko.
“David Hoffman should stop insulting voters, take down this smear job and put up an ad talking about jobs,” it says.
We’ll leave it to voters to decide if linking Giannoulias to Rezko is a “smear job,” but the Daily Herald story does exist, and the Giannoulias camp knows it. Hoffman’s ad got the date wrong. Careless again. But it has allowed Giannoulias to present himself again as the victim.
None of this changes our opinion. As we wrote in our endorsement: Hoffman, the former inspector general for the city of Chicago, “is an incorruptible man who tells truth to power…”
Hoffman is the Democrats’ best choice to bring the highest ethical standards to the U.S. Senate.”
From the Chicago tribune, June 12, 2007.
“Obama endorses Alexi Giannoulias for state treasurer”
“But Obama’s record of local endorsements — one measure of how he has used his nascent political clout — has drawn criticism from those who say it reflects his deference to Chicago’s established political order and runs counter to his public calls for clean government.
In the 2006 Democratic primary, for example, Obama endorsed first-time candidate Alexi Giannoulias for state treasurer despite reports about loans Giannoulias’ family-owned Broadway Bank made to crime figures. Records show Giannoulias and his family had given more than $10,000 to Obama’s campaign, which banked at Broadway.”
“Barack Obama and campaign contributor Alexi Giannoulias”
“Alexi Giannoulias—a “man who has long been dogged by charges that the bank his family owns helped finance a Chicago crime figure” and “who became Illinois state treasurer” in 2006 after Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “vouched for him”—”pledged to raise $100,000 for the senator’s Oval Office bid,” Charles Hurt reported September 5, 2007, in the New York Post.
The September 5, 2007, Chicago fundraiser was omitted from Obama’s public schedule and the event was closed to the press,” Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported.
“Before he promised to raise funds for Obama, Giannoulias bankrolled Michael ‘Jaws’ Giorango, a Chicagoan twice convicted of bookmaking and promoting prostitution.”
“Obama and Giannoulias reportedly met on the basketball court “in the late 1990s … at the East Bank Club, a luxurious spot in downtown Chicago,” Jodi Kantor wrote June 1, 2007, in the New York Times. Now, “thanks in part to [Obama’s] backing, [Giannoulias] is now the Illinois state treasurer. Other regular gymmates include the president of the Cook County Board of Commissioners, the director of the Illinois Department of Public Health and several investment bankers who were early and energetic fund-raisers,” Kantor wrote.”
“Obama the king maker”
“”Did U.S. Senator Barack Obama clear the field in the Democratic state treasurer’s race?” lawyer and political analyst Russ Stewart wrote January 4, 2006.”
“But none announced, and all deferred to Alexi Giannoulias, a 29-year-old Chicago investment banker who was an early supporter of Obama in his 2004 Senate race, whose father owns Broadway Bank, and whose family helped bankroll the Obama campaign. Giannoulias has said that he will campaign as a ‘progressive,’ and he has promised to put more than $1 million in family funds into the race,” Stewart wrote.”
“In March 2006, Giannoulias said that “his ‘good friend and mentor, Barack Obama,’ inspired him to run.”
In fact, Giannoulias’ “endorsers” were “essentially the base of the Obama coalition: white north side progressives and south side blacks.””
Obama endorses Giannoulias Ad
Post Obama Chicago?
In Indiana Congressman Mike Pence (R) has denied he will run against Senate Incumbent Evan Bayh (D) even though polls show Pence would win handily.
Strategically this is a mistake. In the overall scheme 1 senate vote can often make a difference. Ask Scott Brown. Pence imo has aspirations for the White House in 2012 which may play a role in his viewpoint of the 2010 senate seat.
Apparently Joe Lieberman(I) is considering crossing over to the Republicans. Joe's a nice guy and all, but gosh wasn't Joe the 60th vote on so many of the critical ObamaCare December votes, including a vote to say the whole concept was Constitutional when it isn't. I think I might tell Joe to stay an (I) but if he wanted to vote with the Republicans he could. Sometimes stink just doesn't wash off and Joe you stink.
As a side note let me reemphasis I do not hold many Republicans in much higher regard than marxist/democrats who have voted Obama's agenda. Or have turned a blind eye to the eligibility issue. What I am advocating is the replacement as fast as possible by men and women of integrity of the ones that need to go. The Republican party integrity is hanging by a thread with the American populous. The Democrats are the walking dead. We want honest representation, constitutional adherence, smaller government, and we demand our personal freedoms.
Which individual candidates will stick to those principles time will reveal, but those who will not must be removed by recall or voted out. That is my position.
Among the many untruths and misstatements in his so-called State of the Union Address, Barack Obama criticized the Supreme Court for issuing a ruling allowing foreign corporations to influence elections in the United States. The statement, which caused Democrats including Nancy Pelosi to rise and applaud, was a lie.
The next day the White house was forced to “clarify” this statement, saying that US companies owned by foreigners could contribute to political campaigns. That is also a lie and a new “clarification” had to be issued.
In the history of the nation, presidents have only mentioned the Supreme Court nine times in a State of the Union Address. In each instance, nothing antagonistic was said. Obama’s direct attack on the Supreme Court with the Justices present was a true first and shows Obama’s real temperament, one of anger and hostility to anyone he disagrees with.
source: The Religious Freedom Coalition is a non-profit educational organization head quartered in Washington, DC.
Janet Napolitano may be a perfectly wonderful daughter, sister, niece, aunt, and significant other.
However, she has no business serving as Secretary of Homeland Security, unless one is more concerned with affirmative action quotas than the lives and well-being of 300 million Americans.
Placing Napolitano in that vital post is a clear indication that President Obama is in total denial about the fact that America is at war. It also exposes his flagrant disregard for US borders and immigration laws.
Echoing Obama’s position, Napolitano considers it her job to be a “Welcoming Greeter” for illegal aliens, rather than enforcer of the law. In other words, she is smitten with bass-akwards thinking, a genetic disorder common in practicing liberals.
To date, under Napolitano’s watch, America has suffered two acts of attempted terrorism, one of which was successful.
Her “the system worked” comment after the Christmas Day “underwear bomber” episode is still amusing people everywhere, especially Osama bin Laden and his Al-Quaeda killer thugs.
However, even some Democrats are finally waking up to the arrogance and ineptness of this woman and they are not amused.
As reported, in part, at CNN.com (1):
“Washington (CNN) - Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is in hot water for not appearing Wednesday at a congressional hearing on the failed attempt to blow up a U.S.-bound airliner on Christmas Day.
“House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson said the committee had been told Napolitano would be out of the country and agreed to have her deputy, Jane Holl Lute, testify in her absence.
“But Thompson said he understood that Napolitano's schedule changed and she was in Washington. He said the committee should have been informed if she was unable to attend for another reason.”
So, the big question of the day is: Where in bloody hell is Janet Napolitano?
From the perspective of this unbiased reporter, it is clear that Napolitano has abandoned her post in pursuit of one or more of the following objectives:
( ) Advising illegal aliens that the United States now regards them as “Newly Arrived Fugitives,” rather than the correct designation as invading criminals.
( ) Personally escorting “Newly Arrived Fugitives” across the Mexican border and directly to DNC voter registration offices with an eye to growing the Democrat Party base in time for the 2010 elections.
( ) Updating her DHS memo concerning right-wing extremists to include all Massachusetts voters who voted for Scott Brown, including Brown himself, as potential terrorists that the government needs to scrutinize very carefully.
Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security?
Come on Mr. President, its time to face reality: Napolitano must go!
John W. Lillpop
In their rush to dole out a trillion dollars to fund liberal pet projects in the name of stimulating the battered economy, the Democrat-controlled Congress and President Obama failed to address a major domestic crisis that threatens America's homeland security, social order, and cultural heritage, and which costs taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars each year.
The issue is the unchecked invasion of our sovereign land by scores of millions of illegal aliens, mostly from the failed state of Mexico.
Ironically, many of the concerns voiced by liberals could be mitigated, at least partially, by aggressively working to solve the illegal aliens mess.
Concerned about education and overcrowded class rooms?
Removing 12-38 million invaders would reduce class sizes dramatically, and improve the quality of instruction by weeding out illegals unable to keep up because of language and cultural barriers.
Concerned about overcrowded prisons and jails and the need to spend hundreds of billions to erect even more?
Approximately 30 percent of all inmates are illegal aliens, people who should not even be here to begin with.
Concerned about run away health care costs and the tens of millions whom are uninsured?
A disproportionate percentage of illegal aliens are uninsured and do not otherwise pay for their heath care, although they somehow manage to send approximately $30 billion a year back to Mexico. Medical services not paid for by illegals are dumped on the backs of Americans who belong here.
Concerned about violent crime, drugs, gangs and the general deterioration of the rule of law?
In addition to the crime of being in America unlawfully, illegal aliens exacerbate crime in this nation.
Concerned about the loss of jobs and reduced standard of living for working Americans?
Illegal aliens undercut American citizens by working for lower wages and without benefits. In effect, they steal jobs from real Americans.
President Obama has encouraged Americans to see that the horrendous economic meltdown also includes a "great opportunity" for the future.
Perhaps the president and his colleagues in the Democrat party should set the example by taking advantage of this unique opportunity to end, and reverse, illegal immigration, a crisis that plagues the nation's economic, social, cultural, and educational systems?
For instance, unemployed American citizens should be used to complete the border fence between America and Mexico, and be trained to work with law enforcement authorities to ferret out illegals for deportation.
That would put needy Americans to work on a rule of law issue vital to our sovereignty and homeland security, and would make jobs held by illegal aliens available to citizens.
With Democrats committed to spending trillions of dollars of taxpayer money to revive the economy, why not fix the illegal alien mess, once and for all, by building a viable border fence and by sending those who have no business being here back to their nations of origin?
John W. Lillpop
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Down for the Count?
By Dave Macy
It would be presumptive on my part to declare the Obama presidency DOA. While it may stink like a rotting corpse, the administration is not ready to be embalmed and sized for a coffin—not just yet. It’s a long way until the November elections and after the Massacre in Massachusetts any other president would have realized there is little Hope for any Change brought on by grandiose (a nice word for Marxist) plans to move America deeper into a totalitarian state.More...
Larry comes highly recommended...If you want to listen to someone who is articulate, affable and speaks common sense...Larry is your guy!
by: R.J. MoellerUnlike the number of viewers for the president's first (of four) State of the Union Address, the length of this year's speech increased drastically. It was more than 70 minutes, more than 7,000 words, and full of surprises. The biggest surprise had to be that the president sounded largely committed to forging ahead with policy initiatives such as Cap-and-Trade and health care reform that have sparked the bi-partisan back-lashes we've seen since the town hall meetings of August 2009.
I've read and re-read the transcript of the SOTU a few times now, and here are some of my thoughts on a lack-luster performance.
After dispensing with the customary pleasantries, the first thing that stood out to me was this sentence here:
It's tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our progress was inevitable -- that America was always destined to succeed...And despite all our divisions and disagreements; our hesitations and our fears; America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, as one people.
'Tis true, Mr. President, that many Americans take their freedom and prosperity for granted. In fact, I'd say that this ingratitude and total lack of awareness is one of the most glaring shortcomings of our modern society (and education system). But what he, and most progressive-Left politicians, almost never want to accept, let alone proclaim, is that the two primary causes of our success as a nation have been military conquests and free market economics. (Not welfare entitlements or same-sex marriage ballot initiatives.)
If you are serious about teaching the history of this nation, you must include the good with the bad. It hasn't been all racism and Jim Crowe. It hasn't been all government intervention saving the poor, huddling masses from the exploits of monopolistic fat-cats. It hasn't been a secular, "Get your Church away from my State", mentality that gave the American people their moral clarity and fortitude to win wars and overcome domestic tragedies.
This is a Judeo-Christian, free market, liberty-loving, hard-working, government-mistrusting nation. This is a God-Family-Country (and in that order) nation. This is a Center-Right nation. That doesn't mean atheistic or liberal or progressive-Left citizens are less patriotic. It simply means that the ideology that informs their view of the world hasn't been emblematic of our story. We've succeeded where others have failed because of our ideas, ideals, and values. I believe Dennis Prager explains those values best:
Moving on, the president made what I presume was an unintended critique of high tax rates:
This recession has also compounded the burdens that America's families have been dealing with for decades -- the burden of working harder and longer for less; of being unable to save enough to retire or help kids with college.
So what is the solution to this problem, Mr. President? Is it really more government intervention? Isn't the reason people pay so much of their income to their state and federal governments that their state and federal governments tax them so much? You're solutions all involve more government intervention, which all require more tax dollars to pay for them, which means everyone has to work more than four months into the calendar year to afford those taxes.
Oh, and taxes impact everyone, not just those "rich" people who make $250,000...I mean, $200,000...I mean "whatever arbitrary number Axelrod or Gibbs blurts out in staff meeting that morning".
If Wal-Mart gets taxed because Barbara Boxer or Barney Frank or Charlie Rangel has it in for them, Wal-Mart's prices go up and their customers make up the difference. This is how business works. I know it was tough to learn about the inner-workings of a business when the closest you've ever been to one is standing outside with a bull-horn demanding free stuff for the community you were currently organizing, but this is how the rest of us "little people" you insist you are helping live.
Continuing with the speech, Obama then added:
For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast enough. Some are frustrated; some are angry. They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded but hard work on Main Street isn't; or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems. They are tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness. They know we can't afford it. Not now.
This entire paragraph is, how shall I say - claptrap. The "change" we need (and want) is away from reckless spending, higher taxes, and looming inflation...and towards fiscal responsibility, political accountability, and legislative transparency.
Anyone want to make the case that any of those three increased this past year?
I'd also like to take this moment to officially declare the "Wall Street to Main Street" metaphor the most trite, over-used, brain-dead phrase in the English language. Both sides of the political aisle are guilty of indulging in its usage. Stop. Please. Seriously. We get it. Some people look and live like the Monopoly guy, monocle and all, while others are hobos with nothing to wear for clothes but a barrel with two straps holding it in place.
Also, the call to stop with all the "partisanship" from the most partisan, polarizing figure in the country rings deaf on any sane ear. His administration has been defiant in their implementation of Chicago-style intimidation tactics. The leaders in both houses of congress have blocked GOP participation in any of the meetings about health care reform. Democrats have had overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate all year and could have done whatever they wanted without a single Republican.
Scott Brown didn't win Barney Frank's district in Massachusetts because voters wanted to send a message to Republicans that they better start making nice with President Obama. Spare me. Elections have consequences, remember?
The GOP certainly doesn't have to say "no" to everything Democrats want to do. Just all the bad ideas.
When I ran for president, I promised I wouldn't just do what was popular -- I would do what was necessary. And if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today. More businesses would certainly have closed. More homes would have surely been lost.
First off, President Bush was the one to sign TARP in to law. There is still disagreement, even among conservatives, as to whether or not TARP was a good thing, but everyone knows Bush deserves the credit or blame for it. What President Obama did was allocate another nearly $800 billion for what became known as the Stimulus Package. This is an entirely different animal altogether.
The Stimulus was Keynesian Economics at its "finest." Obama believes that the government can spend its way out of a recession. Math and numbers and history all have something to say about that, but where as TARP funds are almost all required to be paid back (as many already have been...with interest), the Stimulus funds will never be recouped by the financier of them (see: you, the taxpayer).
The White House continues to make its case that it saved 2 million (or was it 3 million) jobs and that things would have been worse had Obama not acted and saved the economy. How do you prove a job was saved? What is the standard used to decide that? How do we trust an administration that got caught manipulating the figures of jobs created by the Stimulus?
The plan that has made all of this possible, from the tax cuts to the jobs, is the Recovery Act. That's right -- the Recovery Act, also known as the Stimulus Bill. Economists on the left and the right say that this bill has helped save jobs and avert disaster. But you don't have to take their word for it.
Translation: I don't have any sources (outside of New York Times columnists) to corroborate my claim that everyone thinks the Stimulus was a smashing success...so just trust me on this one, guys.
That is why jobs must be our number one focus in 2010, and that is why I am calling for a new jobs bill tonight. Now, the true engine of job creation in this country will always be America's businesses. But government can create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers.
On second thought, I take that back. The conditions the government can create to help businesses flourish are ones in which they are nowhere to be found. Protect us abroad. Enforce the laws at home. Keep out of things you don't understand and have no Constitutional authority to involve yourself with.
From the day I took office, I have been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious -- that such efforts would be too contentious, that our political system is too gridlocked, and that we should just put things on hold for awhile. For those who make these claims, I have one simple question: How long should we wait? How long should America put its future on hold?
You spent an entire year essentially on one issue (health care). No one wanted it, and people showed up to vote in liberal states to prove it to you.
How long are you going to wait to start cutting out the waste and fraud you said could pay for your ambitious plans? How long until REAL spending freezes are enacted? How long did it take you to make a decision on sending troops to Afghanistan? How long are the lines at the airport going to have to get before we start focusing the profiling done on Muslim males between the ages of 18-35, and not Grandma Mema?
After droning on about other various issues, the president finally addressed his disastrous attempts to bring socialized medicine to this country.
This is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people. And I know that with all the lobbying and horse-trading, this process left most Americans wondering "what's in it for me?"
So you see, the real reason Obamacare isn't the law of the land right now is that you dolts didn't understand his 100+ speeches explaining health care reform. Plus those lobbyists (a.k.a. people who came out for town hall meetings and Tea Party rallies) obstructed the majestic view of government-run health care for the rest of us.
Obama takes no responsibility for proposing something no one wanted or wants, rather, he feels bad he wasn't seen and heard more. Yeesh!
Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it's time to try something new. To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now. We face a deficit of trust -- deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years. To close that credibility gap we must take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; and to give our people the government they deserve.
It's more than a "credibility gap", Mr. President. We absolutely need the government for certain, specific duties to be discharged. (See: Constitution). You promised a "new kind of politics" during your 2008 campaign. Where is any of that? Why didn't you make Pelosi and Reid put ALL of the health care debates on C-SPAN? Why didn't you see to it that bills be placed on-line for at least 5 days before being voted on so the public can scour them?
Excuse me if I don't believe that anything is going to actually change. I hope and pray it does, but enough talk. Do it. Change things. How can we trust our government with big things when they can't even follow through on these little promises.
To quote someone both of us respect, Mr. President:
His master replied, 'Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. (Matthew 25:23)
There were parts that I appreciated in the SOTU Address. I give President Obama all the credit in the world for even just suggesting that nuclear power and drilling at home are legitimate options to help bring costs of energy down.
I enjoyed hearing a liberal Democrat talk about American values being great, but as I said earlier, the key questions are "What are those values?" and "Where did they come from?" He was spot-on in identifying the cyncicism and angst people have towards government, but he is incapable of accepting the notion that people don't just dislike the pony-tails Big Sister has given them; they want the federal government out of their hair altogether.