Tag: Obama

What’s wrong with Hippy Punching?

Posted on

Hmmmm:

Top Obama adviser David Axelrod got an earful of the liberal blogosphere’s anger at the White House moments ago, when a blogger on a conference call directly called out Axelrod over White House criticism of the left, accusing the administration of “hippie punching.”

“We’re the girl you’ll take under the bleachers but you won’t be seen with in the light of day,” the blogger, Susan Madrak of Crooks and Liars, pointedly told Axelrod on the call, which was organzied for liberal bloggers and progressive media.

The call seemed to perfectly capture the tense dynamic that exists between the White House and the online and organized left: Though White House advisers in the past have dumped on the left, anonymously and even on the record, Axelrod repeatedly pleaded with the bloggers on the call for help in pumping up the flagging enthusiasm of rank and file Dems.

“You play a great role in informing people about the stakes of elections,” Axelrod told the bloggers. “One of the reasons I was eager to expend time was to enlist you.”

But hovering over the call was the obvious disconnect between this plea for help and statements like those of Robert Gibbs, who recently pilloried the “professional left” for being overly critical of the White House.

That tension burst out into the open when Madrak directly asked Axelrod: “Have you ever heard of hippie punching?” That prompted a long silence from Axelrod.

“You want us to help you, the first thing I would suggest is enough of the hippie punching,” Madrak added. “We’re the girl you’ll take under the bleachers but you won’t be seen with in the light of day.”

via The Plum Line – Liberal blogger directly confronts David Axelrod, accuses White House of “hippie punching”.

Personally, I think Hippy Punching is pretty cool:

See? 😉

The G.O.P’s “Pledge to America” is nothing more retread Neo-Conservative, Theocracy nonsense

Posted on3 Comments

This is pretty rich; The Republican Party is trotting out the same old George W. Bush style of Governence, with some new promises. Promises that the Republican Party actually expect the American people to believe that they will actually keep.

Let us go through this thing, shall we?

This comes Via CBS NEWS:

CBS News has obtained a final draft of House Republicans’ legislative agenda for the next Congress, a 21-page "Pledge to America" that they will formally unveil Thursday morning at a Virginia hardware store.

"The need for urgent action to repair our economy and reclaim our government for the people cannot be overstated," the introduction says.

It continues: "With this document, we pledge to dedicate ourselves to the task of reconnecting our highest aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values our nation was founded on, the principles we stand for, and the priorities of our people. This is our Pledge to America."

Let look at this thing shall we? I mean, I need a good laugh! I will spare you the hum drum, "Patriot" sounding nonsense and puffery, and I will get to the meat and point out the crap.

We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.
We pledge to make government more transparent in its actions, careful in its stewardship, and honest in its dealings.
We pledge to uphold the purpose and promise of a better America, knowing that to whom much is given, much is expected and that the blessings of our liberty buoy the hopes of mankind.
We make this pledge bearing true faith and allegiance to the people we represent, and we invite fellow citizens and patriots to join us in forming a new governing agenda for America.

Hmmm, Sounds like they want to turn America into a theocracy. 

Continuing:

Permanently Stop All Job-Killing Tax Hikes: We will help the economy by permanently stopping all tax increases, currently scheduled to take effect January 1, 2011. That means protecting middle-class families, seniors worried about their retirement, and the entrepreneurs and family-owned small businesses on which we depend to create jobs in America.

• Give Small Businesses a Tax Deduction: We will allow small business owners to take a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their business income. This will provide entrepreneurs with a much-needed infusion of capital for investment and new hiring.

• Rein In the Red Tape Factory in Washington, DC: Excessive federal regulation is a de facto tax on employers and consumers that stifles job creation, hampers innovation and postpones investment in the economy. When the game is always changing, small businesses cannot properly plan for the future. To provide stability, we will require congressional approval of any new federal regulation that has an annual cost to our economy of $100 million or more. This is the threshold at which the government deems a regulation “economically significant.” If a regulation is so “significant” and costly that it may harm job creation, Congress should vote on it first.

• Repeal Job-Killing Small Business Mandates: One of the most controversial mandates of the Democrats’ government takeover of health care requires small businesses to report to the Internal Revenue Service any purchases that run more than $600. This 1099 reporting mandate is so overbearing that the IRS ombudsman has determined that the agency is ill-equipped to handle all the resulting paperwork.. We will repeal this job-killing small business mandate.

This was all promised before and never was enacted.

Act Immediately to Reduce Spending: There is no reason to wait to reduce wasteful and unnecessary spending. Congress should move immediately to cancel unspent “stimulus” funds, and block any attempts to extend the timeline for spending “stimulus” funds. Throwing more money at a stimulus plan that is not working only wastes taxpayer money and puts us further in debt.

• Cut Government Spending to Pre-Stimulus, Pre-Bailout Levels: With common-sense exceptions for seniors, veterans, and our troops, we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to begin paying down the debt, balancing the budget, and ending the spending spree in Washington that threatens our children’s future.

• Establish a Hard Cap on New Discretionary Spending: We must put common-sense limits on the growth of government and stop the endless increases. Only in Washington is there an expectation that whatever your budget was last year, it will be more this year and even more the next. We will set strict budget caps to limit federal spending on an annual basis. Budget caps were used in the 1990s, when a Republican Congress was able to bring the budget into balance and eventual surplus. By cutting discretionary spending from current levels and imposing a hard cap on future growth, we will save taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.

• Cut Congress’ Budget: This year, Congress increased its own budget by 5.8 percent at a time when families and small businesses across the country are cutting back. We will make Congress do more with less by significantly reducing its budget.

• Hold Weekly Votes on Spending Cuts: Earlier this year, House Republicans launched the YouCut initiative to combat the permissive culture of runaway spending in Congress. Over the course of nine weeks, YouCut produced proposals to save taxpayers more than $120 billion. We will continue to hold weekly votes on spending cuts.

• End TARP Once And For All: Americans are rightly outraged at the bailouts of businesses and entities that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior. We will cancel the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), a move that would save taxpayers roughly $16 billion.

• End Government Control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Since taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage companies that triggered the financial meltdown by giving too many high risk loans to people who couldn’t afford them, taxpayers were billed more than $145 billion to save the two companies. We will reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by ending their government takeover, shrinking their portfolios, and establishing minimum capital standards. This will save taxpayers as much as $30 billion.

• Impose a Net Federal Hiring Freeze of Non-Security Employees: Small businesses and entrepreneurs are the engine of our economy and should not be crowded out by unchecked government growth. We will impose a net hiring freeze on non-security federal employees and ensure that the public sector no longer grows at the expense of the private sector.

• Root Out Government Waste and Duplication: Once created, federal programs almost never go away, even if the problem they were created to address is no longer relevant. More than 20 states have addressed this problem by requiring that programs end – or “sunset” – by a date certain. We will adopt this requirement at the federal level to force Congress to determine if a program is worthy of continued taxpayer support.

• Reform the Budget Process to Focus on Long-Term Challenges: We will make the decisions that are necessary to protect our entitlement programs for today’s seniors and future generations. That means requiring a full accounting of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, setting benchmarks for these programs and reviewing them regularly, and preventing the expansion of unfunded liabilities.

Again, this was all promised before in the past; and was never done. In fact, spending increased under the previous President.

My favorite so far…:

There is literally no aspect of our economy or our society that the federal government doesn’t tax, regulate or subsidize, and often it does all three at the same time. The most recent edition of the Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance listed 2,050 different assistance programs available to states, local governments, for-profit and non-profit organizations, groups, and individuals. Taxpayers are literally funding programs from cradle to grave…

Yes, let’s defund programs for the actual needy, and the Handicapped — like my aunt. Let’s allow them starve. What idiots. 🙄

Here’s the REAL knee slapper!

• Read The Bill: We will ensure that bills are debated and discussed in the public square by publishing the text online for at least three days before coming up for a vote in the House of Representatives. No more hiding legislative language from the minority party, opponents, and the public. Legislation should be understood by all interested parties before it is voted on.

• Adhere To The Constitution: For too long, Congress has ignored the proper limits imposed by the Constitution on the federal government. Further, it has too often drafted unclear and muddled laws, leaving to an unelected judiciary the power to interpret what the law means and by what authority the law stands. This lack of respect for the clear Constitutional limits and authorities has allowed Congress to create ineffective and costly programs that add to the massive deficit year after year. We will require each bill moving through Congress to include a clause citing the specific constitutional authority upon which the bill is justified.

• Make It Easier to Cut Spending: By forbidding amendments on spending bills, Democrats have denied lawmakers the opportunity to tighten Washington’s belt and slash wasteful and duplicative programs. Structure dictates behavior, so we will let any lawmaker — Democrat or Republican — offer amendments to reduce spending.

• Advance Legislative Issues One at a Time: We will end the practice of packaging unpopular bills with “must-pass” legislation to circumvent the will of the American people. Instead, we will advance major legislation one issue at a time.

However, they wish to do this too:

* Pass Clean Troop Funding Bills: When asked to provide our troops with the resources they need, we will do so without delay. That means no more troop funding bills held up by unrelated policy changes, or extraneous domestic spending and pork-barrel projects.

• Keep Terrorists Out of America: We will prevent the government from importing terrorists onto American soil. We will hold President Obama and his administration responsible for any Guantanamo Bay detainees they release who return to fight against our troops or who have become involved in any terrorist plots or activities.

• Demand an Overarching Detention Policy: Foreign terrorists do not have the same rights as American citizens, nor do they have more rights than U.S. military personnel. We will work to ensure foreign terrorists, such as the 9/11 conspirators, are tried in military, not civilian, court. We will oppose all efforts to force our military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel operating overseas to extend “Miranda Rights” to foreign terrorists.

• Fully Fund Missile Defense: There is real concern that while the threat from Iranian intercontinental ballistic missiles could materialize as early as 2015, the government’s missile defense policy is not projected to cover the U.S. homeland until 2020. We will work to ensure critical funding is restored to protect the U.S. homeland and our allies from missile threats from rogue states such as Iran and North Korea.

• Require Tough Enforcement of Sanctions Against Iran: The Iranian regime is a state-sponsor of terrorism, has actively worked to harm our deployed troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and violates the rights and will of its own people. It has declared its determination to acquire a nuclear capability, which threatens its neighbors and the security of the United States. We will work to ensure the government aggressively and effectively implements the sanctions tools Congress has provided.

• Establish Operational Control of the Border: We must take action to secure our borders, and that action starts with enforcing our laws. We will ensure that the Border Patrol has the tools and authorities to establish operational control at the border and prohibit the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture from interfering with Border Patrol enforcement activities on federal lands.

• Work with State and Local Officials to Enforce Our Immigration Laws: The problem of illegal immigration and Mexican drug cartels engaged in an increasingly violent conflict means we need all hands on deck to address this challenge. We will reaffirm the authority of state and local law enforcement to assist in the enforcement of all federal immigration laws.

• Strengthen Visa Security: To stop terrorists like Omar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Christmas Day bomber, we will require the Department of Homeland Security to review all visa applications at high-risk consular posts and prevent aliens from attempting to avoid deportation after having their visas revoked.

As for immigration; how about we try this novel idea? END ALL IMMIGRATION FOR AT LEAST 10 YEARS! Then, using the Government’s already vast resources, we round up, and DEPORT ALL Illegal immigrants in this damn country and BAR THEM from returned to the United States, FOREVER!

Yes, we want to stick to the constitution; but we also want to keep funding the Military industrial complex! This one was really one that makes me ill:

Require Tough Enforcement of Sanctions Against Iran: The Iranian regime is a state-sponsor of terrorism, has actively worked to harm our deployed troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and violates the rights and will of its own people. It has declared its determination to acquire a nuclear capability, which threatens its neighbors and the security of the United States. We will work to ensure the government aggressively and effectively implements the sanctions tools Congress has provided.

Oh yes, let’s antagonize the hell out of Iran, until they strike one of our interests overseas; like Iraq and we end up having to go into that Country or some other one, with our interests in it. Which would lead to more War…….again!

Here is a novel idea. How about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan now? Because Iraq is done; let them people deal with their own Country. Afghanistan is basically lost. The Russians tried rebuilding that god-forsaken wilderness and failed. Why do we think that we can do it any better? Al-Qaeda is basically in Pakistan and so damned well protected; that we will never get them, unless we keep hitting civilian targets. Which only inspires more terrorists. Why not just use CIA Drones and bring out troops home? That or just admit that the United States purposefully let down it’s guard; and end the lie, in the first damned place!  That way, we can usually save some money for defending America from Terrorism here; seeing that we have created this situation of possible blow back from those wanting to hurt America, because of our stupid invasion of Iraq, which had zero to do with 9/11. How is that for a novel idea?

However, no, we would rather continue with the same old Neo-Conservative, Israel-appeasing, polices that caused 9/11 in the first damned place. In the process, we want to bankrupt the Country, by continuing to fund crap like that. Plus, we continue to fund other Countries, like Israel and their healthcare plan, which includes a public option; which America does not even have. Until this stops. America will continue to be in debt for a long time to come.

For what it is worth, I am not the only person that thinks this is crap. Even the folks at RedState hate it.

Memeorandum thread is here.

UPDATED: On the Bob Woodward Book

Posted on

I am poking my head back in again — to comment on the big Bob Woodward story, that is the top story on Memeorandum.

I am referring to this:

President Obama urgently looked for a way out of the war in Afghanistan last year, repeatedly pressing his top military advisers for an exit plan that they never gave him, according to secret meeting notes and documents cited in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward.

Frustrated with his military commanders for consistently offering only options that required significantly more troops, Obama finally crafted his own strategy, dictating a classified six-page “terms sheet” that sought to limit U.S. involvement, Woodward reports in “Obama’s Wars,” to be released on Monday.

According to Woodward’s meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.

“This needs to be a plan about how we’re going to hand it off and get out of Afghanistan,” Obama is quoted as telling White House aides as he laid out his reasons for adding 30,000 troops in a short-term escalation. “Everything we’re doing has to be focused on how we’re going to get to the point where we can reduce our footprint. It’s in our national security interest. There cannot be any wiggle room.”

Obama rejected the military’s request for 40,000 troops as part of an expansive mission that had no foreseeable end. “I’m not doing 10 years,” he told Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at a meeting on Oct. 26, 2009. “I’m not doing long-term nation-building. I am not spending a trillion dollars.”

Woodward’s book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, “We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.”

But most of the book centers on the strategy review, and the dissension, distrust and infighting that consumed Obama’s national security team as it was locked in a fierce and emotional struggle over the direction, goals, timetable, troop levels and the chances of success for a war that is almost certain to be one of the defining events of this presidency.

Obama is shown at odds with his uniformed military commanders, particularly Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of U.S. Central Command during the 2009 strategy review and now the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan.

Woodward reveals their conflicts through detailed accounts of two dozen closed-door secret strategy sessions and nearly 40 private conversations between Obama and Cabinet officers, key aides and intelligence officials.

Tensions often turned personal. National security adviser James L. Jones privately referred to Obama’s political aides as “the water bugs,” the “Politburo,” the “Mafia,” or the “campaign set.” Petraeus, who felt shut out by the new administration, told an aide that he considered the president’s senior adviser David Axelrod to be “a complete spin doctor.”

During a flight in May, after a glass of wine, Petraeus told his own staffers that the administration was “[expletive] with the wrong guy.” Gates was tempted to walk out of an Oval Office meeting after being offended by comments made by deputy national security adviser Thomas E. Donilon about a general not named in the book.

Suspicion lingered among some from the 2008 presidential campaign as well. When Obama floated the idea of naming Clinton to a high-profile post, Axelrod asked him, “How could you trust Hillary?”

Okay, first off, has everyone forgotten that 90% of what Bob Woodward writes is just straight up, sensationalized Bullshit? The Neo-Cons sure did say that, when Bob Woodward wrote his book about Bush.  However, now the Neo-Cons are treating this book like the Gospel truth; because it is about a Democratic Party President. Of course, the warmongering Neo-Cons are eating the whole bit about the terrorist attack up and basically saying that President Obama wants another attack on America. Which is, of course, straight up bullshit.

Some of the other highlights are:

— Obama told Woodward in the July interview that he didn’t think about the Afghan war in the “classic” terms of the United States winning or losing. “I think about it more in terms of: Do you successfully prosecute a strategy that results in the country being stronger rather than weaker at the end?” he said.

— The CIA created, controls and pays for a clandestine 3,000-man paramilitary army of local Afghans, known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams. Woodward describes these teams as elite, well-trained units that conduct highly sensitive covert operations into Pakistan as part of a stepped-up campaign against al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens there.

— Obama has kept in place or expanded 14 intelligence orders, known as findings, issued by his predecessor, George W. Bush. The orders provide the legal basis for the CIA’s worldwide covert operations.

— A new capability developed by the National Security Agency has dramatically increased the speed at which intercepted communications can be turned around into useful information for intelligence analysts and covert operators. “They talk, we listen. They move, we observe. Given the opportunity, we react operationally,” then-Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell explained to Obama at a briefing two days after he was elected president.

— A classified exercise in May showed that the government was woefully unprepared to deal with a nuclear terrorist attack in the United States. The scenario involved the detonation of a small, crude nuclear weapon in Indianapolis and the simultaneous threat of a second blast in Los Angeles. Obama, in the interview with Woodward, called a nuclear attack here “a potential game changer.” He said: “When I go down the list of things I have to worry about all the time, that is at the top, because that’s one where you can’t afford any mistakes.”

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai was diagnosed as manic depressive, according to U.S. intelligence reports. “He’s on his meds, he’s off his meds,” Woodward quotes U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry as saying.

Again, I have to ask; how much of this is actual truth and how much of it is sensationalized bullshit?

Liberal Blogger No more Mister Nice Blog puts it correctly:

“It’s in our national security interest” “I am not spending a trillion dollars.” At least he understand that endless war is bad for America.

And the reason that’s important is that, if we’re still deeply mired in Afghanistan as of January 20, 2013, we’ll still be just as deeply mired four years later, because President Palin/Pence/Daniels/Thune/Huckabee/Barbour/Christie sure as hell ain’t gonna withdraw. But this semi-rationality on Obama’s part is going to be lost, and the bullet-point version of this entire book is going to be “Obama plans to surrender in Afghanistan to appease the evil traitorous voters in his party.”

I hate to say it; but he is absolutely correct. Because you all know that the Neo-Conservatives are all about perpetual war. But they call me a Neo-Nazi for pointing that out; and because I refuse to do the “Identity politics” for that particular warmongering class of people. I despise identity politics on the left and the right. That, according to the protected class, is being a Neo-Nazi. Which, like most of Bob Woodward’s writings, is just straight up bullshit.

Memeorandum Thread Here.

Update: But of course. That is the same idiot that said that Iraq was an imminent danger to America and the rest of the free world back in 2003. Which of course, like Bob Woodward’s books; was straight up bullshit. 🙄

Townhall questioner to President Obama: ‘I’m Exhausted Of Defending You’

Posted on

This comes via Real Clear Politics:

Quote:

“I’m one of your middle class Americans. And quite frankly, I’m exhausted. Exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change that I voted for,” a woman told President Obama at a town hall.

“My husband and I have joked for years that we thought we were well beyond the hot dogs and beans era of our lives, but, quite frankly, it’s starting to knock on our door and ring true that that might be where we’re headed again, and, quite frankly, Mr. President, I need you to answer this honestly. Is this my new reality?,” she added.

The response from the President can be found right here. I listened to about five seconds of it. The President started giving one of his, “I feel your pain” answers; which basically was nice talk for, “You voted for me lady; now deal with what you got and get back on the reservation were you belong!” 😛

However, to address the issue which you are seeing here. This is a classic example of buyer’s regret, and it is a classic textbook example of Democratic Party overreach. They promoted this man, as the “Messiah of Progressivism.” Now that elections are over, the stimulus, that was supposed to created all these jobs; has essentially flopped. Now that the healthcare bill, that nobody really wanted, has passed and the Democrats see that there is no public option; they are now feeling like that might have just been played like a fiddle. Which they were, by Marxists, who were masters at propaganda.

Now that the propaganda phase is over and the newness of a black president has worn off, and the American people see that absolutely nothing has change,including the fact that everyone is still struggling; people are beginning, on the Democratic Party side, to feel like they have been lied too. Which they were and they fell for it — hook, line and sinker. This happened during the Carter era, this happened during the Clinton Era and now it is happening during the Obama era of “Hope and Change.”

Memo to the Democrats: Those people in the White House do not give two flips about you or your problems! They only care about their careers in politics. You are only a means to an end. So, stop your whining and get to the ballot box come November and vote different!

To be fair, and because I am not some Neo-Conservative Blogger, who is simply cashing in on some trending topic. I will say this: Bush did do some of same stuff, when he was elected in 2000. Bush was elected on the promise that he would be a peacetime President. However, 9/11 happened; and the game changed, and the Neo-Conservative warmongers approached him and convinced him that invading Iraq was necessary. Which we all know now was a lie. So, just to show you. I do know that Conservatives have done the same thing.   As much as I am glad that Iraq did turn out well; I will not sit here and lie to you all and say it was needed. Iraq was a mistake, that turned out reasonably well. However, the situation is not stable in Iraq and many are praying for divine intervention there.

—

Memeorandum Thread Here.

The Feckless Left: Exhibit R for Racism

Posted on

The video:

Transcript via NewsBusters:

BILL MAHER, HOST: Isn’t Obama’s big problem is that he does everything half-assed? Maybe it’s because he’s only half black. You know? It’s that, if he was a, if this, if he was fully black, I’m telling you, he would be a better president. There’s a white man in him holding him back because everything is half-assed. The stimulus was half-assed, healthcare is half-assed, let’s talk about Afghanistan.

I brought this subject up to Al Sharpton on twitter:

twittersharpton1

twittersharpton2

twittersharpton3

So, there, Al Sharpton cannot say that he never was told about it; he was, by me. I do not expect anything to become of this; but I can at least say that he was informed via twitter by me. If Al Sharpton Replies, I will post the twitter reply here. One could also post this under the heading of, “Can you imagine the stink that would ensue, if a Conservative, like Ann Coulter, or Sean Hannity or anyone else on the right had said something like this?” You all know what would go down. Anyone remember Don Imus?

The point is here; that Bill Maher will get a free pass on this; because he is a part of the liberal elite. It sucks, but that is the double standard in this Country. For what it is worth; his excuse or justification is that he is a comedian. Well, I know comedy; and that crap just is not funny at all. I am sure Jon Steward would agree with that; being a minority himself, joking about something like this, is just not funny.

Not that it really matters; but I was just looking at Bill Maher’s bio on Wikipedia. I noticed his ethnic background; if he skates on this one — that will explain quite a bit. One cannot very well chap someone for kicking around a black man, if he is also a protected minority too, right? right? I’m just saying…

Others: Gateway Pundit

Video: When you have lost the Home Depot Crowd, you have lost America

Posted on

A nice three in a row from the founder of …..Home Depot.

Quite bluntly — if you have lost this man and the people that frequents his stores; you are toast.

The Videos: (H/T to HotAir.com)

I can tell you right now; Obama is not getting elected in 2012; it is over for the “Hope and Change” era. Over quicker than it started.

Now, I await two things; one, I await for some identity politics ogre, to start carping about how this man is just some angry white racist bigot. Second, I await some liberal to say that this guy is just some angry rich white businessman. Well, let me be the first to tell you all something here. I happen to know a little about the crowd, who hangs around Hope Depot.

Contrary to what some might actually believe. The good majority of the people who buy products at Home Dept are the people; that are commonly known as the backbone of America in this globalist age —- Small Business owners; and the Obama Administration, with the sun-setting of the Bush tax cuts — is basically targeting that group of people. Granted, not all business owners make that kind of money. However there are those that do, and they usually have employees and when taxes increase on those people, sometimes, especially with the smaller businesses; employees have to be laid off, because the “overhead” is just too much of burden on those business people. This should be just common sense, but when you are dealing with socialist left, common sense tends to run in short supply. When you let someone go like that, that causes the said person to not be able to spend money to contribute to the economy; which hurts the service industry, and so on. Not to mention the fact that that person will have problems paying his bills.  It is a vicious cycle and it gets worse as the cycle progresses.

You see, that is one thing that I have been trying to make clear here; and I guess I will just have to say it — most likely again. I am sure I have written here in the past. Anyhow, I do not write on this blog to defend the multi-billion dollar companies. They do not need my help; they have their P.R. companies and such. I write for the small business owner and the working man, who decides to go into business for himself; painting walls, building kitchens or whatever sort of trade that he desires to do; like driving a truck or whatever. Those people should be helped, not targeted for taxes and other such stupidity that the socialist left tries to cook up. Like it or not, my friends — but the small business owner and their businesses are the backbone of America. Yes, sure, General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler have their place, as do every other big business. However, it is the small business owner, the entrepreneur that embodies the true Spirit of America.  That is who I defend and will continue to here on this blog.

The blog is, and will always be — the Blog of the working man. Not the rich man — but those who work for themselves.

A song in tribute to whom I write for:

UPDATED: I hate to say it: Nicholas Kristof makes a very good point

Posted on2 Comments

Rarely do I ever concede a point to a liberal. However, in this case; it is fair to do so.

This morning Nicholas Kristof writes in the New York Times, about the Mosque Controversy:

For a glimpse of how venomous and debased the discourse about Islam has become, consider a blog post in The New Republic this month. Written by Martin Peretz, the magazine’s editor in chief, it asserted: “Frankly, Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims.”

Mr. Peretz added: “I wonder whether I need honor these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges of the First Amendment, which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse.”

Thus a prominent American commentator, in a magazine long associated with tolerance, ponders whether Muslims should be afforded constitutional freedoms. Is it possible to imagine the same kind of casual slur tossed off about blacks or Jews? How do America’s nearly seven million American Muslims feel when their faith is denounced as barbaric?

This is one of those times that test our values, a bit like the shameful interning of Japanese-Americans during World War II, or the disgraceful refusal to accept Jewish refugees from Nazi Europe.

It would have been natural for this test to have come right after 9/11, but it was forestalled because President George W. Bush pushed back at his conservative ranks and repeatedly warned Americans not to confuse Al Qaeda with Islam.

As much as I hate to say it; Mr. Kristof is absolutely right. It should noted that Martin Peretz is, in fact Jewish and is, in fact, a rabid Zionist. In fact, Martin Peretz is known for the following comments:

Frankly, I couldn’t quite imagine any venture like [the Iraq War] in the Arab World turning out especially well. This is, you will say, my prejudice. But some prejudices are built on real facts, and history generally proves me right. Go ahead, prove me wrong. — Source

and:

But, frankly, Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims. And among those Muslims led by the Imam Rauf there is hardly one who has raised a fuss about the routine and random bloodshed that defines their brotherhood. So, yes, I wonder whether I need honor these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges [sic] of the First Amendment which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse. — Source

Like Kristof said; could you imagine if the above were uttered about the Jews or about the black race? There would a media frenzy about it. Believe me, I know; I have been attacked by those who are of the protected class and all for speaking my mind about them and how they attack those of whom they disagree.

The fact is, that this whole Mosque situation boils down to this; Islam versus Christian Nativists and Jews, Arabs versus Americans, whites versus non-whites. Am I calling those who oppose this mosque racists? Well, my question for you is this; do you feel that burning pages of the Koran normal acceptable practice? Would you feel the same way, if some Muslim took a page out of the  Christian Bible and began burning it? How about the Tanakh, the Torah, or The ?umash, the Siddur, the Piyutim or even the Zohar?

The point I am trying to make here is this; I realize that radicalized Muslims attacked the World Trade Center, The Pentagon and Flight 93. However, when you punish an entire religion for the actions of a few, you are practicing a forum of collectivism. That is not anything remotely Conservative, nor is it anything remotely American. Being vigilant against terrorism is one thing; but being idiotic is another, this situation with this Mosque is well beyond that — on both sides.

Update: On the Other hand… these are videos from 9/11:

There are two sides to every argument; one would suppose. There is also this here.

Bush on 9/11 – The only speech that Bush gave that was worth a damn

Posted on

(H/T to Sister Toldjah)

Nine years out; this looks campy, even staged.

However, it was one of Bush’s finer moments. Possibly his only fine moment.

I did not vote for the man; and, at the time, I did not agree with his politics. Needless to say; that has all very much changed.

Whether you voted for him or not — you have to admit. President George W. Bush showed leadership on a very tragic day in America.

Which begs the question —- Could Obama do something like this?

I very much highly doubt it.

Video: Is this is the future of America in 5 or 10 years?

Posted on

(H/T to Richard Spencer of Alternative Right)

I think it’s time we got real; before we lose everything.

The Obligatory Obama will not extend Bush Tax Cuts Posting

Posted on

Well, duh, he is a liberal and a Democrat. He does believe in class warfare. Remember you Republicans and Libertarians that voted for him. (You know who you are…)

Via the NYT:

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday will make clear that he opposes any compromise that would extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy beyond this year, officials said, adding a populist twist to an election-season economic package that is otherwise designed to entice support from big businesses and their Republican allies.

Mr. Obama’s opposition to allowing the high-end tax cuts to remain in place for even another year or two would be the signal many Congressional Democrats have been awaiting as they prepare for a showdown with Republicans on the issue and ends speculation that the White House might be open to an extension. Democrats say only the president can rally wavering lawmakers who, amid the party’s weakened poll numbers, feel increasingly vulnerable to Republican attacks if they let the top rates lapse at the end of this year as scheduled.

It is not clear that Mr. Obama can prevail given his own diminished popularity, the tepid economic recovery and the divisions within his party. But by proposing to extend the rates for the 98 percent of households with income below $250,000 for couples and $200,000 for individuals — and insisting that federal income tax rates in 2011 go back to their pre-2001 levels for income above those cutoffs — he intends to cast the issue as a choice between supporting the middle class or giving breaks to the wealthy.

In a speech in Cleveland on Wednesday, Mr. Obama will also make a case for the package of roughly $180 billion in expanded business tax cuts and infrastructure spending disclosed by the White House in bits and pieces over the past few days. He would offset the cost by closing other tax breaks for multinational corporations, oil and gas companies and others.

While the speech will be centrist in its policy prescriptions other than the Bush tax cuts, Mr. Obama’s language will be partisan as he seeks to sharpen the contrasts between Republicans’ record and efforts by Democrats to create more jobs, aides said.

As much as I would like to jump up, holler and raise a fuss about this; I cannot. We all knew that this was coming. This should be a lesson to the Republican Party. That is, do not run weak or moderate Conservatives during elections. Because when you do; Conservatives, and I mean hardcore Conservatives will not vote — and this is what you get. I know that I, personally, will not be affected by this; neither will my family.

However, I am sure that there will be some families affected by this —  not to mention a myriad of business owners out there. This will, I am sure, cause a downtown in hiring by businesses; which will add to the huge downturn in the economy. It is all a domino effect, starts at the top and goes to the bottom.

Another thing to think about; we do have to eventually pay for these two wars. I believe that those who profited off of both of these wars ought to be targeted for taxing. I believe that a special “War Tax”, ought to be appended to anyone making over $500.000 or more a year. I would target multinational companies, like oil companies and so forth. Especially those in Iraq. Perhaps next time, the warmongering class will not be so eager to start a war next time. This taxing would reinforce the idea that those wanting said war, should they actually have to pay for it. Foreign Policy has a price tag; and those who want follow Woodrow Wilson’s steps, should be required to pay that price tag.

Memorandum Thread.

Want Living Proof that Nation-Building does not work?

Posted on1 Comment

Here you go, a video of New York Times reporter John Burns, who, by the way, was the best person covering the Iraq War.

The Video: (H/T HotAir.com)

Ed Morrissey makes a very important point:

On Iraq, it’s hard to see how Obama could have improved the situation. He followed the SOFA pact that George W. Bush negotiated with Nouri al-Maliki, and the Iraqi government made it clear they wanted us to stick to that schedule. If the Iraqis want us out entirely by the end of next year, we have little choice but to comply; to do otherwise would be a de facto reoccupation that will not fly well here at home or abroad.  However, I’d say it’s entirely likely that Baghdad will rethink that final phase and ask us to remain for logistics, training, and air and sea protection for the next several years, and then the question will be whether Obama will agree to it or insist on a full withdrawal, even if it means the collapse of the nascent democracy in Iraq.

Afghanistan is a different problem, but one with potentially the same result.  Obama owns Afghanistan more than he does Iraq, having made the decision himself to add more troops and get more aggressive, which means a failure there can’t be left on the doorstep of his predecessor.  If Obama starts withdrawing from both fronts as they deteriorate, he will at least be the man who lost Afghanistan, if not Iraq as well, just as he has to prepare to convince Americans to give him another four years as Commander-in-Chief.  For that reason, I doubt we’ll see a significant drawdown in either theater, and Obama will just have to remind the Left that they have nowhere else to go in 2012.

Ever notice how Neo-Conservatives will never say Bush screwed up with Iraq, at all? They will never admit, that there was an intelligence error — never. That is what Party loyalty does to a person.

Anyhow, some good reading about Nation-Building over at The American Conservative:

“Nation-building is the most prominent — and most important — part of the neocon doctrine,” wrote Jed Babbin in the American Spectator. “And the decision to pursue it is the principal reason that we are losing in Afghanistan, Iraq is falling apart, and the real enemy — the terror-sponsoring nations — have grown stronger.”

None of these writers can accurately be described as a budding noninterventionist. But most conservatives who opposed the Iraq War from the beginning and favored no more than a limited mission in Afghanistan can agree with them on the following: neither Islam nor foreign lands can easily be reformed by either bureaucrats or the force or the force of arms; our interventions have produced something closer to sharia states than Switzerland’s; Iran is now more powerful in the region rather than less.

There have l0ng been three main foreign-policy tendencies on the American Right: old-style conservatives who agree with Randolph Bourne that war is the health of the state and therefore favor less military intervention abroad; neoconservatives who want to preserve the United States’ global hegemony and engage in armed proselytizing for democracy; and defense-minded conservatives who believe the U.S. should strike forcefully at its enemies whenever it perceives itself, its interests, or its allies to be threatened.

Roughly speaking, these groups can be described as the Jeffersonians, the Wilsonians, and the Jacksonians. Among rank-and-file conservatives, the Jacksonians are by far the largest group. In the postwar era, the Jacksonians have tended to align with the Wilsonians. But there is no reason why that conjunction is inevitable.

With the exception of Ron Paul and some Ron Paul Republicans, the Jeffersonians have no major political figure to speak for them. Yet the popularity of the Wilsonians was always greatly exaggerated. The invasion of Iraq and the mass conservative acceptance of the Bush Doctrine were made possible by al-Qaeda’s act of mass murder on 9/11.

Throughout the 1990s, Wilsonian neoconservatives called for regime change in Iraq, but they did not succeed in rallying the grassroots Right to the cause. The conservative base tuned out the PNAC crowd. Millions of conservatives voted for Pat Buchanan, who opposed even the first war with Iraq, in the 1992 and 1996 Republican presidential primaries—even as neoconservative commentators were writing essays attempting to purge Buchanan from conservative movement.

Grassroots conservatives were repulsed by American bloodshed during our humanitarian intervention in Somalia. They opposed using our armed forces to deliver groceries to Third World countries and restoring a dubious left-wing character to power in Haiti. They objected to the bombing of Serbia and canceled their subscriptions to the Weekly Standard when that magazine sided with the Clinton administration on military action in the Balkans.

The years after 9/11 were a Jacksonian moment hijacked by neoconservatives. While most American conservatives liked the idea that the we could increase others’ freedom by defending our own against despots overseas, very few of them wanted to go to war to build schools in Iraq or promote democracy. They wanted to pay back the people who murdered their countrymen and make sure that such an attack never happened again.

They trusted that George W. Bush was the man for the job and were patient when he talked about lighting a fire in the minds of men. But ordinary conservatives nevertheless agreed with the following sentiment expressed by John Derbyshire: “What matters most is not the fire in the minds of men, which will burn at some level for as long as there are men, but the fire that results when fissionable material undergoes a fast chain reaction.”

You see the problem is that the very same people that stood behind George W. Bush and cheered him, as he charged off to war in Iraq and Afghanistan; are the same one who stand and in unison blame President Obama for any failures for the war in both Countries.  The truth is that President Obama DID inherit BOTH of these wars for President Bush and it is because of utter incompetence of the Pentagon and State Department under President Bush, not to mention the entire intelligence community, is why we are in this mess in the first place!

So, instead of being noble and honest men, and admitting that they actually made mistakes, one being electing a President that was about as Conservative, as I am damned atheist; they would rather navel graze the whole thing and try and deflect the blame onto the Democrats, as much as they possibly can.  The problem is with that little idiotic plan is this; thinking Americans, like this writer are just smarter than that, we know what happened and we know who was responsible for the actions of the President.  I am fully aware of who goaded the President into declaring war with Iraq.  I have no forgotten and neither have the American people.  This is, one of a myriad of reasons, why John McCain lost the election.  Because the American people did not want someone, who would take marching orders from the Neo-Conservatives.

So far, Obama has been showing his independence of the warmongering class in the Republican Party. Thankfully, under Michael Steele the warmongering class have been pushed aside; which is why people like William Kristol want him to resign so badly, that being because Michael Steele will not march to their orders and is expressing his own views, and not those who wish the United States to fight a perpetual war.  I commend Michael Steele for that.

Another thing I think I need to be clear on; as you know, I did post a video, that was a warning to America.  Some would look at that and say, “Are you not talking about of both sides of your mouth?” to that I would say no. That is because that video essentially validates what I have believed all along; that the notion of, “We must fight the terrorists there, so we do not have to fight them here” is idiotic at best.  That is because there are radical Islamic terrorists that are already here now! That video proves as much.  My personal issue with George W. Bush was not with fighting terrorism, which he began in Afghanistan.  He however, was goaded by the warmongering class in the Republican Party to go to war with Iraq, which, for what it is worth, is what this class of people wanted to do during the Clinton years, but was rebuffed repeatedly.  This caused, I feel, a distraction, as those who planned had this strange idea, that the invasion would be a cakewalk.  I believe it would be understood that we all know now that this was a very flawed idea.

Much of what I said above, would be considered, what I like to call, “rearview mirror quarterbacking.”  We all know this now, the problem is, where do he go from here?  The best thing that can happen is Obama follow through with his promises to follow Bush’s pull out timetable in Iraq.  We cannot continue to be the World’s police officer.  If Iraq has an upheaval over there, let them.  We did our part over there; we rooted the major player in the insurgency.  We toppled Saddam.  What happens after we have left is not our concern.  As for Afghanistan, if we can catch or kill Osama Bin Laden, fine do so.  However, if the Afghan Government and the Pakistani Government is that corrupt and does not want to be partner against the war on terror.  I say cut our losses and pull out the troops and leave.  Then send in specialized CIA assassins in there to hunt Osama Bin Laden down and kill him that way.  I just do not see the justification for our Military personnel dying for a Government that is corrupt to its core.  It just does not make any sort of sense to me at all.

Bottom Line:  President Obama should not be blame for any of the failures of any of these wars.  The President who started them should be blamed.  President Obama should continue the turnkey plan given him by Bush, and should implement a better strategy in the Afghan theater.  If the Governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan will not work with the United States on the capture or killing of Osama Bin Laden, then President should use the CIA to kill him.

Video: Recovery Summer

Posted on

Some Straight Awesomeness from these guys:

Remember this come November 2, 2010 and vote….accordingly.

UPDATED: Is Fidel Castro sincere or attempting to win favor with America?

Posted on

This is the first thing that went through my mind when I read this article.

I am, of course, referring to the piece by Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic:

A couple of weeks ago, while I was on vacation, my cell phone rang; it was Jorge Bolanos, the head of the Cuban Interest Section (we of course don’t have diplomatic relations with Cuba) in Washington. “I have a message for you from Fidel,” he said. This made me sit up straight. “He has read your Atlantic article about Iran and Israel. He invites you to Havana on Sunday to discuss the article.” I am always eager, of course, to interact with readers of The Atlantic, so I called a friend at the Council on Foreign Relations, Julia Sweig, who is a preeminent expert on Cuba and Latin America: “Road trip,” I said.

I quickly departed the People’s Republic of Martha’s Vineyard for Fidel’s more tropical socialist island paradise. Despite the self-defeating American ban on travel to Cuba, both Julia and I, as journalists and researchers, qualified for a State Department exemption. The charter flight from Miami was bursting with Cuban-Americans carrying flat-screen televisions and computers for their technologically-bereft families. Fifty minutes after take-off, we arrived at the mostly-empty Jose Marti International Airport. Fidel’s people met us on the tarmac (despite giving up his formal role as commandante en jefe after falling ill several years ago, Fidel still has many people). We were soon deposited at a “protocol house” in a government compound whose architecture reminded me of the gated communities of Boca Raton. The only other guest in this vast enclosure was the president of Guinea-Bissau.

Now getting down to the meat of the matter:

He said the Iranian government should understand the consequences of theological anti-Semitism. “This went on for maybe two thousand years,” he said. “I don’t think anyone has been slandered more than the Jews. I would say much more than the Muslims. They have been slandered much more than the Muslims because they are blamed and slandered for everything. No one blames the Muslims for anything.” The Iranian government should understand that the Jews “were expelled from their land, persecuted and mistreated all over the world, as the ones who killed God. In my judgment here’s what happened to them: Reverse selection. What’s reverse selection? Over 2,000 years they were subjected to terrible persecution and then to the pogroms. One might have assumed that they would have disappeared; I think their culture and religion kept them together as a nation.” He continued: “The Jews have lived an existence that is much harder than ours. There is nothing that compares to the Holocaust.” I asked him if he would tell Ahmadinejad what he was telling me. “I am saying this so you can communicate it,” he answered.

[….]

We returned repeatedly in this first conversation to Castro’s fear that a confrontation between the West and Iran could escalate into a nuclear conflict. “The Iranian capacity to inflict damage is not appreciated,” he said. “Men think they can control themselves but Obama could overreact and a gradual escalation could become a nuclear war.” I asked him if this fear was informed by his own experiences during the 1962 missile crisis, when the Soviet Union and the U.S. nearly went to war other over the presence of nuclear-tipped missiles in Cuba (missiles installed at the invitation, of course, of Fidel Castro). I mentioned to Castro the letter he wrote to Khruschev, the Soviet premier, at the height of the crisis, in which he recommended that the Soviets consider launching a nuclear strike against the U.S. if the Americans attack Cuba. “That would be the time to think about liquidating such a danger forever through a legal right of self-defense,” Castro wrote at the time.

I asked him, “At a certain point it seemed logical for you to recommend that the Soviets bomb the U.S. Does what you recommended still seem logical now?” He answered: “After I’ve seen what I’ve seen, and knowing what I know now, it wasn’t worth it all.”

I was surprised to hear Castro express such doubts about his own behavior in the missile crisis – and I was, I admit, also surprised to hear him express such sympathy for Jews, and for Israel’s right to exist (which he endorsed unequivocally).

After this first meeting, I asked Julia to explain the meaning of Castro’s invitation to me, and of his message to Ahmadinejad. “Fidel is at an early stage of reinventing himself as a senior statesman, not as head of state, on the domestic stage, but primarily on the international stage, which has always been a priority for him,” she said. “Matters of war, peace and international security are a central focus: Nuclear proliferation climate change, these are the major issues for him, and he’s really just getting started, using any potential media platform to communicate his views. He has time on his hands now that he didn’t expect to have. And he’s revisiting history, and revisiting his own history.”

Some, including those who fled Cuba for the freedom of America,  would say that Castro is trying to REVISE his own history; but I digress. Anyhow, this strikes me as an attempt by Fidel Castro to earn favor within the United States, in a very lame attempt to get relations normalized with the United States. This is to get trade sanctions lifted, so Cuba’s people will not be starving any longer.

Now, do I think that this will work? No. I do not. President Barack Obama might be many things; A Democrat, A Liberal, and some would say a Socialist. However, he is not a fool. It would be political suicide for him to even think about normalizing relations with a communist Government like Cuba. That is especially with his poll numbers as low as they are. This soul searching is just an attempt to re-brand Castro in his older years. I am certainly not foolish enough to buy this little dog and pony show and I am sure no one in Washington will be either.

Others: Pajamas Media

UPDATE: The Shark Tank sends me this via twitter:  Is Fidel Castro’s Political Influence Tied to Democrat Joe Garcia?

UPDATED: I know Michael Moore is an idiot, but this is Awesome

Posted on

I have to respect the man for going after the Obama Administration like this here:

(WARNING THE ARTICLE I AM ABOUT TO QUOTE HAS SOME SERIOUS LANGUAGE IN IT, IF YOU ARE EASILY OFFENDED, DO NOT PROCEED BEYOND THIS POINT!)

Further more, if you happen to be one of those type of people that believe that Unions are inherently evil, you might want to stop here. Least your head explode…

Read More …

The obligatory President Barack Obama flings 50 billion out the window to save America posting

Posted on

Can you tell that I am tired of writing about this stuff, I’m getting there…:

MILWAUKEE, Wisconsin (AFP) – US President Barack Obama Monday promised more than 50 billion dollars to create jobs rebuilding roads, railways and airports, targeting huge unemployment and ripping resurgent Republicans.

Obama, under intense pressure due to the sputtering economy ahead of November’s mid-term congressional elections, announced the new funding spree at a Labor Day rally with union workers in Wisconsin where the crisis has hit hard.

“This will not only create jobs immediately, but will make our economy run better over the long haul,” Obama said on a public holiday two months before congressional polls which Democrats fear could bring heavy losses.

“It’s a plan that says even in the aftermath of the worst recession in our lifetimes, America can still shape our own destiny.”

The White House called on Republicans to support quick passage of the measure, which would “front-load” 50 billion dollars of money as the first part of a broader effort to reauthorize transportation funding over six years.

“We’d like to pass this as quickly as possible,” a senior administration official said. The size of the total package, over and above the initial 50 billion dollar infusion of funding, was unclear.

via As Democrats fear rout, Obama launches new jobs push – Yahoo! News.

Of course, the Republicans are the ones being the evil white racists the grown up realists here:

Opposition Republicans, seeking to wrest control of both chambers in Congress from Democrats, immediately condemned Obama’s plan, signaling no let up to obstruction tactics which have slowed his presidency.

“A last-minute, cobbled-together stimulus bill with more than 50 billion dollars in new tax hikes will not reverse the complete lack of confidence Americans have in Washington Democrats’ ability to help this economy,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

John Boehner, the top Republican in the House of Representatives, sought to link the new plan to Obama’s previous stimulus package worth around 800 billion dollars, which critics say has failed to revive the economy.

“If we’ve learned anything from the past 18 months, it’s that we can’t spend our way to prosperity,” said Boehner.

This is why I do like two party politics. Because one party does equalize out the other party. What gets me is the fact that Obama accuses the Republicans of wrecking the car and that Americans should not “Give them back the keys.” The problem with that is this; and Yes, I have written this before, the Republicans seem to have learned the error of their ways. Where, the Democrats have not. They have taken that same car and driven it over a cliff and are not still trying to drive that mangled car. The sick part is, everyone else knows that car is wrecked and no longer drivable. But the Democrats are willfully blind of that fact and keep on trying to drive that same wrecked car.  I know, it is a bit of a weird analogy, but it works in this case.

The Bottom Line: Obama and Democrats are in trouble, grave trouble and they are trying every trick in the book. They pushed healthcare, when America needed Economic recovery, and yes, Jobs.  Now, they are trying to save face. Will it work? Doubtful. Many are angry and feel that Obama lied to them or told them anything to get elected. This angry will come out in the polls. Personally, I see a shift, but I do not believe it will be a huge sweep as some do. However, it will be interesting to blog about. I cannot wait. 😀

Bow Wow: Video: Obama: They talk about me like a Dog

Posted on

(H/T to the Daily Caller and Via CNN)

Did you notice that funny look in his eye? I wonder, if he was aiming that whole, “That’s not in my prepared comments” bit, at the Liberal media, and say, Chris Matthews? Too Funny! 😀

Now a Memeornadum Thread.

Video: RedState Update on “Murfreesboro vs. Muslims”

Posted on

Redstate Update HQ

Chris Muir over at Day by Day knocks one out of ballpark!

Posted on

Via Day by Day Cartoon:

Excellent one, Chris. Keep it up!

Oh really?: “Reverend” Al “Interloper” Sharpton says that Alabama State Senate District is “Heir Property” for African-Americans

Posted on

Video:

The Story via Freedom’s Lighthouse, A pretty snazzy looking site, by the way. :

Here is Naked Emperor News video of the Rev. Al Sharpton speaking at a rally in Alabama back in July in which he essentially said African-American candidate Johnny Ford should win his State Senate Primary runoff against a white candidate – Billy Beasley – because the district is “heir property” to African-Americans.

Sharpton, for all his talk of wanting equality, actually uses “race” as a cottage industry for himself. It is impossible to square these comments with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream that people would someday be “judged by the content of their character” and not the “color of their skin.”

Here is the real funny part:

The voters did not agree with Sharpton. Beasley defeated Ford in the Democratic Primary runoff for the District 28 State Senate Seat by getting 62% of the vote.

Heh. So much for that entitlement to the State Senate in Alabama, aye Sharpton?

From the comments section over at Freedom’s Lighthouse:

Your heir property is in Africa.

In-Farking-deed! I always hear Blacks; all liberals of course, trashing America and complaining about how they are always oppressed by the White Man. I have one thing to say to them —- you can always go back where you originated from and live there and see how well you live. However, when someone does that; they are automatically called RAAAAACIST!

I am sure there is a particular Pony-tailed Homosexual that is about go into meltdown, because of this post right about now. Right Bob? Right.

Yes, that is right, I am one of those!

Er, um, I mean, a Son-of-a-bitch, I mean. 😛

Oops: President Obama gets it wrong on the carpet

Posted on6 Comments

Doggone. That man cannot do anything right, at all. WOW! 😯

Update: I do believe that the President is worthy of this:

and this:

Via the Washington Post: (…..of all people!!! 😯 )

A mistake has been made in the Oval Office makeover that goes beyond the beige.

President Obama’s new presidential rug seemed beyond reproach, with quotations from Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. woven along its curved edge.

“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” According media reports, this quote keeping Obama company on his wheat-colored carpet is from King.

Except it’s not a King quote. The words belong to a long-gone Bostonian champion of social progress. His roots in the republic ran so deep that his grandfather commanded the Minutemen at the Battle of Lexington.

For the record, Theodore Parker is your man, President Obama. Unless you’re fascinated by antebellum American reformers, you may not know of the lyrically gifted Parker, an abolitionist, Unitarian minister and Transcendentalist thinker who foresaw the end of slavery, though he did not live to see emancipation. He died at age 49 in 1860, on the eve of the Civil War.

A century later, during the civil rights movement, King, an admirer of Parker, quoted the Bostonian’s lofty prophecy during marches and speeches. Often he’d ask in a refrain, “How long? Not long.” He would finish in a flourish: “Not long, because the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

[…]

Parker said in 1853: “I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one. . . . But from what I see I am sure it bends toward justice.”

The president is at minimum well-served by Parker’s presence in the room. Parker embodied the early 19th-century reformer’s passionate zeal for taking on several social causes at once. Many of these reformers were Unitarians or Quakers; some were

"D'oh!"

Transcendentalists. Most courageously, as early as the 1830s, they opposed the laws on slavery and eventually harbored fugitives in the Underground Railroad network of safe houses. Without 30 years of a movement agitating and petitioning for slave emancipation, Lincoln could not have ended slavery with the stroke of a pen in the midst of war. Parker was in the vanguard that laid the social and intellectual groundwork.

The familiar quote from Lincoln woven into Obama’s rug is “government of the people, by the people and for the people,” the well-known utterance from the close of his Gettysburg Address in 1863.

Funny that in 1850, Parker wrote, “A democracy — that is a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people.”

Theodore Parker, Oval Office wordmeister for the ages.

I will not take the harsh slams that the other Bloggers on the right are doing. But, man, that is such a stupid screw up.

However, when you have amateur politicians in the White House; one can only expect so much. Just as well, Sarah Palin, being quite the amateur herself could have made the same mistake.

Others: : JustOneMinute, Gateway Pundit, Freedom’s Lighthouse, American Thinker and Outside the Beltway

This is one of those times, when you could not pay me to work in the White House

Posted on

That’s right folks, the President and his Administration are in one hell of a huge bind. If they do not do something fast; they are going to be sunk come the midterms and possibly come 2012.

Here’s your video:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Now, for the Stories….

Via the New York Times:

American businesses added more jobs in the last three months than originally estimated, but the wheels of the economic recovery are still spinning in place.

The private sector added 67,000 jobs in August, according to the Department of Labor, higher than consensus forecasts, and the government upwardly revised its numbers for June and July, suggesting that job creation was slightly stronger over the summer than originally reported.

But the continuing wind-down of the 2010 Census, as well as state and local government layoffs, led to an overall loss of 54,000 jobs in August.

With businesses adding about half the number of positions needed simply to accommodate population growth — much less dent the ranks of the jobless — the unemployment rate ticked up to 9.6 percent, from 9.5 percent.

“The overall picture is one where the labor market is still kind of treading water,” said Joshua Shapiro, chief United States economist at MFR Inc. “It’s better than sinking, but it’s certainly not surging ahead.”

Given the continuing addition of private jobs — albeit at a tepid pace — Friday’s monthly snapshot of the labor market seemed to calm fears of a double-dip recession. But the numbers are likely to do little to assuage political pressure on the Obama administration in the run-up to the midterm elections.

Speaking from the White House Rose Garden on Friday morning, Mr. Obama called the latest job report “positive news,” but said he would be unveiling “a broader package of ideas next week,” to shore up the flagging economy, although he declined to give specifics. The president once again urged Congress to pass a stalled bill that would offer tax breaks to small businesses and create a $30 billion program to encourage community banks to lend.

“There’s no quick fix for this recession,” he said. “The hard truth is that it took years to create our current economic problems, and it will take more time than any of us would like to repair the damage.”

Responding to the higher-than-expected private sector numbers and revisions, investors pushed up the major stock gauges. By early afternoon, the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index was up 1 percent. Market reaction to the jobs data was tempered somewhat by a report that said growth in the services sector had slowed in August.

The Labor Department revised its private sector number for July, raising the number of jobs added to 107,000 from the 71,000 originally reported. And private sector hiring in June, originally reported at 83,000 and lowered to 31,000, was raised again to 61,000.

This is not making Democrats happy at all… Jack Tapper Reports:

Flanked by members of his economic team – including outgoing Council of Economic Advisers Dr. Christina Romer, whose replacement has yet to be named – President Obama chose to look at the silver lining in the economic clouds of today’s jobs report – not even mentioning that August saw a net job loss of 54,000 jobs.

“In the month I took office, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month,” the president said. “This morning, new figures show the economy produced 67,000 private sector jobs in August, the eighth consecutive month of private job growth. Additionally, the numbers for July were revised upward to 107,000. Now that’s positive news, and it reflects the steps we’ve already taken to break the back of this recession.”

The net job loss for August is largely because of the layoffs of 114,000 Census temporary workers.

….and from David Corn:

Democrats are spooked by recent polls and predictions indicating the GOP may slam the Dems so badly that the D’s lose the House and possibly the Senate. The Republicans need to gain 39 seats to seize the House, and it’s not difficult these days to find nonpartisan handicappers who predict the R’s could gain 40 to 50 seats. The conventional wisdom in D.C.: A tsunami is heading toward the Democrats. A Democratic strategist toiling on the party’s House efforts refers to working on the “Titanic” (though he claims there may be some hidden life rafts). “The president keeps saying it’s a tough environment,” says a Democratic House staffer. “We know that. We want to know what he’s going to do about it.”…

“He still wants to be seen as post-partisan and bipartisan,” says a House Democratic leadership aide. “But we’re in a fight here.” Democrats expect Obama to come out swinging nonstop — bashing the R’s repeatedly and proposing economic initiatives that actually register with voters. At the same time, members of the House Democratic leadership are worried that Obama will cave and yield to GOP demands that George W. Bush’s expiring tax cuts for the wealthy be extended. “If he doesn’t do something immediately, our members will be livid,” says a House Democratic aide. “And when there’s fear of a bloodbath, it’s never too early to start the blame game.”

I just blogged about how the Democrats can fix this mess. However, knowing them like they do; they would rather let the Nation suffer and blame the Republicans for the entire mess, while living large on the taxpayers dime —- than to actually do something to fix the problem. FDR did this, to a certain extent as have many other Democrat Party Presidents; I mean, it is not like Obama is going to be affected by any of this economic downturn.

One there is very certain, the tide is turning, Democrats had the chance to actually fix things and they have failed at it miserably. The Tea Party has now crystallized into a political force to be reckoned with — even among Republicans. RINO’s are being flushed out and true-blue Conservatives are being brought to the battle. It is so bad that the liberal media is gone to terrible spinning facts, an example:

It is possible that coming at the end of the summer an uptick in people looking for work is not as positive as it appears. This is the time of year, after two hot months, when recent graduates start to actually think about their future and send out resumes. And you can image many other out of work people deciding to take off looking for a job in the summer. In August, with the summer ending, some of those people started looking again in earnest. But you would expect the big uptick in post-summer people searching for work to come in September. So the fact that it is coming early is a good sign.

Oh Yes, it is that bad on that that side of the political aisle. When you start reading that sort of idiotic spin in a liberal publication, you know that things are horrifically bad right now for the Democrats. This midterm election and possibly in the general election; will most likely go down as the worst ever failure of the Democrat Party ever. The Democratic Party roared into power in 2006 to take the keys away from the Bush Administration, then they won the General election in 2008. They then got the entire key chain of the Country —- and proceeded to drive the Country as a whole over a cliff!  Because of that and because of this economic that we are in, which was, in fact, created by the Carter and Clinton Administrations; whom were, Democratic Party Administrations — we are about to see a major collapse of a party’s authority in the political realm. I have written here, time and time again; that the Democratic Party has horribly overreached…..again. This happens just about every time the Democrats get into power. To be fair and as non-partisan as I can be; Republicans have done it too — Nixon did it, Bush did it and some others. However, this administration took it to another more frightening level.  Because of this; they are about to do what many call, “Paying the Piper.”

The ship is sinking and the rats are jumping. It should be very interesting to watch. 2010 looms and they have no answers.

Welcome to the meltdown. Get popcorn. Hold on tight and enjoy the show.

(H/T to HotAir on the story leads for this posting. Good show AP! 😀 )

It is amazing what terrible economy will do to a Democrat President

Posted on1 Comment

If there is any truth to this; it can turn the most rabid Democrat into a Republican, real quick:

Administration officials have struggled to develop new economic policies and an effective message to blunt expected Republican gains in Congress and defuse complaints from Democrats that President Obama is fumbling the issue most important to voters. Following Obama’s vacation and focus on foreign policy in recent weeks, White House advisers have arranged a series of economic events for the president next week, including two trips to swing states and a news conference.

“We’ll continue to do everything we can, understanding that recovery will require persistent effort. There are no silver bullets,” senior Obama adviser David Axelrod said in an interview Thursday. “At the same time, we have to make clear our ideas and theirs, and the fact that the Washington Republicans, having helped create this recession, have attempted to block our every effort to deal with it.”

But with the unemployment rate expected to rise again in jobs numbers due out Friday, panic is setting in among many Democratic candidates who fear it is too late for Obama to convince voters that he understands the depth of the nation’s economic woes and can fix them.

[….]

Last November, Obama announced that he would turn his attention to unemployment, calling it “one of the great challenges that remains in our economy.” He declared the same intent two months later, telling House Democrats he would focus relentlessly on job creation “over the next several months.” Senior aides went on television pledging that the mantra would become “jobs, jobs, jobs.”

But other matters – health care, the BP oil spill – continually stole the limelight, creating the impression, some Democrats complain, that the president was barely focused on the economy at all.

His advisers described his attentiveness – noting, for example, that he discussed the economy with New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I) for 15 minutes before golfing – but got little traction.

“Obviously it’s going to be hard to get anything done before the election, but it’s really important for him to try, and to make the case to the American people that he’s trying to do something and the Republicans aren’t letting him,” said Steve Elmendorf, a Democratic strategist. “We are at the final moments here.”

Obama has another incentive to act: Tax cuts enacted during the George W. Bush administration are scheduled to expire in January, and Democrats – accused by Republicans of plotting to let them vanish – feel compelled to do something before the midterms.

Obama campaigned on a pledge to let cuts expire for the richest 2 percent of households, but some Democrats say the economy is too weak to raise anyone’s taxes right now. And they fear a backlash from small-business owners who could be hit with higher taxes.

Pairing targeted business tax breaks with an extension of middle-class tax cuts could help alleviate those problems.

This article alone, ought to be a lesson for any Democrat thinking about running for office. That raising Taxes in a recession, just does not work. Only tax breaks for the wealthy and making the business climate more healthy will help. Also cutting spending is another way to bring down inflation. This article alone, should be a text book example of why Keynesian Economics does not work in a recession, at all. If you tax businesses to death, you spur growth, if you spur growth, jobs disappear — it is a vicious cycle. Democrats have been making these same stupid mistakes for years.

Which is why we need to vote them out, come November of 2010. Especially here in Michigan, where job growth is desperately needed.

Salon Publishes some irrefutable truths about the Republican Party’s Past

Posted on2 Comments

I hate to say it, for once, Salon.com, got it right:

For a century after the Civil War, the South was deeply and overwhelmingly Democratic, a consequence of the “humiliation” visited upon white Southerners by the Republican-initiated Reconstruction that followed the Civil War. The level of support enjoyed by Democratic candidates in the region is almost too astronomical to fathom now. In 1912, Woodrow Wilson took 42 percent of the vote nationally in a four-way presidential contest. But in South Carolina, he snared 95 percent. In Mississippi, 88 percent. While he was grabbing 60 percent nationally in 1936, Franklin Roosevelt scored 97 percent in Mississippi and nearly 99 percent in South Carolina. The region’s congressional delegation was uniformly Democratic — and, thanks to the South’s one-party status, disproportionately influential, with lifelong incumbents taking advantage of the congressional seniority system to secure the most powerful committee gavels.

For decades, they comfortably coexisted in the national Democratic Party’s other major source of support, the machine-folk of the urban North. But as civil rights became a national issue — and as the Great Migration of Southern blacks to the cities of the North and West turned civil rights into a priority for Democrats outside the South — the coalition began to splinter. When the party ratified a civil rights plank at its 1948 convention, Southern Democrats staged a walkout and lined up behind Strom Thurmond, South Carolina’s governor and (like all Southern Democrats of the time) an arch-segregationist. Running under the Dixiecrat banner, Thurmond won four Deep South states that fall.

Throughout the ’50s and early ’60s, Southern Democrats sat in political limbo. Their national brethren were inching their way toward a full-on embrace of civil rights, but the GOP wasn’t much of an alternative, not with Dwight Eisenhower endorsing integration and not with the party’s Northern-dominated congressional ranks strongly backing civil rights legislation.

1964, though, is what changed everything. In signing the Civil Rights Act, LBJ cemented the Democrats as a civil rights party. And in nominating anti-civil rights Barry Goldwater for president (instead of pro-civil rights Nelson Rockefeller) the GOP cast its future fortunes with the white electorate of the South. LBJ trounced Goldwater nationally that fall, winning more than 60 percent of the popular vote. But in the South, voters flocked to the Republican nominee, with Goldwater carrying five states in the region. Mississippi, the same state that had given FDR 97 percent of its votes 28 years earlier, now gave Goldwater 87 percent. That fall, Thurmond, now a senator, renounced his Democratic affiliation once and for all and signed up for Goldwater’s GOP. The realignment was well underway, and it had everything to do with race.

First of all, let me say this; yes, this article is true. As is the premise of the article as well. Now, seeing what I am being accused of, I will let forth another revelation. Do I think that this a good thing? No, I do not. Here is why; just like in the Democratic Party, where they have played upon the fears among the black community, that the Tea Party are bunch of “White Racist Bigots”, like they were called by some liberal idiot actress — the Republicans played that same game back in the 1950 and to a bigger extent in the 1960’s. This was the second time, that they played that idiotic game. The first time, was back in the 1930’s after the stock market crash. This mainly happened after FDR went into office and the Republicans lost a good deal of seats in the House and Senate. These people became known as the “Old Right,” or the Taft Republicans. Named for the Senator, Robert Taft.  They were and are still commonly referred to as the “Taft Wing” of the Republican Party; anti-new deal, Anti-FDR, Isolationists —- all that. Yes, they are still around; some familiar names — Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and many more.

I said all that to say this; as I have written before on this blog any times, politics is a sewer. There are people, in both of these parties, that would sell out a political or ideological stance; or even capitalize on a public fear, just so they can get elected. This has been happening since the founding of America and since the time that political parties were started. The Democrats did it in the past, and the Republicans have done it too. The problem is now, that the GOP wants to rewrite their own damned history, just for the purpose of political expediency. They believe that now that Obama is not doing very well in the polls and the midterms are coming; that they will be able to clear the Bush hurdle and possible take the midterms. Something that they could do very well, if they would be a bit more honest and up front about their past. Sorry folks, there is nothing wrong with a political party saying, “Hey, you know, we were wrong about all that a long time ago.”

To clearly understand all of the above; one must take the camera lens and pull back about 10 good feet and look at that only thing in it’s historical context. You have remember, that there a good number of scared white people in the south. The Klan backed segregation movement had been defeated. The Federal Government had ordered integration in the south. There were white people in Alabama, Georgia and many other states in the south, that were deathly afraid that the black populace was going to rise up and drag the white folk out of their houses, kill them, and take their possessions. Did the Republican Party capitalize on those fears. You bet they did! Did it ever happen? No. But it did get many of a Republicans voted for in the south.

Not much of it has changed; back then, they had booklets like “Red Channels.” Nowadays, we have a thing called the Blogosphere! Same game, same fears, same two parties. Just the surroundings have changed a bit. We have laptops and desktops; instead of typewriters. We have RSS feeds, instead of newspapers. We have Bill O’Reilly, Keith Olbermann and Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Ed Schultz; back then there was just Ed Murrow and McCarthy. They are still yelling at one another and getting ratings. Not much as changed at all. One side is fighting for supposed “Equality”, the other is on some sort of Messianic mission to save the world from Communism. None of it has ever changed; just the methods have changed a bit. But it is that struggle, I believe, that makes America the great nation that it is. That is the debate that sets us apart from other Countries —- Federalism vs Anti-Federalism. Conservative vs Liberal.  The very right to be able to debate is unique one to this Nation.

Admittedly, in the last two years; things got a bit one sided in Government. One party was driven to the wilderness for a bit. However, in 2010, this is about to fix itself. That is the wonderful thing about America; our political balance always rights itself.

…..and we are a greater Nation for it.