America is on the brink of
another revolution. In a new
American
TEA Party,
citizens across the USA are beginning to protest
Obama's giant government programs that reach deep
into their pockets.
date
item
archive in
All new items posted to The Obama
File are first posted on this page.
Selected items are then archived
or edited into the "subject area" pages, accessible via the
buttons
12/16/09
Obama Threatens Senator
The Washington Examiner is
reporting that according to a Senate aide, Obama is now threatening
to put Nebraska's Offutt Air Force Base on the Base Realignment And
Closure (BRAC) list if Nelson doesn't fall into line.
While the
Democrats appease Senator Lieberman, they still have to worry about
other recalcitrant Democrats including Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson.
Though Lieberman has been out front in the fight against the public
option and the Medicare buy-in, Nelson was critical of both. Now
that those provisions appear to have been stripped from the bill,
Lieberman may get on board, but Nelson's demand that taxpayer money not
be used to fund abortion has still not been met.
Offutt Air Force
Base employs some 10,000 military and federal employees in Southeastern
Nebraska. As our source put it, this is a "naked effort by Rahm
Emanuel and the White House to extort Nelson's vote." They are
"threatening to close a base vital to national security for what?" asked
the Senate staffer.
Indeed, Offutt is the headquarters for US
Strategic Command, the successor to Strategic Air Command (STRATCOM),
and not by accident. STRATCOM was located in the middle of the
country for strategic reasons. Its closure would be a massive blow
to the economy of the state of Nebraska, but it would also be another
example of this administration playing politics with our national
security.
Hot Air blog
adds, "The Obama administration has little left to use for leverage.
Why not national security? After all, if we’re going to bring
terrorists into Illinois, what does it matter if we put the US Strategic
Command on wheels for a few years?"
Intimidation
12/16/09
Obama's Latest Swindle
The LA Times is
reporting that Obama is pressing Congress to provide money to
homeowners to improve energy efficiency -- and the economy -- by
replacing doors, caulking windows and padding their attics with more
insulation, in a scheme that has been dubbed, "Cash For Caukers."
Obama admitted that the "idea may not be very glamorous" but
declared Tuesday that he found insulation "sexy."
Under one
proposal being considered by House Democratic leaders, $20 billion from
February's economic stimulus package would be used to offer incentives
of $1,000 to more than $3,000 for people to apply to projects that
improve the energy efficiency of their homes. About 5 million
homes could be retrofitted under the program, saving homeowners a total
of $3.3 billion annually on energy bills, supporters said.
According to the US Census Bureau's "American
Housing Survey (AHS)," there were 128,203,000 housing units in the
United States in 2007. Approximately 110,692,000 were occupied as
regular residences and 17,511,000 were vacant or seasonal.
According to my calculator, that $180.68 per home, if all of America's
homes were to benefit from Obama's latest swindle. That, of
course, ain't gonna happen.
The beneficiaries of Obama's scheme,
comprise only only 4.5% of the occupied dwellings in the United States.
How do you suppose Obama is going to pick and choose the winners in this
program? Hmmmmmm?
And check out the Democrats "fuzzy math."
$20 billion for 5 million homes (less than 5% of America's homeowners)
-- that's $4,000 per home, according to my calculator -- so how do the
Democrats calculate their average of $2,000 per home?
"Administrative" costs, no doubt -- half the allocation would be paid to
some unknown entity to distribute the benefit. Do I smell another
ACORN, or ACORN affiliate, cash grant in
the wind?
Can you spell "reparations?" Can you spell
"redistribution?" Hard working, mortgage paying Americans won't
see a dime of this money. This swindle is just another handout to
Obama's supporters -- another payment for their vote.
Not Archived
12/16/09
Enslaving The American People
Atlas Shrugs asks how do people reconcile this in their minds?
How do Americans reconcile the fact that federal employees earn an
average of $30,000 more than the private sector employee? Or that
close to 350,000 federal employees earn more than $100,000?
They
are bankrupting this nation while stuffing their faces on the backs of
Americans. This is the poisonous fruit of the left's utopian dream
of big government.
Ayn Rand saw it all:
Today, when a concerted effort is made to
obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the
Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private
individuals -- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private
individuals, only the conduct of the government -- that it is not a
charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen’s
protection against the government.
America’s abundance was
created not by public sacrifices to "the common good," but by the
productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal
interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They
did not starve the people to pay for America’s industrialization.
They gave the people better jobs, higher wages and cheaper goods
with every new machine they invented, with every scientific
discovery or technological advance -- and thus the whole country was
moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.
The goal of the "liberals" -- as it emerges from the record
of the past decade -- —was to smuggle this country into welfare
statism by means of single, concrete, specific measures, enlarging
the power of the government a step at a time, never permitting these
steps to be summed up into principles, never permitting their
direction to be identified or the basic issue to be named.
Thus, statism was to come, not by vote or by violence, but by slow
rot -- by a long process of evasion and epistemological corruption,
leading to a fait accompli. (The goal of the "conservative"
was only to retard that process.)
"Nobody Wanted To Deal With The Fact That He Was A terrorist"
(02:24)
Nidal Hassan
12/15/09
The Audacity Of Chutzpah
In Hebrew, "chutzpah" is used indignantly, to describe someone
who has over-stepped the boundaries of accepted behavior with no
shame. There's an old anecdote that is used to
illustrate chutzpah -- it's about a man who murdered his father
and mother, and then throws himself on the mercy of the court on
the grounds that he’s an orphan -- that's chutzpah.
Well,
Obama displayed chutzpah, and in spades, Sunday night during his
"60 Minutes" interview by Steve Kroft when he said, "I did not
run for office to help a bunch of fat cat bankers," blaming them
for the financial crisis, saying "You guys caused the
problem" -- video
here.
Obama was simply applying Alinsky's rule # 12, "Pick the
target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." This
tactic attempts to cut off the support network (the public) and
isolate the target (bankers) from sympathy. Obama was
going after people and not the institutions -- people hurt
faster than institutions.
But behind that attack was
chutzpah, because Obama knows that he, Barack Hussein Obama, is
singularly responsible for much of the financial crisis.
In a 1995 case known as Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank, Obama and his fellow attorneys
charged that
Citibank was making too few loans to black applicants and
won the case. As one commentator
noted in May 2008, legal "successes" such
as this were responsible for the
sub-prime mortgage crisis
of 2007 AND 2008. That is, banks were
not loaning to
minorities whose
credit was poor. When the law forced them to lend money anyway, the
inevitable collapse occurred."
Obama played a large part in the lawsuit that started the
government on a course of forcing lenders to give more loans to
those who had poor credit. Lending companies were forced to
come up with imaginative ways of fulfilling the quota that was
required. Sub-prime lending was born as a result.
Obama's pal and his campaign's finance chair,
Penny Pritzker, was an
early promoter of what would
become known as "predatory lending" -- and now,
according to Obama, its the bankers' fault -- that's chutzpah.
The
mortgage crises was forecast by many who were able to look beyond
the quotas. This
August, 2008, New York Times
article (.pdf) clearly forecast the mortgage meltdown:
In
a move that could help increase home ownership rates among
minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation --
protected by Barney Frank and
Chris Dodd -- is
easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from
banks and other lenders, ... under increasing pressure from the
Clinton Administration.
"Fannie Mae has expanded home
ownership for millions of families in the 19902 by reducing down
payment requirements," said Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman
and chief executive officer. "Yet there remain too many borrowers
whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has
required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher
mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market."
Demographic
information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study
indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went
to black borrowers, compared to 5 percent of loans in the
conventional loan market.
In moving, even tentatively, into
this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more
risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic
times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into
trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue
similar to that of the savings and loan industry of the 1980s.
"From the perspective of many people, including me, this is
another thrift industry growing up around us," said Peter Wallison,
a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. "If they
fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out, the way
it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry."
And at the same time as Obama berates bankers, he
wants them to make more bad loans -- that's chutzpah.
This "Audacity of Chutzpah" is classic Obama. He creates a
disaster, like his professors, Cloward and Piven
taught him, and then blames somebody, or something else for the
fallout. He's been doing it his entire political career.
Since he's occupied the Oval Office, he's been blaming George
Bush for his own failures, caused by his own lack of judgment.
That's not the behavior of a man.
Obama is not a leader. He doesn't have a clue about
leadership or governing, so he falls back on the only thing he
knows -- Alinsky's community organizing techniques -- bringing
folks to the "realization" that they are miserable;
blaming their misery on the greedy bankers; demanding the
bankers cave to their demands; and to make such an almighty
stink that the dastardly bankers will see imminent
"self-interest" in granting whatever it is that will cause the
harassment to cease.
NewsMax.com is
reporting that Barack Obama intends to block the growth of the CIA’s
largely successful clandestine program of using missiles fired by
Predator drones to kill key al-Qaida leaders in Pakistan. A debate
over expanding the program has reportedly been ongoing among Obama and
his advisers for the past year.
Obama and his advisers worry the
spy agency’s desire to expand the strikes into populated areas such as
Quetta -- reported home to key Taliban leaders such as Mullah Omar --
would increase the risk of unwanted civilian casualties and increase
diplomatic problems with the Pakistani government.
The
administration reportedly has been encouraged by Pakistani army attacks
against al-Qaida and Taliban positions inside Pakistan, and is wary of
straining relations.
The attacks have killed over a dozen
al-Qaida leaders in the past two years. The body count includes
Abu Khabab al-Masri, al-Qaida’s alleged top specialist in the area of
weapons of mass destruction, and Baitullah Mehsud, the mastermind
of Benazir Bhutto’s murder.
In spite of the publicity the
Predator strikes have garnered, the U.S. government still refuses to
acknowledge its existence. However, an unnamed national security
official tells Newsweek the attacks have not only been successful in
killing key terrorists, but it has kept them on the run and disrupted
their ability to plan new attacks.
Another official said
expanding the drone missile strikes could be kept on the table as a way
to gain diplomatic leverage with the Pakistani government to keep up its
present offensive against al-Qaida and the Taliban.
"...the attacks have not only been
successful in killing key terrorists, but it has kept them on the run
and disrupted their ability to plan new attacks" -- well, we can't have
that now, can we.
Military
12/15/09
Obama To Sign $1.1 Trillion Omnibus Bill
CNSNews.com is repoting that Barack Obama will likely sign the $1.1
trillion omnibus spending package passed by the Senate over the weekend
containing more than 5,224 earmarks, taxpayer-funded abortions, and
needle exchange, a White House spokesman said Monday, stressing that the
number of earmarks had dropped from the previous year’s spending bill.
Obama signed the 2009 omnibus bill last March. It
contained 8,570 earmarks. He vowed then that the bill signing was
simply wrapping up the previous year’s business -- a "departure point"
-- and that things would change under his watch.
"We can’t have
Congress bogged down at this critical juncture in our economic
recovery," Obama said in March. "But I also view this as a
departure point for more far-reaching change. I am signing an
imperfect omnibus bill because it’s necessary for the ongoing functions
of government, and we have a lot more work to do."
The latest
omnibus spending bill is designed to keep the government running until
the end of fiscal year 2010 on Sept. 30. The watchdog group
Taxpayers for Common Sense determined that this omnibus contains 5,224
earmarks.
Among the more controversial aspects, the bill would
allow the District of Columbia government, which is mostly funded
through federal subsidies, to pay for abortions. It also overturns
a ban on needle exchanges and ends the D.C. school voucher program,
forcing 1,800 DC schoolchildren back into Washington's failed public
school system -- you can thank the teachers unio.
The earmarks
in the bill identified by the watchdog group Citizens Against Government
Waste include:
Lies
12/15/09
Obama's Secrecy
The Washington Times
contends you can't have a closed-door meeting about the need for
fewer closed-door meetings and expect anyone to take you seriously.
That's like writing a memo to order fewer memos. Such folly is
business as usual in the Obama White House.
Obama promised a
historic level of transparency from his administration but hasn't
delivered. On Dec. 7, he held a "workshop" on government openness
that was closed to the public.
Perhaps Obama didn't want the
public to hear about some of his less-than-glamorous transparency report
cards. This comes on the heels of a purported transparency Web
site -- Recovery.gov -- delivering fake information to the public about
fantasy jobs in imaginary congressional districts.
The political
landscape is littered with broken promises for ever-greater
transparency. Obama promised that all health care negotiations
would be open to the public. Yet the day before the secret meeting
to condemn secrecy, he held a Democrats-only closed-door strategy
meeting to push a new version of his partisan health care plan.
Obama's purple prose continues nonetheless. "The government should
not keep information confidential merely because public officials might
be embarrassed by disclosure," he said. Talk is cheap.
The
administration has sometimes released information only after weeks or
months of pressing from watchdogs and reporters. There has been
foot-dragging about what cars people bought through the "cash for
clunkers" program, rules about the interrogation of terror suspects and
White House visitor logs, for starters.
We have some sympathy
for Chicago's favorite son. After all, it has to be embarrassing
for him to have to reaffirm the George W. Bush administration's decision
to keep national security information secret, but that's what he's
doing. The Obama administration is using the state-secrets
privilege just as President Bush did to keep eavesdropping programs in
the shade. Obama also didn't allow the planned release of hundreds
of photos by the Pentagon that show the purported mistreatment of
prisoners by U.S. personnel.
A Nov. 18 Zogby poll shows that
just 38 percent of likely voters think the Obama administration is more
transparent than the Bush administration, with the same number viewing
the Democratic team to be less transparent. That's not a great
showing for a would-be reformer who made openness one of the hallmarks
of his campaign for the highest office in the land.
Obama has
the lowest-ever recorded approval rating at this point in time.
Perhaps he might win broader public support if he didn't promiscuously
abandon his campaign promises.
Lies
12/15/09
Anti-Obama Sentiment Brewing On The Internet
The Australian is reporting that anti-Obama sentiment is brewing on
the Internet as Tea Parties threaten a boil-over.
When Stacy
Mott, a stay-at-home mother of three children, started writing a blog
after the election of Barack Obama last year, she had no involvement in
politics and simply wanted to vent her frustration at financial
bailouts, healthcare reform and legislation to combat climate change.
The former marketing executive at "Toys R Us" quickly found she was not
alone. One year later, her blog,
Smart Girl Politics, is
an organization with 23,000 members and coordinators in almost every
state.
"There are a huge amount of people out there who are angry
at Obama and big government but feel the Republican Party is not
representing them," said Rebecca Wales, who left the party's campaign
team to become Smart Girl's communications director. "What we are
seeing is an outpouring of conservative values."
In recent
months, the US has witnessed an astonishing growth in similar right-wing
grassroots organizations across the country,
loosely grouped under the
"Tea Party" label.
Although it has no leader, no clear origins
and a vague objective of "taking back America", it is emerging as a
powerful force in next year's congressional elections. A poll last
week found that if it were a party, the movement's candidates would be
more popular than the Republicans. According to the Rasmussen
survey, Democrats have 36 per cent of the vote, the Tea party 23 per
cent and Republicans 18 per cent.
Yet the first mention of the
movement came only in February, when a TV reporter named Rick Santelli
launched a tirade against the government's bailout of mortgage
companies.
His rant, which ended up on YouTube, called for a tea party in
homage to the 1773 protest in which British tea was emptied into Boston
Harbor, helping to spark the American revolution. Others say the
name stands for "Taxed Enough Already".
Whatever its origins, the
Tea party first showed its teeth with a rally in Washington in September
whose size and venom took everyone by surprise. Hundreds of
thousands of angry protesters massed near Capitol Hill to denounce
Obama's healthcare and spending plans, chanting, "Enough, enough".
Then, last month, Tea party supporters showed the electoral damage they
could wreak by backing their own right-wing candidate rather than the
moderate Republican in a congressional election in New York state.
The resulting split led to a Democrat victory.
Tea party
activists now plan to back conservative candidates in next autumn's
mid-term elections. They believe their grassroots support will
enable them to raise millions of dollars, drawing on the Obama
campaign's success in using the internet.
The Telegraph (UK)
reports that Barack Obama has awarded himself a B plus for his first
11 months in office, stressing in an interview with Oprah Winfrey that
there was still much to be done.
"A good solid B plus," Obama
said during an hour-long, intimate soft-focus ABC network Christmas at
the White House special, when Winfrey asked what grade he would give
himself.
Explaining why he wouldn't give himself top marks,
Obama blamed George Bush, saying his administration had "inherited the
biggest set of challenges of any president since Franklin Delano
Roosevelt," which they were still working on.
Obama thinks he's
doing pretty good -- here's what the American People have to say:
And check
this poll that is currently running on the New York Daily
News, entitled "Grading Obama." It says Obama gives
himself a B+ for his first 11 months in office, and asks, "What
grade would you give him?" At noon, the results are:
A -- 7% B+ -- 9%
B -- 7% C -- 8% D
-- 16% F -- 53%
And, here
are Obama's numbers by state -- and they're all tanking.
In 2010 we take away Obama's majority in Congress, and in 2012,
we send this guy back to WHEREVER the hell he comes from.
Not Archived
12/14/09
But The Commies Are Encouraged
Sam Webb, Chairman of the Communist Party USA says that slightly
over a year ago, the American people elected a young African American to
the presidency and increased the Democratic majority in the Congress.
Obama’s victory represented a repudiation of right-wing ideology,
politics and economics and a setback for neoliberalism in both its
conservative and liberal skins.
This victory was a long time in
coming. When it finally happened it did so not only because of the
brilliance of the candidate, but also due to the broad shoulders of a
people’s coalition.
The swing in the political pendulum ushered
in the possibility of a new era. After 30 years of right-wing
dominance, the balance of political power tilted once again in a
progressive direction.
Though that tilt wasn’t far enough for a
people’s agenda to be easily enacted, political advantage did shift, and
that’s no small accomplishment.
Perhaps it is obvious, but if
McCain and Palin had been elected, a public option would not be in the
center of the conversation -- in fact, health care reform wouldn’t even
be on the agenda. The Employee Free Choice Act would be off
labor’s wish list. The stimulus package would be far smaller and
unemployment much higher. There would not be a Puerto Rican woman
on the Supreme Court. Our government would be actively supporting
the coup regime in Honduras, and relations with Cuba would be frozen or
worse. Legislation extending hate crimes to include anti-gay
violence would still be on the "to do" list. And not a word would
have been mentioned about the abolition of nuclear weapons.
In
short, Obama’s election has made a difference, and the progressive
movement has space to dream again. There are limits and obstacles
to be sure, but what should frame our outlook are hope and possibility.
The great reformer of the 20th century, Rev. Martin Luther King, taught
us this lesson.
Obama's agenda is the agenda of
the Communist Party USA -- how nice!
And the next time someone
tells you they're a "Progressive," point to the fact that the Chairman
of the Communist Party USA says progressivism IS communism.
Politics
12/14/09
From Cover-Up To Stonewall
CNSNews.com is
reporting that Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the ranking member of
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, says Obama is
stalling in providing information to the leaders of the House and Senate
and the congressional intelligence committees on the multiple murders
committed by a radical Muslim Army officer at Fort Hood more than a
month ago. So far, the committee chairman and congressional
leaders have received no detailed, substantive briefing on the terror
attack and what is known about its jihadi perpetrator.
"You know,
they're playing out the string," Hoekstra said Thursday. " We're going
home next week, (and) they will have effectively made it through three
months with giving no substantive briefings on Fort Hood."
CNSNews.com asked Hoekstra whether it was "a constitutional affront not
to have the Gang of 8 briefed on this?"
"Oh yeah, sure,
absolutely," said Hoekstra.
The Gang of 8 is a group of leaders
from the House and Senate who by law are supposed to be briefed on U.S.
intelligence activities when the matter is too sensitive to share with
the full intelligence committees. The group includes the chairmen
and ranking members of the House and Senate intelligence committees and
the majority and minority leaders of each chamber. Additionally,
the law holds that the administration must "ensure that the
congressional intelligence committees are kept fully and currently
informed of the intelligence activities of the United States."
"The committees were briefed on I believe it would be November 18, 19,
preliminarily. It was a scripted presentation where most of the
questions were answered with, 'We don't know,' 'We're checking into
that,' 'We'll get back to you,' 'Let us finish our initial investigation
here.'…'We don't want to jeopardize any criminal prosecutions,' and all
those kinds of things," said Hoekstra.
Hoekstra said Obama was
not being transparent. "It's now three and a half, four weeks
later," said Hoekstra. "I would assume that in the last four weeks
we've gathered lots of info that should be shared with the intelligence
committees." There is a "lack of transparency here," Hoekstra
said, and "it is unbelievable the material and the information that
they're withholding from us, from the American people."
Hoekstra
said, "I know that the (Fort Hood) report was delivered to the President
on November 30, so I talked to director [of National Intelligence,
Dennis] Blair last week and said, 'Hey, I'd just like an update,' you
know? There are a lot -- potentially lots -- of areas that have
ties to foreign intelligence and foreign threats -- international
threats. Give us an update," said Hoekstra. "I'd like to
know who Hasan was in contact with, what happened to his money and these
types of things. Who else he might have been talking to in the
United States? All of this kind of information. Supposedly
we got access to his computers, supposedly we got access to his email,
his phone records, financial records, all of these kinds of things,"
said Hoekstra.
Hoekstra said Blair has been putting off a
meeting. "So I asked for a briefing last week," said Hoekstra.
"Mr. Blair thought he'd be able to give me one. He was told, 'No,'
and then he said, 'I'm not going to make a commitment, but I think that
we'll be able to give you one next week,' which would be this week.
Well, he's out of the country until late tomorrow (Friday). I
talked to his (Blair's) office yesterday (last Wednesday), and you know
the answer is now, 'No briefing this week.' It's unbelievable,"
said Hoekstra.
When Hoekstra was asked if he wanted to be briefed
on Obama's report or on the Fort Hood incident in general, he said: "On
anything -- on any intelligence that they've gathered! They are
not willing to share it with the intelligence committee. Wouldn't
it be nice to know what his -- shouldn't the intelligence committee know
what his relationship was to Aulaqi [Anwar
al-Awlaki], what other foreign people he would be talking to?
No briefing."
Read about the jihad attack and Obama's subsequent
cover-up here . . .
Nidal Hasan
12/14/09
Obama's Rules Of Engagement
Joseph Farah
reports that the new military rules of engagement (ROE), implemented to
ostensibly protect Afghan civilians, are putting the lives of U.S.
forces in jeopardy, as the Taliban learns to game plan based the rules'
imposed limits.
The rules of engagement, or ROEs, apply to all
coalition forces of the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization. Their enactment is in response to Afghan President
Hamid Karzai's complaints over mounting civilian deaths apparently
occurring in firefights --
remember, the Taliban ARE "civilians" and they travel and fight with
their families.
The impact of new restrictions has
created increasing frustration and concern among U.S. Army and Marine
Corps troops who now are compelled to follow these rules despite the
danger of letting the Taliban live to fight again another day.
Critics see the new ROEs being more oriented toward defensive rather
than offensive operations, as evidenced by recent charges of murder
against two U.S. Army snipers because they had targeted a Taliban
commander who reportedly wasn't holding a weapon.
The actual
ROEs are classified U.S. and NATO secrets, but based on individual
soldier accounts, those restrictions include the following:
No night or surprise searches
Villagers are to be warned prior to searches
Afghan National
Army, or ANA, or Afghan National Police, or ANP, must accompany U.S.
units on searches
U.S. soldiers may not fire at insurgents
unless they are preparing to fire first
U.S. forces cannot
engage insurgents if civilians are present
Only women can
search women
Often, rules of engagement require varying levels
of approvals before action can be taken. In one case, villagers
had tipped off U.S. forces of the presence of a Taliban commander who
was threatening village elders. To get permission to go after him,
U.S. troops had to get 11 separate Afghan, U.S. and international
forces' approval to the plan. The approval, however, did not come
until well into the next day. By then, the Taliban commander had
moved on, to the consternation of the villagers who had provided the
tip. Observers have claimed that it can take some 96 hours to
acquire all the permissions to act.
In other cases, the use of
force against insurgents may be blocked if they lower their guns, only
to have those insurgents return later to attack.
Also, ISAF
troops cannot engage insurgents if they are leaving an area where an IED
has been planted. In one case, insurgents planting an IED had
detected the presence of U.S. forces and immediately began leaving the
area, tossing evidence of their preparations along the way. U.S.
forces could not fire on them.
The ROEs in some cases have gone
beyond limiting ISAF troops in their operations. In one case, ROE
restrictions were in effect when four U.S. Marines twice pleaded by
radio for artillery support in combat action in Kunar Province in
Afghanistan -- and twice they were refused -- before they were killed.
Military
12/14/09
Obama's Long-Time Plan For
Socialized Medicine
Obama's long-time plan (01:12)
Freedom's Lighthouse
says that Obama has planned all along to move the United States
toward a "single-payer," Universal Health Care System.
This
video points out that Obama went to Capitol Hill on December 7th, to
meet with Senate Democrats. Just two days later, Harry Reid
announced his grand "compromise" to supposedly drop the "Public
Option," but expand Medicare to include those 55 and up.
The
proof that this "compromise" comes straight from Obama is in the
video.
ObamaCare
12/13/09
More Marxists And Socialists
Aaron Klein
says extremists that were tied to a Bill Ayers-organized event
propelled Obama's political career.
During Obama's West Point
address last week. in which he committed 30,000 more troops to
Afghanistan, he referred to his opposition to the war in Iraq, which he
first voiced at a 2002 anti-war rally, said to have helped launch his
political career. The rally, which drew some 2,000 participants,
was planned by socialist and Marxist activists associated with
Weatherman Underground founder
William Ayers. The Oct. 2,
2002, rally at Chicago's Federal Plaza was widely credited with
propelling to Obama to the national stage.
That event, meant to
protest the impending invasion of Iraq, was coordinated on behalf of a
small group, Chicagoans Against the War & Injustice, run by Marxist
Carl Davidson and extremist activists
Marilyn Katz and
Bettylu Saltzman.
Davidson is a notorious far-left activist and former radical national
leader in the anti-Vietnam movement. He served as national
secretary for the infamous Students of a
Democratic Society anti-war group, from which Ayers' Weathermen
later splintered.
Davidson was a founder of the
New Party, a controversial 1990s political party that sought to
elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic
Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a
socialist agenda -- Obama was a
member, and
participated in New Party events and campaigns.
Katz is a Chicago
public relations consultant and political operative, who has known David
Axelrod for 30 years. Katz claims it was she who introduced Obama to
the "activist network" in Chicago.
Katz met William Ayers
through SDS and defended him after his association with Obama surfaced
in the 2008 Presidential Campaign. She organized Vietnam War protests
through Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). Katz is a petite
woman who was, improbably, the head of security for S.D.S. at the 1968
Democratic Convention. She led young protesters outside the convention,
including throwing nails in the street to thwart police officers.
In Recalling Her 1960’s Activism, Katz, who served on the finance
committee of Obama's presidential campaign, has said she was for "sexual
freedom and a Democratic socialist
paradise."
During the SDS's infamous
Days of Rage
riots in October 1969, Katz introduced protesters to a new weapon to
deploy against the police: a cluster of nails sharpened at both ends and
fastened in the center. Police later reported being hit by golf
balls with nails through them, as well as by excrement. Katz would
insist years later that her "guerrilla nails" were merely "a defensive
weapon" to prevent "possible bad behavior by the police."
Obama
initially met Katz through his first job at a law firm run by Judd
Miner. The New York Times reported Katz "gave [Obama] entry into another
activist network: the foot soldiers of the white student and black power
movements that helped define Chicago in the 1960s."
After Obama
became president, Katz reportedly tried to convince Illinois Gov. Rod
Blagojevich to appoint Valerie Jarrett, Obama's top adviser, to Obama's
open U.S. Senate seat. The New York Times describes Katz as "a
friend" of Jarrett's who encouraged her to step out of Obama's shadow
and "be the sun."
Saltzman first met Obama when he was in charge
of Project VOTE's
registration drive for the 1992 election.
In the past few days,
Anti-American extremists, such as Ayers, have been protesting Obama's
plan to deploy 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and begin drawing
them down in July 2011.
"I am here demonstrating against the war
because I am appalled and alarmed that once again we are escalating the
war,'' Ayers said, in a video interview captured on the streets of
Chicago last week. "The idea that there are benchmarks for getting
out is a myth and a lie."
Also, principle Students for a
Democratic Society organizer
Tom Hayden last week wrote in the Nation magazine that he is
removing an Obama bumper sticker from his car until all troops are
removed from Afghanistan.
And the list
of Communists, Marxists and Socialists that have one degree of
separation from Obama grows and grows.
The Post & Email
reports that in the aftermath of yet another insult to our allies
via the refusal to participate to the traditional events surrounding the
award of the Nobel Prize including a dinner with the King, on the
pretenses that the recipient was a very busy, sitting "President,"
responsible for not one, but two, wars and facing the worst economic
crisis "EVAHHH," the White House is quietly organizing yet another
vacation for the Obamas.
They would have you believe that nothing
has been decided yet, when in fact the logistics of booking their 13 day
vacations in Hawaii, from December 23 to January 3, are in full swing,
and the invitations for the entourage are out!
Yesterday,
December 10, AFP's Laurence Haim, the only French-Press-accredited,
White House correspondent, revealed that she had received an email
inviting her and a guest to stay for the duration of Obama’s trip to
Hawaii, at a Hotel next to the Obamas’ vacations spot. Her
revelations were aired on the French TV leading evening news program.
To listen to the program in French, go to the 20:00 mark in
this broadcast.
According to Haim, the entire corps of White
House correspondents, domestic and international has been invited (with
a guest of their choice), to follow the Obamas under the sun at the
American taxpayer expense.
In times when the American people are
facing a bleak and sobering Christmas, when millions have lost their
jobs and homes, the Obama Court is relocating to a Hawaiian paradise on
the public dime. And to insure the cooperative silence of the Main
Stream Media, it is bribing the lackeys of the press, with lavishing and
outrageous favors.
This would be cause enough to raise eyebrows,
but since when is 13 day vacation outside of the mainland U.S.A.
accpetable the "President" of a nation at war?
I guess Christmas
at home in Chicago or New Year at Camp David does not fit the standards
of the Grandiose Obamas.
Probably not Historic enough!
Propaganda
12/13/09
Not Archived
12/13/09
Welcome To ObamaVille
Noel Sheppard
says a sign reading "Welcome to Obamaville, Colorado's Fastest
Growing Community" appeared at a homeless tent city in Colorado Springs
this week. You probably didn't hear about it because outside of
two Colorado television stations nobody found this newsworthy.
No hope and change here
By contrast, when word got out in March of a tent
city in Sacramento, California, news media couldn't get enough of the
story. Is it because that happened so soon after Inauguration Day
that it could easily be blamed on George W. Bush, and that given the
name given to this area that's no longer possible?
Before you
answer, here's the report logged Thursday by ABC affiliate KRDO-TV
(video embedded below the fold, h/t
Breitbart TV): According to LexisNexis and Google news
searches, only KRDO and
KJCT
reported the appearance of this sign.
By contrast, Sacramento's
tent city garnered much national coverage in March. In fact,
according to LexisNexis, television news outlets ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC
all covered it. So did the Associated Press, the New York Times,
the Washington Post, and Slate.
Yet not a peep about Obamaville.
Exit question: If the Colorado Springs tent city sign read
"Welcome to Bushville," do you think it would get more media attention?
-- Yes, that's a rhetorical question.
Economy
12/13/09
Billboard Warns: "Prepare For War"
The European Union Times
reports on a new billboard off of Interstate 70 in Missouri provides
a short "citizens guide to REVOLUTION of a corrupt government" and
issues a call to "PREPARE FOR WAR."
This billboard replaces one
that warned that the socialist "Obama-Nation" is "coming for you."
It’s unclear who the owner of the billboard is, but the first one was
the work of a "Missouri businessman."
While it’s unclear who owns it, the Lafayette
County Republican Central Committee seems to endorse it.
From the
comments: Dale Caruso writes, "It is just getting more and more
interesting -- or perhaps ominous would be a better word. Since
the beginning of this year, it has been like watching a faucet drip --
now it is becoming more like watching a small steady stream. IF
people continue to think of this in terms of "Libs" and "Conservatives"
-- "Democrats" or "Republicans" -- then they won’t see it until it
smacks them in the face. I think this is more the PEOPLE of the
United States wanting their country back."
Not Archived
12/12/09
Obama Orders Terrorists To Illinois
The Land of Lincoln may still be licking its wounds over Chicago’s
losing the Olympics to Rio, but Obama has delivered up a small
consolation prize, the state’s very own federal prison for terrorists.
Big Government has
received what is claimed to be a leaked DOJ
memo that was
allegedly sent yesterday from Eric Holder’s Department of Justice to
Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The memo authorizes the transfer
of Gitmo terrorists to the Thomson Correctional Center (TCC) in Thomson,
Illinois.
Presumably, the inmates at Guantanamo Bay are there
because they are believed to be a threat to national security. How
moving them into the United States then is a good idea is beyond our
powers of reasoning. While we are well aware of the Corleone
advice to keep one’s friend close and enemies closer, we’re pretty
certain it wasn’t meant as national security advice.
Thomson,
Illinois, is little village. It's quite small. There's no
real infrastructure to deal with any sort of "incident." It's
about 15 miles upriver from the Cordova Nuclear Power plant, and not too
far from the Rock Island Arsenal. Lots of good targets for
"outside" influences. It's populated by many simple agricultural
folk who don't lock their doors at night. There are small schools,
ripe for a hostage incident. You get the picture. But, I
guess Obama and Holder think Thomson is a good, safe place for these
enemy combatants!
Update: Breitbart's site describes the document as "a leaked
DOJ memo" from Holder to Gates. But, assuming it is authentic, it
is clearly a memo from Obama to Holder and Gates the constitutional
powers relied on are those of the president, not the attorney general,
and the memo gives directions to both Holder and Gates. (Holder
has no power to order Gates to do anything -- they are peers, and the
Constitution vests all the executive power in the president, not members
of the president's cabinet.)
Terrorism
12/12/09
What Has Obama Accomplished?
Nancy Morgan points out a question that's making the rounds of
conservative talk shows lately: "What has Obama accomplished so
far?" The question is asked of Obama supporters and the answers
range from "abolishing lobbyists" to "securing world peace" to "lowering
taxes."
One thing all answers have in common: They are all
grounded in perception as opposed to reality.
Obama has
accomplished the amazing feat of convincing millions of Americans that
black is white, that cold is hot, that the bad economy is the fault of
George W Bush, and the only things standing between America and peace on
earth are those darn Republicans and greedy capitalists.
As
author Thomas Sowell points out in "Is Reality Optional," social history
in the last 30 years has been a history of replacing what worked with
what sounded good. And no-where is this more evident than in the
"change" Obama is foisting on the American people.
The empty
rhetoric of "social justice" and "compassion" is convincingly and
successfully being used to justify ever more ludicrous social policies,
which just happen to come with a huge price tag and more government
control.
Ignored by the left and the media, however, is the
inconvenient fact that every single policy promoted by Obama and passed
by congress has been a dismal failure. From the jobs "stimulus" package
that has cost taxpayers a whopping $236,436 per job created -- to the
the "cash for clunkers" -- to the $61 billion bucks taxpayers just lost
through the AIG and auto industry bailout.
Add in the $75 billion
mortgage relief program to stem the largely government caused
"foreclosure crisis." This program has
helped a grand total of 31,000 borrowers to date, a paltry 4% of the
760,000 who have applied.
Despite the dismal failures of these
policies, Obama and his cohorts continue advocating more of the same.
As Dr. Sowell points out, "The anointed are often wrong but never in
doubt."
A survey of adult Americans finds that an overwhelming majority
prefer the seasonal expression "Merry Christmas." More than seven
out of ten, in fact. Twenty-two percent, according to Rasmussen
Reports, go for "Happy Holidays."
However, the Obamas, who won't
spend their first December holidays in the White House, apparently don't
like either one.
The Obamas have just
mailed thousands of greeting cards that say simply, "Season's
Greetings." They're cream-colored, maroon-bordered cards showing a gold
wreath wrapped around the presidential coat of arms.
The Obamas'
card, paid for by the Democratic National Committee, makes no religious
reference whatsoever. "May your family have a joyous holiday
season," says the Obamas' greeting, "and a new year blessed with hope
and happiness." This comes after reports that, initially anyway,
the Obama White House
planned its first Christmas to be a "non-religious" one, kind of
like a non-sports Super Bowl Sunday.
Not Archived
12/12/09
However
Barack Obama doesn't want to offend the sensibilities of folks who
aren't Christian by celebrating Christmas, and avoids any reference to
the birth of Christ -- even though it's a federal holiday -- at least
that's his excuse.
But
the "alleged" Christian, who rarely, if ever, attends Christian
services, has no problem offending Christians by attending services in a
mosque.
The photo above (left) was
taken in a mosque in Istanbul, Turkey. It shows Obama
preparing for an Islamic service taking place in the Sultan Ahmed Mosque.
And in the right photo, Obama and Turkish Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan
remove their shoes as they visit the Blue Mosque with Muslim clerics
Emrullah Hatipoglu (R) and Mustafa Cagrici (L) in Istanbul, Turkey.
These photos were taken during Obama's trip to Turkey, last Spring,
when Obama said, that Americans "do not consider ourselves a Christian
nation..." Obama has made similar statements in the past. In June
2007, he told CBS, "Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian
nation -- at least, not just.
But that’s not what the U.S.
Supreme Court
ruled
when, in Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 U.S. 437
(1892), they held that "this is a Christian nation." They meant that
this nation was founded on Judeo-Christian biblical principles, and that
those who brought these biblical principles to this land and who
implemented those principles in our system of government were for the
most part professing Christians who were actively involved with
Christian churches -- 51 of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional
Convention were members of Christian churches, and that leading American
political figures in the founding era quoted the Bible far more than any
other source.
And the ideals on which they framed the Declaration
of Independence and the Constitution -- that man is subject to the laws
of nature and of nature’s God, that God created man equal and endowed
him with basic unalienable rights, that human nature is sinful and
therefore government power must be carefully restrained by the
Constitution -- are ideals that they derived, directly or indirectly,
from the Bible. Some of these ideals may be shared by those of
other religious traditions. But the Founding Fathers, with few
exceptions, did not read the Koran, or the Upanishads, or the Bagavigita.
They read the Bible, and they heard the Bible preached on Sunday
mornings.
Besides denying that America is a Christian nation in
his April 6 news conference in Turkey, President Obama told the Turkish
Parliament on the same day: " We will convey our deep appreciation for
the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape
the world -- including in my own country."
The suggestion that
Islam has shaped America in any substantial way is ludicrious. As Robert
Spencer asks:
Were there Muslims along Paul Revere’s ride,
or standing next to Patrick Henry when he proclaimed, "Give me
liberty or give me death"? Where there Muslims among the
framers or signers of the Declaration of Independence, which states
that all men -- not just Muslims, as Islamic law would have it --
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,
including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Were
there Muslims among those who drafted the Constitution and
vigorously debated its provisions, or among those who enumerated the
Bill of Rights, which guarantees -- again in contradiction to the
tenets of Islamic law -- that there should be no established
national religion, and that the freedom of speech should not be
infringed?
The primary contact our Founding Fathers had with
Islam occurred during their struggles with the Barbary pirates, who from
1500-1800 carried over a million European Christians -- including some
Americans -- into Muslim slavery. For centuries the Knights of
Malta protected Europe from the Barbary pirates, but after their demise
the European powers decided that paying tribute to the Barbary rulers in
exchange for protection was easier and cheaper than fighting them.
(Hello Somali pirates!!).
But this galled the Americans. In 1786, while Thomas Jefferson and
John Adams were in Europe, they asked the ambassador from Tripoli by
what right Tripoli could claim tribute from nations which had done his
country no injury. Jefferson and Adams reported the ambassador’s
response:
It was written in their Koran that all
nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet [Mohammed] were
sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful [Muslims] to
plunder and enslave; and that every Muslim who was slain in this
warfare was sure to go to paradise.
When Jefferson became president in 1801, he refused
to pay tribute to the Barbary states, and Tripoli, Algiers, and Tunis
declared war on the United States. The American Navy blockaded the
coast of North Africa, and American marines stormed "the shores of
Tripoli" and captured the city, forcing the Barbary rulers to agree to
terms of peace. The Barbary states soon broke the treaty and
demanded tribute again, and President James Madison again sent the U.S.
Navy to the Mediterranean, forcing the Barbary states to again sign a
treaty of peace.
Clearly, Islamic influence on the United States
was minimal, and what little influence there was, was mostly negative.
Much of the Muslim world has a negative view of the United
States. Sadly, Obama seems to think the Muslim world will warm up
to our country if he shares their negative view.
Islam
12/11/09
Jihad's Apologist
In this video, Obama comments on the five Muslim-American jihadiis
from the Washington, DC area, who were
arrested in Pakistan,
and who said they were on jihad.
"I prefer not to comment" (01:39)
"I prefer not to comment."
There he goes again, covering up for the
brothers just like he did for the jihadist, Nidal Hassan,
here,
here,
here,
here,
here,
here and
here. Obama
never has a bad word for Muslims. He's just one big apologist for
jihad,
Sooner or later Obama's Muslim empathy and sympathy
is going to blow up right in his face, and a lot more Americans will be
dead. Just look at the
recent instances of jihad provided by Pamela Geller, at Atlas Shrugs
-- no doubt Obama doesn't want to comment on these events either.
Just listen to Obama's comments:
"...what has been
remarkable...is the extraordinary accomplishments of American Muslims...how
they have been woven into the fabric of our nation...fierce loyalty to America,
their patriotism...blah, blah, blah..."
What nonsense! Just
check out these
American Muslims protesting against America -- "fierce loyalty to America,
their patriotism" -- just who does Obama think he's fooling?
The responsible party? Obama blames the world-wide web for
American jihadiis.
Borrowing the tag line from Flip Wilson's
Geraldine character -- "the debil made me do it" -- Obama apologizes --
"the Internet made them do it" -- this would be funny if it weren't so
deadly serious.
Obama concludes:
"I think WE have a good story to tell here
and one WE need to build on."
What's all this WE stuff? Has Obama got a
mouse in his pocket? Just who is WE?
That pronoun could be
interpreted to mean Americans -- it could also be interpreted to mean
Muslims -- remember, "it
all depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." These pols are highly
skilled at using the language to deceive.
For almost two years, I
have resisted labeling Obama a Muslim -- even though Muslims
think he's a Muslim -- but I'm 99% sure he's not a Christian.
There's no record of a baptism, anywhere, and strolling down the
aisle of a black-nationalist church and pledging allegiance to the Black
Value System does not a Christian make. At the core of Obama's
faith -- whether lapsed Muslim, new Christian or some mixture of the two
-- is African nativism. In the paperback version of "The Audacity
of Hope," in the chapter entitled "Faith," beginning on page 195, and
ending on page 208, Obama is telling us that he doesn’t really have any
profound religious belief, but that in his early Chicago days he felt he
needed to acquire some spiritual "street cred."
The Jesuits would
say, "Give me the child, and I will mould the man."
Obama's Speech Was Bad -- Turgid -- High School Level (05:31)
"My accomplishments are slight." -- Ha! -- Obama, your
accomplishments are non-existent.
Videos
12/11/09
The King And Queen In The Universe Of Lies
Rush Limbaugh: "Actually,
I'm glad it happened. I am glad that that happened over there.
I was just watching an unbelievable sight. President and Mrs.
Obama on the balcony of their hotel room in Oslo, it's nighttime over
there, and there is a torchlight parade reception, and the street is
just filled, it's teeming with people, with their candles and torches,
with the Obamas standing high above and looking down upon them,
President Obama in his tuxedo, and I kid you not, Michelle (My Belle)
looked like she was dressed in a way to make people think she was
royalty, a queen. Make no mistake about it, it was on purpose.
But the reason I'm glad it happened, cause, you know, Snerdley is
saying, "Gosh, they just have to be eating this up, they just have to
love this, they think of themselves as royalty." That's right.
Let 'em think of that. Let them stay so out of touch with how they
are perceived by people in this country. Let 'em go over there,
get all these accolades and let them continue to live in the Universe of
Lies. I think it's much better than if he went over there and got
booed out of the place. Give that another year and that will
happen. This is good. This is good that it happened because
it allows them to continue to live this delusion that they are special,
unlike any others who have come before them."
"This morning during the intense period of show
prep that I do each and every day, I began to feel that we're living in
occupied territory, that we've been taken over, not militarily -- follow
me on this -- we've been taken over financially, economically,
politically, scientifically. Without firing a shot the left has
seized the press, they have taken control of the banks, they're about to
take control of the insurance companies and wipe them out, much of the
auto industry, the left is now setting a salary scale for people.
They've taken over our currency, and they're preparing to seize health
care. We're being occupied by the left. This country, we
need to be liberated. We, the people of this country need to be
liberated. We are oppressed now."
"You know, Snerdley told
me just a moment ago he was watching A&E, and it was a series on the
Revolutionary War. And this is what he said to me. He said
the things that our Founding Fathers considered tyranny wouldn't rate a
quarter page in a newspaper today, that the tyranny that we live under
in this country already dwarfs the kind of tyranny that caused this
country to be founded or inspired it to be founded in the first place.
Now, the left, I look at them as the occupiers, they have labeled the
word "dissent" as racism. "Dissent" is now racism, to try to quash
any dissent whatsoever. Protest has been labeled teabagging.
So, in addition, without firing a shot, being taken over financially,
economically, politically, and scientifically, the language is being
reset. Individual wealth is set to be taxed away. Schools
are teaching the words of the left, the occupier. And we're given
bread and circus distractions: Tiger Woods, the White House party
crashers, to keep us entertained while the occupation goes on."
"But sometimes occupation schemes break down. And when that
happens, the occupier has to do what all occupiers do, and that's
restore order. And I'll tell you this, this health care bill, the
people in Washington do not understand, and the polls will not tell them
of the intensity here. And of course the State-Controlled Media
doesn't get it, either. People do not understand the outrage that
is effervescing all over this country for everything Democrat Party and
Obama that's going on right now, and it's going to have a tipping point.
That's why I like Obama over there with all these people in Oslo and
their torchlight vigil and him acting like royalty and he's the savior
of the world, let him go ahead and live that delusion and ignore the
reality that he faces when he comes home."
Not Archived
12/11/09
Obama Wears Out the Welcome Mat
The Wall Street Journal
reports that 56% of voters disapprove of Obama's handling of health
care.
John Fund says that on the very morning Senate Democrats
claim to have reached a "broad agreement" on a health care bill that
will allow Americans over age 55 to "buy" into Medicare, a new
Quinnipiac poll shows just how little support the Senate efforts inspire
among the American people.
Voters oppose the bill by 52% to 38%,
and Obama's handling of health care gets even more of a thumbs down,
with 56% of those surveyed registering disapproval. By more than
two to one, Americans say extending health care to the uninsured will
cause their own costs to go up, and a plurality expect quality to
decline as well. By 71% to 21%, voters don't think universal
coverage is worth lower quality of care.
"It's a good thing for
those pushing the health care overhaul in Congress that the American
people don't get a vote. At this time, supporters are down 14
percentage points," says Peter Brown, assistant director of the
Quinnipiac Poll.
The poll also reports that Obama's personal
approval rating has fallen to 46%, an all-time low. Among
independent voters, only 37% now like the job he's doing.
ObamaCare
12/11/09
20% Of Voters Favor Impeachment
Public Policy Polling (PPP) has a whole slew of
poll results -- none are good for Obama and his agenda -- but they
slip this one in in the final paragraph:
20% of voters, including
35% of Republicans, support impeaching Obama for his actions so far.
PPP is not clear exactly what 'high crimes and misdemeanors' they are
using to justify that position but there may be a certain segment of
voters on both the right and the left these days that simply think Obama
doing things they don't agree with is grounds for removal from office.
Not Archived
12/10/09
How Many Commies Are You Close To?
The New Zeal blog is reporting that Dr. Quentin Young has been a
close friend, personal physician and political mentor to Barack Obama
for more than 20 years. He is the father of the US socialized
healthcare movement and proudly admits to having tutored his friend
Barack Obama in the subject.
Young, a member of Democratic
Socialists of America, was a member of the Young Communist League in his
teens. He was also accused of membership of the Bethune Club of
the Communist Party ( a party doctor's group) by a government commission
investigating the 1968 Democratic Party Convention riots in Chicago.
This exhibit is a
list of signatories to an Illinois Communist Party to an electoral
petition for the 1976 US Presidential Elections:
click for larger
image
John R. Lumpkin, appointed to Google's Health Advisory Council, is
listed, as are three other prominent Communist Party members -- --
Mark J. Almberg, Peter Orris and Linda Rae Murray -- all of whom are
active in the modern "single payer" movement, and all of whom are close
to Quentin Young -- who is close to Barack Obama.
Mark J. Almberg
is still a leading
member
of the Communist Party USA in Chicago. He is the Communications
Director of Quentin Young's Physicians
for a National Health Plan, one the US's main "single payer"
advocacy groups.
Dr. Peter Orris left the Communist Party in 1992
for the
Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, in which
he now plays a leading role. While still in the Communist Party,
Orris helped Quentin Young to set up the Physicians for a National
Health Plan. Orris now serves as Professor and Associate Director
of the Great Lakes Center for Occupational and Environmental Safety and
Health of the University Of Illinois School Of Public Health. He
holds several union advisory roles, including with
SEIU and uses his positions to promote "single payer" at every
opportunity.
Linda Rae Murray also left the Communist Party in
1992 and has since worked closely with Committees of Correspondence and
Democratic Socialists of America.
She is a prominent Chicago health professional and the the immediate
past president of Quentin Young's Health and Medicine Policy Research
Group. Murray is a leading and very active advocate for "single
payer" and has just been elected president of the American Public Health
Association -- a post Quentin Young held in 1988.
Quentin Young and Linda Rae
Murray (left) pictured with Barack Obama in 2003
Read the whole article
here . . . unbelievable . . . and this guy is a Kiwi . . .
Here' are the
backgrounds of known
communists that have one degree of separation from Barack Obama -- these
people are his mentors and close political allies -- Frank Marshall
Davis; Bill Ayers; Sam Graham-Felsen; Gregory Galluzzo;
Patrick Gaspard; Van Jones; Mike Klonsky; Mike Kruglik;
Alice Palmer -- and these are the ones of which we know.
How many
members of the Communist Party USA do you know -- that you're that close
to?
Associates
12/10/09
Aiding and Abetting The Enemy
The Post & Email is
reporting that Chris "Tingles" Matthews, on MSNBC's "Harball," said
Dick Cheney accused Barack Obama of treason. However, Cheney never
did any such thing.
Cheney, appearing on "Count Down with Keith
Olbermann," was commenting on Holder’s decision, at Obama’s request, to
move the trial of the 9/11 conspirators to New York City.
Cheney
said:
"I think we are going to give aide and comfort to the
enemy."
"I think it will make Kalid Shek Mohammend something of a
hero in certain circles, especially in the radical regions of Islam
around the world; it will put him on the map."
"He will be as
important or more important than Osama Bin Laden. And we will will have
made it possible."
Aiding and abetting the enemy is listed in
the U. S. Constitution as one of the grounds for a formal accusation of
treason.
That same Constitution specifies that candidates for the
presidency be natural born citizens; U.S. Statutes also require
the president of the Senate during the joint session to call for
objections to the Electoral College votes tallied in favor of each
candidate. Cheney as Vice-president last year,
failed to do that on Jan. 8.
Now perhaps, Cheney is
beginning to realize the importance of his
omission.
Not Archived
12/10/09
Obama's Nobel Snubs Are Impolite
A majority of Norwegians
consider "impolite" Barack Obama's decision to snub parts of the
official Nobel Peace Prize program in Oslo this week, a poll showed on
Wednesday.
Obama, who will formally receive the award at a
ceremony at Oslo's City Hall on Thursday, will limit his attendance at
the normally-scheduled events to a strict minimum.
Faced with two
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the fallout of the economic crisis, the
US leader has declined the traditional lunch with the king of Norway,
and, unlike previous laureates, will not hold a press conference nor
attend the Nobel concert held in his honor the day after the prize
ceremony.
According to a poll conducted by the InFact institute
and published in daily Verdens Gang (VG), 44 percent of 1,000 people
surveyed said it was "impolite" of Obama to not lunch with the king,
while 34 percent said it was okay. ore than half, 53 percent, said
it was "impolite" not to attend the Nobel concert, while 27 percent
disagreed.
Obama is due to arrive in Oslo on Thursday morning and
will leave Friday morning, staying in the Norwegian capital less than 24
hours. The official Nobel program is usually spread out over three days.
A coolly and strategically calculated evaluation of 'realpolitik' lies
behind this decision," a public relations expert, Kjell Terje Ringdal,
told VG.
"It's a smart move, since he wants to keep a low profile
and he wants to avoid the (Nobel) medal shining too bright," he added.
This guy has
another take. It all seems plain enough to him. He's not
sure why people choose to couch it in manners or protocol. If
you're a yellow, black, brown, red, or some other leader, or king, of
color, Obama is more than happy to all but get down on his knees for you
to show his respect. But old Europe, originally comprised of
mostly white people, is part of the problem with the world in Obama's
view.
If people want to give him a pass on it out of fear, or
cowardice, so be it. But the facts derived from his behavior seem
pretty clear -- time and time, again. We're now finding out first
hand why Obama was more than happy to spend all those years in Reverend
Wright's church. He is every bit the racist Wright is and his
decisions and behaviors support that conclusion. You shouldn't
need a rap artist to point it
out.
Now, did you click that
last link? That's Obama -- in his own words -- in his own voice.
This, from the guy that Joe Biden
described as, "the first mainstream African-American who is
articulate..."
And, I challenge Biden's description of Obama as
"mainstream." Obama is about as mainstream as
Gus Hall.
Race
12/10/09
2010 Is Here
Lieutenant Colonel West at the American Freedom Tour
(05:59)
Congressional candidate Lieutenant Colonel West speaking at
the American Freedom Tour in Fort Lauderdale Florida at the
Revolution Nightclub. For more information about the West for
Congress campaign or to become involved please follow
this link.
I've said it before. The
only way to take back the country from these communists, socialists,
Marxists and other assorted leftists and deviates is to ORGANIZE!
2010 is here -- this year, make it your goal to throw the bums out.
Get off your butt. Join a group near you. Add your
voice. Become active. We can send this anti-American
crowd back to wherever it is they come from.
Jake Tapper is
reporting that a six-and-a-half foot statue of Barack Obama, aka
Barry Soetoro, as a 10-year-old boy, wearing a monkey-god pendant, has been commissioned in Jakarta,
Xinhua reports.
Barry spent five of his formative years there as
a boy, where he was educated at
Catholic and
Indonesian schools.
Barry, described as "quite
religious in Islam" by his classmates, also studied
studied "mengaji," the
recitation of the Quran in its native Arabic.
A group
called "Friends of Obama" made the announcement today, saying the statue
will be inaugurated on December 10 in a playground in the Jakarta suburb
Menteng Dalam, where Barry lived from 1967 until 1971 with his mother
and stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, a practicing Muslim.
"The statue is
designed to inspire Indonesian children that they can be anyone they
want to be," said Friends of Obama chairman Ron Muller.
This may not work out very
well, since Obots will make pilgrimages to Jakarta to pay homage to the
image of their ObamaMessiah.
Since it is haram
for Muslims to have images that cultivate sentiments of worship in
people, there will undoubtedly be cultural clashes.
What will the
government of the world's largest Muslim nation do when they realize
they have erected an idol in their capitol?
Will the Indonesian
government
Taliban the "Obama as Boy" statue? Will the Obots resist?
Stay tuned.
Iconography
12/9/09
Killing Jobs -- Obama-Style
The Washington Times
editorializes, "The Obama administration used last week's jobs
summit to promote policies Obama admits will kill jobs."
In case
no one in the White House has noticed, unemployment has become a bit of
a pressing issue. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the
number of jobs lost in 2009 far surpasses the number in any other year
since World War II. More than 3 million jobs have evaporated into
the ozone layer since Obama usurped the office.
Everything the
administration is doing threatens to dig that hole deeper. Obama
has never hidden his anti-business agenda. When campaigning last
year, he told a group of journalists at the San Francisco Chronicle:
"We would put a cap-and-trade system in place that is aggressive if not
more aggressive than anybody else's that is out there. I was the
first to call for a 100 percent auction on the cap-and-trade system.
...So if somebody wants to build a power plant, they can; it's just that
it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for
all the greenhouse gas that is being emitted."
At the jobs
summit, Obama promised to keep working on that plan to bankrupt the coal
industry. He joined a clean-energy breakout session and emphasized
that the cap-and-trade bill still needs to pass the Senate. In
case you're curious where he draws the line between style and substance
on purported global warming, Obama made it clear: "The most
important thing we talked about here is packaging and marketing."
He then went on to repeat the canard that the cap-and-trade bill was
"not a jobs killer but a jobs grower." Packaging and marketing,
indeed.
As the recent scandal about fudged global-warming data
has proved, it can be tricky trying to market baloney because facts have
a way of bubbling to the surface. For example, Obama warned that
"as you know the unit costs on a lot of these renewable energies, if
you're not factoring carbon in, you are not going to be able to catch up
to coal. You just can't. Coal is going to be substantially
cheaper for the duration unless people take into account the
externalities the industry produces."
Translation of that
wonkery is fairly simple. The price of coal needs to be jacked up
so government-favored but wildly inefficient energy sources can compete.
When the price of coal goes through the roof, the number of jobs related
to coal will go through the floor. Every business in America will
have to pay higher energy costs, making it harder for all employers --
from the corner dry cleaners to automakers to international consultants
-- to hire new workers and retain current staff.
There's no way
Obama's promised boom in green jobs can compensate for the unemployment
that will result in traditional industries if his draconian energy
policy becomes the law of the land. Contrary to some claims, Obama
does have a jobs plan. The problem is it kills jobs rather than
creates them.
Economy
12/9/09
Is This Guy An
Idiot Or An Enemy?
Breitbart is reporting that
Obama plans to "spend our way out" of the financial crisis.
Obama
outlined new multibillion-dollar stimulus and jobs proposals Tuesday,
saying the nation must continue to "spend our way out of this
recession," until more Americans are back at work.
Without
giving a price tag, Obama proposed a package of new spending for
highway, bridge and other infrastructure projects, deeper tax breaks for
small businesses and tax incentives to encourage people to make their
homes more energy efficient.
The Washington Times
says Jennings' group made sex between children and adults look
normal.
The media is trying to keep this story in the closet, but
it's important not to wink at all the serious problems surrounding
Obama's controversial "Safe Schools" czar, Kevin Jennings.
Mr.
Jennings is the moral malefactor who gave a speech about how he merely
advised a 15-year-old high-school sophomore who was having sex with an
older man that, "I hope you knew to use a condom." He knew the boy
had met the adult in a bus-station restroom. Mr. Jennings also
expressed admiration for Harry Hay, a notorious and extremely prominent
supporter of the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).
"One of the people that's always inspired me is Harry Hay," he said.
Despite numerous requests to the Obama administration and Mr. Jennings,
we have not received any answers to inquiries about these troubling
issues.
Now revelations have surfaced that Mr. Jennings not only
thought there was nothing wrong with boys having sex with older men (or
girls having sex with older women), but he also played a role in
promoting such relationships.
In 1990, Mr. Jennings founded the
Gay and Lesbian Independent School Teachers Network, which later became
the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). He was
the group's first full-time staffer and executive director, a position
he held until August 2008. One of GLSEN's tasks was to put
together lists of suggested readings for K-through-12 students and their
teachers. The reading lists categorize books by the ages for which
they purportedly are appropriate. The organization Web site
reassures us, "All BookLink items are reviewed by GLSEN staff for
quality and appropriateness of content."
Some of these shocking
readings clearly promote homosexuality and promiscuity. Consider
what GLSEN put forward as appropriate for children 13 years or older.
Eleven of the recommended books were examined by Scott Baker from
Breitbart.tv and re-examined by The Washington Times. Numerous
passages discuss kids having sex with adults. Many of the sexual
discussions and scenes are too explicit for us to publish, so what
follows are greatly sanitized versions.
In "Queer 13," the book
describes a 13-year-old boy who has sexual encounters with older men.
His experience caused him to desperately want sex. "While my
classmates wondered what sex was like, content to masturbate over
pinups, I was out there having my [explicit descriptions of having oral
sex and being sodomized]. These were grown men I was tricking
with. Some were nice, grateful for a young boy to have their way
with. Some were harsh and mean. ...That feeling of doing it
to them and them doing the same for me was just too damn good."
In "Passages of Pride," a 15-year-old boy has sex with a much older man.
The boy says, "It wasn't a bad thing. I didn't necessarily know it
would turn into sex. But I knew what I was doing." The boy
claims that he was "not intimidated by the discrepancy in their ages."
"Growing Up Gay/Growing Up Lesbian" details a 15-year-old boy's
relationship with "a much older man." And in "In Your Face," one
16-year-old boy has sex with a 25-year-old man, and another 16-year-old
boy has sex with multiple men. Four of the other seven books on
the reading list contain passages of children having sex.
The
readings try to make sex between children and adults seem normal and
acceptable. Being exploited by homosexual pedophiles is portrayed
as something that can make children happy and fulfilled. Perhaps
Mr. Jennings will claim he was too busy to check what his organization
was recommending children read. Either way, this is not a man who
should have been appointed by Obama to make schools safe.
Unless, of course, Obama agrees
with Jennings. He has been very aggressive in
supporting the homosexual agenda.
Czars
12/8/09
Obama Signed Resolution Describing Him As Ineligible
This is an oldie, but it needs to be revisited, since the Obots still argue that Obama is eligible
to serve as Commander-in-Chief.
On April 10, 2008, Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Claire McCaskill
(D-MO) introduced a resolution
expressing the sense of the U.S. Senate that presidential candidate Sen.
John McCain (R-AZ) was a 'natural born Citizen,' as specified in the
Constitution and eligible to run for president. Sen. McCaskill knew
Obama was not a U.S. Citizen, that’s why she introduced this bill --
dressing it up to look like it was in Sen. John McCain's cause.
It was during the bill's hearing that Sen. Patrick Leahy, Chairman of
the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the following statement:
"Because he was born to American citizens,
there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born
citizen," said Leahy. "I
expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the Senate."
At a Judiciary Committee hearing on April 3, Leahy asked Homeland
Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, himself a former Federal judge, if
he had doubts that McCain was eligible to serve as President.
"My
assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a
natural-born American citizen," Chertoff
replied.
"That is
mine, too," said Leahy.
What's interesting here is that Sen. Leahy, the Chairman of the
Senate Judiciary, confirms that a "natural born" citizen is the child of
American citizen parents. Parents -- that's two. That's BOTH
parents.
Every time the words, "citizen" and "parent," are used
by Sen. Leahy and Sec. Chertoff, the plural case, "citizens" and
"parents," is used. The plural case is the operative case.
It is
Sen. Leahy's opinion -- his own recorded words, in a formal Senate
Resolution and on his U. S. Senate website -- that Barack Obama is not a
"natural born" citizen, and therefore not eligible to serve as
Commander-in-Chief, regardless of his birthplace.
Obama had one
American parent --singular -- his mother. His father was a citizen of
Kenya, and a subject of Great Britain.
Obama, himself, "at
birth," was a citizen of Kenya, and a subject of Great Britain -- he
says so
on his own campaign website. This fact introduces the concept of
"divided loyalties," -- the reason the founders created the eligibility
requirement in the first place -- a fact that further underlines Obama's
ineligibility.
The
source
of this information is Sen. Leahy's own website. The webpage contains a
statement about the resolution; the resolution, itself; the Statement Of
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.); and an excerpt of Sec. Chertoff's
testimony.
The plural word "parents" is used four times. When
used to identify the parents, the word "citizens" is used five times.
That's nine times that Sen. Leahy, on his own website describes the
eligibility requirement. There is NO PLACE in any of these four
documents where the singular case of "parent" or "citizen" is used.
The real purpose of this bill
was to change article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution of the
United States with reference to the requirements of being a "natural
born citizen" by the Democratic Party leadership -- paving the way for
an Obama run.
Both Leahy and Chertoff avoid addressing the "in
the US mainland" (jus solis) element of the eligibility requirement and
focus solely on parentage (jus sanguinis) in
making their arguments and by doing so bring focus to the fundamental
reason Obama is not qualified. He had one American parent and one
foreign parent. Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen -- no matter
where he was born.
Obama is a co-signer of this
resolution. So, I guess he too agrees that one needs two American
parents to be eligible for POTUS -- except he doesn't care -- after all,
he's the Obamamessiah. Rules don't apply to him.
Two days ago, I posted an item
from the European Union Times, "Obama Orders 1 Million US Troops To
Prepare For Civil War."
As of 0700 hours, this morning, the
entire European Union Times website has disappeared from the Internet.
The Internet Archive -- the
Wayback Machine -- has "no matches" for the
website or the
article.
I can understand the site being hacked by Obots, but
what happened to the stuff in the Internet Archive?
I assume the
archiving process is an automated one. So even if someone hacked
the European Union Times, there should be pages archived, but there are
none. It would have taken some form of human intervention to do
such a thorough job of scrubbing all instances of the European Union
Times' web pages.
However, there are 149,000 items returned in a
Google
web search for "European Union Times" -- I expect that page willdisappear shortly -- seeing that Google Chief Executive Officer
Eric Schmidt is such a
big Obama supporter -- Obama returned the favor by
appointing Schmidt to the President’s Council of Advisors on Science
and Technology.
Update:
As of December 11th, The European Union Times is back up. I have
sent them an email inquiring about the circumstances surrounding their
disappearance. The website and article are still not available via
the Wayback Machine.
Update: European Union Times response
--
Our website went down unexpectedly after we posted some articles. The
EU Times should now be fully functional again.
Some of our articles attracted too much visitors and we weren’t
prepared for it. We have upgraded our bandwidth and we hope that the EU
Times online newspaper will load smoothly now.
That’s it, no controversies you probably heard were true, we were not
hacked, no government brought us down. We are here to Inform You!
Props to reader
Andrea.
Scrubbing
12/8/09
Obama Claus
What's really amazing to me is that
this bribery of elected officials is so public.
Not Archived
12/8/09
Obama Is Colluding With Left To Subvert His Own
Afghan War Policy
In a move by the Obama administration that
is gallingly cynical and would be considered treasonous in a less
progressive era, a message
sent by Code Pink and an
article
published by the left wing
online publication AlertNet indicates the White House is working with the
left wing terrorist support group Code Pink to agitate the public and
undermine Barack Obama’s newly announced Afghanistan war policy.
Top Obama funder, Code Pink co-founder and terrorist
supporter Jodie Evans
wrote at AlterNet of a White House initiated phone call she received
last week, two days after Obama’s Afghan war speech at West Point.
The Obama official said the administration wanted to "consult" with Code
Pink in response to the group’s e-mail campaign targeting the White
House with opposition to the president’s surge strategy.
However, it appears that the Obama administration was
already in consultation with Code Pink before this reported phone call.
In its message to supporters, Code Pink guaranteed their e-mails would
be read by someone in the White House.
"It’s time to turn our outrage into sustained
action. Use our quick and easy tool to send your response to
Obama’s announcement to the Executive Office of the President -- where
it will be read by a member of Obama’s team! Let them know
that you are mad as hell and will push back on the escalation. It
is our job to continue to press them as we move forward."
In the article at AlterNet, Jodie Evans gloats about Code Pink’s
success, noting the Obama official called "three minutes" after the
e-mail campaign was launched.
"It was working! Impassioned CODEPINKers
all over the globe were being heard inside the White House!
Obama has been consulting with Jodie Evans for nearly three years
since first
inviting her to co-host the breakthrough Hollywood fundraiser in
February 2007 that made him a serious contender. He
appointed
her as a "bundler" for his campaign and
took tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from her for his
Obama for America and Obama Victory Fund campaign vehicles.
Obama’s last known meeting with Jodie Evans was in
October, when she gave him an antiwar propaganda package based on
her recent trip to Kabul. While in Afghanistan, she
met with members of the Taliban, according to her friend Jane Fonda.
Obama allowed himself to be filmed
accepting the propaganda package.
Jodie Evans and Code Pink have a well documented history of working
to bring about America’s defeat in the war on terror. They have
the blood of America’s soldiers on their hands from
funding "the other side" in Fallujah, acting as a
mouthpiece for
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and
sympathizing
with Osama bin Laden.
Obama and his team know this, yet they continue to work with Jodie
Evans and Code Pink as Obama sends more of America’s sons and daughters
to fight Code Pink’s allies overseas.
Paul Mirengoff
directs us to this Washington Times
editorial that updates the growing scandal at the Obama-Holder
Justice Department over the New Black Panther case. As the Times reminds
us, that case involves paramilitary-garbed Panthers caught on videotape
engaged in intimidating activities outside a Philadelphia polling booth
on Election Day 2008. A judge was ready to enter a default judgment
against the Black Panthers, based on a case brought by career Justice
Department attorneys, but the Obama administration decided last spring
to drop three of the four cases and punish the final one with only a
weak injunction.
Now the Justice Department is attempting to
cover its tracks on this matter. Thus, last week it ordered two key
career attorneys not to comply with a subpoena about the case issued by
the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. The Commission has the power to
issue subpoenas, and the law requires that "all federal agencies shall
cooperate fully with the Commission." The Justice Department, however,
is citing its own regulations as a basis for ignoring the subpoena.
The career DOJ attorneys are caught in the middle. According to the
Times, one of them has been advised by his personal attorney that
failure to comply with the subpoena could put him at risk of
prosecution, although presumably not during the tenure of the Obama
administration.
In addition, congressional Republicans are
accusing Thomas Perez, head of the Civil Rights Division, of not telling
the truth while under oath. Perez testified before Congress that, in the
case of the one New Black Panther thug against whom charges were not
dropped, "the maximum penalty was sought and obtained." That penalty,
says the Times, consisted of an injunction barring him from brandishing
a weapon near a polling place, within Philadelphia, through Nov. 15,
2012.
It's difficult to imagine that this was the maximum
penalty available, and the Times maintains that it was not. First, the
injunction could have been broader geographically and could have run for
a longer period of time. Second, if DOJ had sought a criminal
indictment, Title 18, Section 245 of the U.S. Code provides that those
found guilty of voter intimidation "shall be fined under this title, or
imprisoned not more than one year, or both."
The more the
Obama-Holder Justice Department covers up and dissembles, the more
traction this story is likely to get. And the chances are not
inconsiderable that Republicans will obtain congressional subpoena power
at some not too distant point in the future. But perhaps the truth is
sufficiently damaging that merely delaying it from being revealed is
well worth the price.
The
brothers are all sticking together on this one. Malik Shabazz, the racist leader of the New
Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, defended Attorney General Eric H.
Holder Jr. and a decision by the Justice Department to drop a voter
intimidation suit against the group.
Black Panthers
12/8/09
Obama For World President?
David Gutmann says rookie Democratic congressmen are reportedly
afraid that Obama will stubbornly press ahead with his unpopular plans
for Health Reform, even if they, his unwilling Kamikazes, get voted out
of office in 2010 as a result. As a dedicated Obama watcher, I for
one am not surprised by this development. In fact, I am now
betting even money that Obama is not particularly concerned about his
own re-election in 2012, and that he will enact as many of his programs
in health reform, energy conservation, arms reduction and income
redistribution as he can before his current term expires, and then try
for higher goals. My hunch is that he is already getting restless
in his present job, and that he seeks a promotion to an even greater
status.
My sensitivities, sharpened by years of Obama watching,
take note of the following pieces of evidence, and have gone to
Condition Red:
Obama’s seeming restlessness is a matter of
record. Until recently he was routinely charged with throwing
outworn sponsors, including his old mentor the Rev. Wright, "under the
bus." And as a Chicago politician, he used wealthy, influential
backers (mainly women), discarding them as better prospects hove into
view.
Just four years ago he was a backbencher in the Illinois
legislature, but since then he has served a partial term in the U.S.
Senate, where he spent most of his tenure campaigning for the next giant
step in his upward mobility, to the Oval Office. He has never in
any office run for re-election, but has instead used any current
position as a boost platform for his next installation.
Observers
have been puzzled by the continuing pattern: Obama is still in
campaign mode, spending a good deal of time giving major policy
speeches, not only in the states, but around the globe. "What
office is he running for now?" One can ask.
Tackling that
question, we note that Obama is an enormously ambitious, audacious man,
and -- as his gritty record in Chicago politics demonstrates -- an
enormously competitive and at times ruthless one. Coupled with his
formidable intelligence, plus the evident grandiosity revealed most
blatantly in his victory speech after winning the Democratic nomination,
("This is the night when the oceans start to recede"), we glimpse a
personality constellation that we have known before, notably in
Alexander the Great and Napoleon Bonaparte: that of the would-be
world conqueror.
"A feeble executive implies a feeble execution of the
government." -- the prescient Alexander Hamilton
David A.
Eisenberg believes that impartial observers looking for reasons to
oppose Obama’s candidacy were not found wanting. Anyone capable of
transcending the partisan pettifoggery with which the campaign,
unexceptionally, was rife, would have been able to adduce a number of
arguments why Obama was not fit to assume the nation’s highest office.
Perhaps the most prominent of these was his lack of experience.
While not without weight, the argument was largely misguided.
Experience, in and of itself, is neither good nor bad. While there
exists a strong correlation between experience and competence, the
former is no guarantee of the latter. Publius Quinctilius Varus
was not without experience when he lost three Roman legions, to say
nothing of his own life, in the Battle of Teutoburg Forest.
The
inverse is no less true, and more relevant to the matter at hand.
Nature engenders prodigies in all walks of life whose concomitant want
of experience and prodigious ability rightly garner the astonishment not
only of their contemporaries but of their antecedents for generations to
come. Alexander the Great -- who at the age of 20 succeeded
Phillip II as king of Macedon and went on to become the pharaoh of
Egypt, shah of Persia, and king of Asia by the age of 25 -- serves as no
trifling testament in this regard.
Obama availed himself of
neither approach. Instead, while implicitly conceding the value of
experience, he adopted the rather dubious position that his lack of it
was inconsequential because he possessed the judgment to lead.
Better to possess sound judgment and little experience than sound
experience and little judgment, so the argument ran. That the
claim was suspect at best could be gleaned from the fact that the basis
for it was his Iraq War opposition, which was promulgated as a state
legislator in Illinois' overtly liberal 13th district. Parroting
the sentiments of your constituents hardly is a measure of leadership.
Even if opposing the war did suggest an uncommon sense of acuity (which
would be odd seeing that resistance to the war was not exactly
uncommon), then it was at the very least undermined, if not discredited,
by Obama’s obdurate opposition to the surge.
But leaving all that
aside, the entire logic was fundamentally fallacious for the very reason
that the judgment to lead is not the ability to do so.
Gen. David
Petraeus
told "Fox News Sunday" that Obama has finally acknowledged the
success of the "Surge" in Iraq -- it must have broken his heart to do
so.
Eligibility
12/7/09
Obama's Incompetence In Developing Afghan Plan
Paul Mirengoff
comments on The Washington Post's detailed version of the lengthy
process that finally resulted in Obama's decision to send more troops to
Afghanistan. The early paragraphs track the White House's
self-congratulatory line that Obama's close attention to detail resulted
in the speeding up of troop deployment, thus creating a true "surge."
This is consistent with Obama's attempt, in his speech at West
Point, to excuse the three months it took him to make a decision.
He claimed that the process didn't really delay anything because the
plan Gen. McChrystal presented to him would not have deployed troops
rapidly enough. In other words, any delay in decision-making was
offset by the quality of the decision. The problem with this
argument is that, if the McChrystal plan truly was defective on this
count, that defect could have been cured without a three month review
process. Thus, Obama's dithering cannot be excused on this ground.
Deeper into the Post's article, we learn the real reason for the
dithering: It turns out that, Gen. McChrystal's proposal was based
on instructions from the White House that Obama probably never believed
in and certainly did not believe in when McChrystal presented his plan.
If true, this reflects gross incompetence on the part of the
administration.
According to the Post, the review process began
in the second week of September. But McCrystal was not looped into
the discussion until October 8. At that time, he made it clear
that
his mission was to "defeat the Taliban and secure the population."
This mission statement was challenged immediately by the administration
on the grounds that it is impossible to defeat the Taliban.
McChrystal noted, however, that this was precisely the mission he had
been given, as enshrined in the Strategic Implementation Plan signed off
on by the administration in March. Indeed, President Obama had
said at that time that the U.S. would "defeat the the terrorists who
oppose us."
According to the Post, Obama and his team conceded
at an October 9th meeting that McChrystal's plan reflected what he had
been told was his mission. He concluded, though, that the mission
should be redefined. Naturally, this meant significant adjustment
to McChrystal's plan.
In short, the three-month delay occurred
mostly because the White House had given McChrystal one mission and then
decided to pursue a different one. In addition, nearly a month of
delay is attributable to the time it took Obama and crew to figure out
that it no longer agreed with the mission it had given McChrystal -- the
one on which his plan was based. This, in turn, was due to the
delay in actually hearing from McChrystal.
If the Bush
administration had been this incompetent, we can be sure the Post would
have led with that story. The headline probably would have read:
"Confusion over Afghan mission led to months of delay" or something to
that effect. But because this is the Obama administration, the
headline reads: "Obama pressed for faster surge." The Post,
in short, would rather downplay a scoop than damage Obama.
Finally, the Post's story suggests that Obama wanted a fast surge at
least in large part because he wants a fast withdrawal. From his
perspective this makes sense -- you can't remotely justify beginning a
pullout in July 2011 unless you complete the surge by mid 2010.
The Post characterizes Obama's objection to the McCrystal plan this way:
"it took too long to get and too long to get out." And,
revealingly, when Obama told the military to go back to the drawing
board and find a way to get more troops in more quickly, his comment
(according to the Post) was "I don't want to be going to Walter Reed
[Hospital] for another eight years."
It is not surprising that
Obama would find it difficult to support a surge except as a means of
speeding up a withdrawal. Whether this thought process has
produced an optimal strategy for succeeding in Afghanistan -- whatever
success means now that Obama has defined it down -- is another matter.
The July 2011 date is all about
the 2012 election. It's a political calculation -- not a military
one. Obama wants to be able to claim that he has achieved victory
-- whether he has, or not -- and is withdrawing troops. If he
doesn't do this, he will lose millions of his supporters on the
Political Left.
Military
12/7/09
Did Obama Lie?
The Mail Online (UK) has a report about a highly regarded detective,
Neil Sankey, who was once seconded to elite Scotland Yard units hunting
down IRA bombers, dangerous anarchists and organized crime barons.
Today, however, almost 30 years after quitting Hampshire
constabulary to become a private investigator in California, he is
wrestling with an inquiry that is as controversial as it is complex; one
that makes that his former police work seem mundane by comparison.
Now aged 64, and semi-retired, Mr. Sankey is attempting to prove
that Barack Obama is guilty of the most audacious act of fraud in U.S
political history, having become president when he was not even eligible
to run for office.
He is conducting his inquiries on behalf of a
protest group known as the 'Birthers' -- so-called because they claim
Obama lied about his birth place to satisfy the requirements of the U.S
constitution, which stipulates that the President must be a "natural
born" American citizen.
According to his biography, Obama was
born 48 years ago in Hawaii, the 50th state of the union. But the
Birthers are convinced that he came into the world in Kenya, his
father's homeland, and Mr. Sankey claims he has already uncovered a
great deal of evidence to support this astonishing assertion.
"As an investigator it has become obvious to me that something very
strange is going on," he intoned gravely when we spoke this week.
"His background throws up all kinds of anomalies. It may sound
incredible (but) this guy comes from nowhere. No one really knows
who he is."
Obama has an
obligation to release his birth certificate and end the speculation
about his birthplace.
However, Obama's ineligibility to serve as
Commander-in-Chief is not based solely on his birthplace, but also based
on the fact (bottom of
page) that, at birth, Obama was a citizen of Kenya, and a British
subject (British
Nationality Act of 1948).
It is entirely possible that Obama
fails both tests -- jus
soli and jus
sanguinis -- the simple fact is that Obama has chosen to hide who he
is, what he is and where he comes from.
You may have noticed,
this website does not address Obama by his title, except within quotes.
The day he releases his bona fides,
and established his eligibility with a certainty, this website will
immediately refer to him as president and commander-in chief -- until
that day, he's Obama.
Eligibility
12/7/09
Just How Brilliant Is Barack Obama?
John Lillpop says for nearly two full years now, the American people
have been force-fed a steady diet of propaganda as to the formidable
genius and superior intellect of one Barack Hussein Obama.
According to the mainstream media and other liberal sources, Obama’s
superior intelligence was more important than the fact that, at age 46,
this savant from Chicago had no practical problem solving experience and
no accomplishments to his credit when he decided to seek the presidency.
His IQ is so extraordinary, they said, that he was entitled to
step into the most powerful position in the world with only the Audacity
of Hope on his resume, and the word CHANGE on his lips and loaded into
his teleprompter.
Barack Obama was the messiah, the One, the
Healer, all things good and glorious rolled into one clean and
articulate ball of genius that would save the world, America, and all of
mankind from eight years of W. and the Republicans.
Unfortunately, the American people bought into this bull excrement and
elected an enthusiastic agent of CHANGE who was, and is, exactly
clueless about the real world.
For the nightmare now residing at
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, we can thank mainstream media and the Democrat
party, and the 69 million people who voted with their hearts rather than
their brains.
After less than a full year in the presidency,
Barack Obama has distinguished himself as the most overrated and
unqualified president in American history.
One of the favorite tactics of the political Left is to smear their
political opponents. They follow
Alinsky's guideline
-- "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." They ridicule, personalize
and attack those they disagree with, because they can not, and will not,
debate the issues.
The Left is unable to defend Obama's decision to
hide his bona fides from the
American People, so they
attack anybody that dares to ask Obama to release his
documentation. One of their favorite tactics is to tar the
questioner as a "Birther," or relegate the skeptic to the "fringe."
On December 2nd, conservative talk show host Rusty Humphries
asked the former Republican vice presidential candidate whether she
would make Obama's birth certificate an issue if she ran for president.
Palin responded, "I think the public rightfully is still making it an
issue. I don't have a problem with that."
Steve Pendlebury
published a sarcastic
article in Sphere, described as "the next phase in the evolution of
AOL News" in which he comments on Sarah Palin's remarks. He includes a bunch of quotes
in his biased piece, the purpose of which is to diminish Palin
and assign her to "the fringe" -- along with the rest of the "crazies.
"
However, Pendlebury screwed up when he included an AOL Poll that asks the question: "Do you think
it's fair to question President Obama's citizenship?"
At 6 AM, on
12/6/09, the results were: 67% "Yes" -- 33% "No" -- and this is AOL, hardly a conservative website.
That's some fringe -- and
Pendlebury's attempt to tar and feather Sarah Palin has blown up --
right in his face. AOL visitors, by a factor of two-to-one,
believe Obama should release his bona fides and end the
controversy.
YouPolls.com has taken down
their December 4th poll that asks the question, "Is Obama's
birth certificate a valid question." Obviously, they
didn't like the respondents' answers -- 83% "Yes" -- 17% "No."
YouPolls.com is still running the one
asking,
"Is Obama a one term President?" -- 94? "Yes -- 5.7% "No" --
expect that one to disappear soon.
And, as previously reported, an October
23rd item reported that three-in-ten Americans think their current head of
state was not born in the United States, according to a poll by Angus
Reid Strategies. That's almost a third of all Americans.
Now,
Goddard's Political Wire
points to a new Public Policy Polling
survey in Arkansas shows that only 45% of voters in the state say
they believe Obama was born in this country, while 31% say they think he
was not and 24% are unsure.
"Arkansas is the first of four states
where we've polled the birther issue (Virginia, North Carolina, and
Colorado were the others) and found less than half of respondents
confident that Obama is a natural born citizen. The numbers are
particularly dramatic among Republicans with 49% saying Obama was not
born here to just 23% who grant that he was."
Obama's "Strongly Approve" number is
only 25% -- the lowest ever
Not Archived
12/6/09
Obama Orders 1 Million US Troops To Prepare For Civil
War
The European Union Times reports that Russian Military Analysts are
reporting to Prime Minister Putin that Barack Obama has issued orders to
his Northern Command’s (USNORTHCOM) top leader, US Air Force General
Gene Renuart, to "begin immediately" increasing his military forces to 1
million troops by January 30, 2010, in what these reports warn is an
expected outbreak of civil war within the United States before the end
of winter.
According to these reports, Obama has had over these
past weeks "numerous" meetings with his war council about how best to
manage the expected implosion of his Nations banking system while at the
same time attempting to keep the United States military hegemony over
the World in what Russian Military Analysts state is a "last ditch
gambit" whose success is "far from certain".
And to Obama’s "last
ditch gambit," these reports continue, he is to announce in a nationwide
address to his people this coming week that he is going to expand the
level of US Military Forces in Afghanistan by tens of thousands of
troops, while at the same time using the deployment of these soldiers as
a "cover" for returning to the United States over 200,000 additional
American soldiers from the over 800 bases in over 39 countries they have
stationed around the Globe bringing the level of these forces in America
to over 1 million, a number the US Military believes will be able to
contain the "explosion of violence" expected to roil these peoples when
they learn their economy has been bankrupted.
What remains to be
seen, and these reports do not speculate upon, is if the
citizen-soldiers of the United States will fire upon and kill their
fellow countrymen during the coming conflict, but if history is to be
our guide clearly shows this will be the case as the once great American
Nation continues its headlong plunge into the abyss of history.
May God have mercy upon all of them.
Military
12/6/09
Obama’s Great Leap Forward
When Barack Obama was campaigning in 2007, his backers frequently
compared him to former president John F. Kennedy. After a year in
office, however, Obama’s words and actions align more closely with
China’s despotic Chairman Mao than with JFK’s.
When Mao Tse Tung
conquered China in 1949, his secret goal was to dominate the world.
When Obama was elected, many started referring to him as "President of
the World." Both Obama and Mao had carte blanche to set out a path
of radical change.
As part of his strategy, Mao informed his top
echelon, "There has to be a personality cult…it is absolutely
necessary." With the aid of the state media, Mao crafted an iconic
image of himself as the savior of the common man.
Propaganda was everywhere -- including
the fields where workers could listen to messages from Mao as they
worked.
Sound familiar?
In 1958, Mao kicked off what he
called The Great Leap Forward, an extraordinarily creative intervention
in China’s economic development. Mao planned to abolish wages and
put society on a non-cash basis. He then set about abolishing
private property.
The ownership of tools, animals, and other
means of production were taken over by the state -- in the name of the
people. Just as the ownership of the auto, banking and insurance
industries of today have been taken over by Obama's government.
Chairman Mao, in the name of the people, also took over China’s health
care. The "state" determined who would receive this essential
service. The elderly were moved into "houses of happiness" so that
they could be looked after -- by the state. Much like the proposed
government takeover of America’s health care today.
Chairman
Mao’s government also plunged the country into a deep debt by
drastically increasing spending on the development of heavy industry.
But the state-sponsored industry that developed was not only
non-productive, it ended up wasting money and resources on a massive
scale without producing anything of value. Much like the bloated
government behemoth Obama’s policies are producing today.
Mao,
through a cult of personality and firm control of the levers of
government, had the ability to impose his own version of reality on
China. Just as Obama has today.
Those who ignore the
lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
believe a civil war is breaking out within the left of the
Democratic Party pitting the Congressional Black Caucus against Obama.
The battle began when California Rep. Maxine Waters complained
publicly about the administration's failure to do more to help
minority-owned businesses in the current recession. (Translation:
In the new stimulus of "jobs" bill making its way through Congress, they
want a larger take.) It continued yesterday when 10 members of the
Black Caucus refused to participate in a meeting of the House Banking
Committee that was considering the bill to restructure financial
regulations, forcing Chairman Barney Frank to push the bill through by
the uncomfortable margin of only 31-27.
The latest shot in the
battle was fired by Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss.,
a card carrying regular of the Black Caucus. Faced with the need
to investigate the gate-crashing at the White House during the recent
state dinner for India, he chose to embarrass Obama by subpoenaing White
House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers rather than quietly negotiating
for her appearance.
That Thompson's action was a deliberate slap
in Obama's face is obvious (even though the media have missed it).
Since when does a liberal Democratic committee chairman embarrass a
liberal Democratic president by forcing a liberal Democratic social
secretary (from Chicago no less) to resist a subpoena to appear at a
hearing? Since he wanted to send a message to Obama and Chief of
Staff Rahm Emanuel that the Black Caucus did not like being taken for
granted.
The merits of the controversy are obvious. What
possible reason would a social secretary, for goodness sakes, have for
the assertion of executive privilege, usually reserved for issues of
national security? Obviously, none. But Thompson chose his
target well. He struck at the social core of the Chicago Mafia
that runs the White House, probably striking within the Obama family as
well.
You don't do that to the leader of your own party, your
own ideology and even your own race unless you want to make a point.
The friction between the Black Caucus and Obama escalated when
Waters berated the administration for failing to rework a business loan
from Goldman Sachs to the Inner City Broadcasting Corp. Inner City
is run by Pierre Sutton, son of Percy Sutton, the longtime media giant
in the African-American community. Two weeks after she raised the
issue in a meeting with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Emanuel,
Goldman saw the light and restructured the loan.
Coming on top
of liberal angst with the decision by the "peace president" to escalate
the war in Afghanistan, this split with the Black Caucus comes at an
awkward time.
But you pay a price when you mess with the African
American Caucus and the Suttons. Obama is feeling it. Its
kind of fun to watch!
