Obama Campaign - "If I Wanted America To Fail"

Total Pageviews

Daily Devotions


If you support our national security issues, you may love and appreciate the United States of America, our Constitution with its’ freedoms, and our American flag.

If you support and practice our fiscal issues, you may value worldly possessions.

If you support and value our social issues, you may love Judeo-Christian values.

If you support and practice all these values, that is all good; an insignia of “Wisdom” . - Oscar Y. Harward

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20100112


Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!

"Daily Motivations"

I always tried to turn every disaster into an opportunity. -- John D. Rockefeller

"The simplification of life is one of the steps to inner peace. A persistent simplification will create an inner and outer well-being that places harmony in one's life." -- Peace Pilgrim

"Here is the test to find whether your mission on Earth is finished: if you're alive, it isn't." -- Richard Bach

"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)

No, I will not abandon you as orphans - I will come to you. (John 14:18)

"I feel so alone," Bev said, "with my husband gone and all my children married. Sometimes I can hardly bear the pain, the anguish. At times it's as though I am about to suffocate---I am so lonely!"

Bev was in her late 70s. Her husband was dead, and her other family members were involved in their own careers and activities. Though they loved her, they were so busy they seldom saw her to express that love.

I shared with her the good news of the one who loved her so much that He died on the cross for her and paid the penalty for her sins, the one who promised never to leave her once He came.

There in the loneliness of her living room, she bowed with me in prayer and invited the risen living Christ to take up residence in her life, to forgive her, to make her a child of God. When she lifted her face, her cheeks were moist with tears and her heart was made new with joy.

"I feel so different," she said. "Already I feel enveloped with the sense of God's presence. His love and His peace."

As the months passed, it became increasingly evident that she was not alone. He who was with her had been faithful to His promise never to leave her.

Do you feel deserted, alone, rejected? Do you have problems with you family, work, school or health? Whatever may be your need, Jesus is waiting to make His presence real to you.

Your View of God Really Matters …

Do you want to more fully experience His presence? Confess all known sin. Obey His commands. Meditate on His Word. And talk with Him about everything as you go through your day.

"The Patriot Post"

The Time Has Come

By Mark Alexander


"It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth -- and listen to the song of that syren, till she transforms us into beasts. ... Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not?" -- Patrick Henry

The 2008 presidential election was much more than a referendum on the two candidates; it was a referendum on the ability of a majority of Americans voters to discern between one candidate who possessed the character and integrity of a statesman, and one who did not.

A year ago, a majority of our countrymen were hoodwinked into electing a charlatan with dubious credentials to the highest constitutional office in the land. Since then, millions of Americans who had become complacent about the Leftist threat to our liberty have begun to realize that our Constitution is now suffering an unprecedented assault.

There were those of us who realized in 2004 -- back when Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry let him take center stage at the Democrat National Convention -- that Barack Hussein Obama was a Marxist. Nonetheless, too many of our countrymen were lulled into believing that no leftist politico with such abhorrent extra-constitutional views on the role of government could rise to be president of the United States.

The awakening that has occurred since November of '08 is like nothing I have witnessed since the first election of President Ronald Reagan in 1980. After the economic and foreign policy disasters created by the Carter administration, Americans were stirred to action. Yes, the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 resulted in a conservative takeover of the House two years later, but Clinton was far more moderate than Obama, and his election didn't inspire millions of Americans to arm themselves for the first time.

That Obama's election inspired a wave of conservative activism is good news.

The great news is that since last November, millions of Americans have joined our ranks.

And the momentum continues unabated.

I knew we were turning a corner a few months back, when an establishment Republican, typical of most such Republicans, told me that Obama's health care proposal "amounts to socialism." This same fellow told me a year earlier that calling Obama a Socialist was just too severe. When I reminded him of his earlier admonishment, he said simply, "My eyes are now open."

If Barack Obama has given us one thing of value, it is the opportunity to clearly discern between Left and Right, between rule of men and Rule of Law. He is the quintessential socialist, and his domestic and foreign policies present a contrast between tyranny and liberty that has rarely been so apparent. Many who have been hitherto reluctant to rise on behalf of liberty or have been too comfortable to be concerned by such conflict, are now making an ever-louder stand.

Benjamin Franklin aptly noted, "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."


Obama is the personification of Leftist philosophy and dogma, and in a turn of irony, for the clarity he has provided to that end we owe him a debt of gratitude.

Despite the fact that the Leftists in media and academia have had a stranglehold on public opinion, seating one of their own as president, which they believe is a great prize, may well be their undoing.

The once noble Democrat Party is now led by those who have turned the wisdom of their iconic leaders upside down.

Then: "My fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country." --John F. Kennedy, Inaugural Address, 1961

Now: "Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you."

Then: "I have a dream that my children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." --Martin Luther King, Address from the Lincoln Memorial, 1963

Now: "I have a dream that my children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the content of their character but by the color of their skin."

Today, Democrat Party Leftists deride the notion of individual rights. Instead, they advocate the supplanting of individual liberty with statism.

They promote the notion of a living constitution rather than the authentic Constitution our Founders established.

They despise free enterprise and advocate socialist redistribution of wealth, the ultimate goal of which is to render all people equally poor and dependent upon the state.

They loathe our military and our national sovereignty, and they propose to replace it with treaties that establish supranational governmental legal and policing authorities.

They detest traditional American values, and they support all manner of behavior resulting in social entropy.

Being debated right now is whether an additional 17 percent of the U.S. economy is going to be nationalized under ObamaCare, and whether the rest of the economy is going to be shackled by cap-and-trade taxes in addition to a plethora of other job-eliminating taxes on private sector employers.

Would it surprise you to know that, while Democrat impositions on lending practices are largely responsible for the fact that millions of Americans are now out of work, the number of government "workers" making over $100,000 per year has increased 30 percent since the beginning of the current recession? There are more than 10,000 bureaucrats earning more than $150,000 annually, and the average federal salary is $71,206, not including generous government benefits, while the average private sector salary is $40,331.

Obama and his Democrat Congress have endowed future generations, unless soon reversed, not with liberty but with historically unprecedented levels of debt, which will enslave them to hyperinflation.

Conservatives and liberals can argue various policy points ad nauseam, but the question Americans are asking in greater numbers is this: Are we a nation governed by Rule of Law or the contemporaneous opinions of men?

History provides us with repeated evidence that the terminus of nations that are governed by men rather than laws is tyranny. In the last century alone, hundreds of millions have been enslaved under statist dictators such as Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Franco, Hitler, Mao, Kruschev, Pol Pot, Ho Chi, Idi Amin, Castro, Hussein, Mugabe, Kim Jong-Il, Chavez, Hu Jintao and others. Who might be next?

Surely not us?

Obama has clearly delineated the difference between individual rights and statism, between free enterprise and socialism.

Alexander Hamilton said, "In disquisitions of every kind there are certain primary truths, or first principles, upon which all subsequent reasoning must depend."

Today, more and more Americans are returning to the core principles upon which our nation was founded, which made it the freest and most productive in history. There is a renewed commitment to support and defend Essential Liberty.

John Adams wrote: "Human nature itself is evermore an advocate for liberty. There is also in human nature a resentment of injury, and indignation against wrong. A love of truth and a veneration of virtue. These amiable passions are the 'latent spark' ... If the people are capable of understanding, seeing and feeling the differences between true and false, right and wrong, virtue and vice, to what better principle can the friends of mankind apply than to the sense of this difference?"

I believe that a supermajority of us are fully capable of understanding the truth, if given the right information and opportunity.

As Thomas Paine noted, "Such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing."

Of course, Barack Obama and his liberal lawmaking brethren have done us great harm this past year, and it may take several election cycles, or a revolution, to turn that around. But, the fields are being plowed and seeds sown.

Ronald Reagan delivered an enduring challenge to conservatives entitled "A Time for Choosing": "You and I are told we must choose between a left or right," Reagan said, "but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream -- the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order -- or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism."

Patriots, the time has come to choose.

Reagan also outlined a plan for "The New Republican Party," stating, "The principles of conservatism are sound because they are based on what men and women have discovered through experience in not just one generation or a dozen, but in all the combined experience of mankind. When we conservatives say that we know something about political affairs, and that we know can be stated as principles, we are saying that the principles we hold dear are those that have been found, through experience, to be ultimately beneficial for individuals, for families, for communities and for nations -- found through the often bitter testing of pain, or sacrifice and sorrow."

If Republicans want to regain majority status, the RNC must purge those who have forsaken the first principles of conservatism for power. In their stead they must lift up those who are devoted to the Rule of Law and Essential Liberty, those who incorporate Reagan's charge, and that of generations of Patriots before him. They must back real conservatives instead of arrogant pretenders (see Toomey v. Specter). Short of bold new leadership, what remains of the Republican Party will end up on the trash heap of political irrelevance.

Patriots take heart: Do not wither during these difficult times. For as George Washington advised, "We should never despair, our Situation before has been unpromising and has changed for the better, so I trust, it will again. If new difficulties arise, we must only put forth new Exertions and proportion our Efforts to the exigency of the times."

Indeed, the next several years will be a vital test for Patriots and our countrymen. Let us choose to persevere, to make our cause that of all men, to make no peace with oppression.

In 1776, Peter Muhlenberg delivered a sermon, concluding, "There is a time for all things, a time to preach and a time to pray, but those times have passed away. There is a time to fight, and that time has now come." He removed his clerical robes and set out to command the 8th Virginia Regiment of the Continental Army.

Patriots, we have great opportunity before us, and once again the time has come to fight for it.

"The Web"

Two words we must not speak

Peter Heck - Guest Columnist


It's an interesting dichotomy. As the vicious ideology of fundamentalist Islam continues to spark daily acts of violence and terror that maim and murder innocent people, the political left in this country is quick to dismiss it all as "isolated extremists" who are "acting alone." They warn us against jumping to the conclusion that people motivated by the same beliefs and teachings might be motivated by the same beliefs and teachings. In dealing with those whose sole objective is to kill us, the left urges calm, restraint, and a non-judgmental attitude.

But let a public figure open their mouth and embrace the two most intimidating words imaginable – Jesus Christ – and those same "tolerant" and "open-minded" liberals will lose all control of their bodily functions.

The most recent example of their hysterical response to public demonstrations of the Christian faith came when former Fox News anchor Brit Hume appeared as a guest on Fox News Sunday. While discussing the continuing saga of Tiger Woods' moral failings, Hume was asked his opinion of the golfer's professional and personal future. He responded: "The extent to which he can recover, seems to me, depends on his faith. He's said to be a Buddhist. I don't think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So my message to Tiger would be, 'Tiger, turn your faith to the Christian faith, and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world." (See related story)

Frankly, that is the pretty standard, obvious position any Christian would logically take to the issue. And, if Hume truly believes that Jesus is the only way to the Father, it is also the only loving and compassionate response he could have possibly given. But judging by the reaction of liberal commentators across the board, you would have thought Hume had tried to light his underwear on fire and detonate hidden explosives near the Woods' home.

MSNBC's resident drama queen Keith Olbermann likened Hume's evangelistic outreach to that of Muslim jihadists. Atlanta Journal-Constitution writer Jay Bookman condemned Hume for his "pompous judgment" of a person's faith.

Pompous judgment? If Bookman knew anything about Hume's faith, he would know that it was forged in the fire of a great personal trauma (the suicide of his son) that puts Hume in a sympathetic position to understand the grief and pain Tiger Woods is undoubtedly experiencing. Hume's remarks were nothing more than a sinner who had found the grace and peace of Christ himself extending that promise to another.

But that just isn't acceptable to the secular humanist crowd. Washington Post TV critic Tom Shales suggested Hume doesn't have the authority to make such a statement about faith, "unless one believes that every Christian by mandate must proselytize." Well, yeah, Tom...they must. It's called the Great Commission. And this demonstrates the real problem.

I contend that what really bothers liberals about these public expressions of Christianity is the direct result of their fundamental misunderstanding of the faith itself. They read it as they read all other world religions: a set of traditions, customs, and practices with a religious text that defines the rules of play. And since that is all that it is, it should be properly quarantined and isolated to the "religious part" of life.

Take the remarks made by MSNBC's David Shuster (their sometimes-anchor who desperately seeks to be the next Olbermann) on the Hume situation. He bizarrely suggested that Hume denigrated Christianity by daring to bring it up on a Sunday talk show.

"This isn't church, this isn't some sort of holy setting – this is a political talk show. Doesn't that minimize the significance of Christianity, when you bring a discussion of Christianity into a conversation about politics?" he asked.

This is a perfect depiction of what I'm talking about. Shuster sees it as demeaning the faith to allow it to escape its carefully defined parameters. But anyone who understands Christianity knows it cannot be limited or segregated to particular parts of a person's being. It is a total surrender and a complete worldview change. It alters not just your actions and words, but your very thinking. It is a recognition of the sovereignty of Christ, and therefore an acknowledgement that all things – political, social, cultural included – come under His final authority.

For his part, Hume doesn't seem overly concerned about the fallout. "This is to be expected," he said. "It has been happening to people who proclaim their faith in Christ for as long as anybody can remember – this is part of the deal." Indeed it is. The name of Jesus has been intimidating people for ages, and that's not going to stop now.

$2.5 million in federal spending created 0.5 jobs, government claims

By Sara Burrows


RALEIGH — The federal government sent 2.5 million stimulus dollars to North Carolina ZIP codes that don’t exist.

The information came from the government’s own Web site — Recovery.gov. The site was set up to track the distribution of the $787 billion made available by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

It lists 479 North Carolina ZIP codes as the destination of $4.2 billion in grants, contracts, and loans. Four of those ZIP codes — 24858, 28389, 23854, and 27600 — are nowhere to be found on U.S. Postal Service maps. In the four ZIP codes, the Web site reports, the $2.5 million created 0.5 jobs all told.

All North Carolina ZIP codes start with 27 or 28, so projects listed in 24858 and 23854 ZIP codes would not be based in North Carolina, even if such ZIP codes existed.

The Philadelphia-based Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity reported last week that the federal government’s Web site had assigned $375 million in stimulus spending nationally to 440 nonexistent ZIP codes.

In December, the Franklin Center found that nearly $6.4 billion in stimulus spending had been attributed to 440 phony congressional districts.

Deputy Press Secretary for the Recovery Act Jim Gilio said the illegitimate ZIP codes were probably innocent mistakes. He said the list was compiled based on information reported by recipients of the funding, and that they most likely made data entry errors.

“There’s really no story here,” he said in a telephone interview. “Every project was real. There’s never been a question about whether a real recipient received the money.”

Gilio suggested searching by dollar amount rather than by ZIP code. While the “funds by ZIP code” page is based on recipient-reported data, the “funds by amount” page is based on agency-reported data. He demonstrated that the $34,096 figure, which corresponded with the phony 24858 ZIP, could be found on the agency-reported data page along with the correct ZIP code, 27834, and the correct recipient, East Carolina University.

Using the same method for 28389, the $63,000 award went to ZIP code 28226, and that the recipient was Uplift Cosmetic Surgery Laser and Skin Center. The award created zero new jobs.

And yet it’s not possible to use Recovery.gov’s “search by amount” method to learn how the $2.1 million assigned to 23854 or the $367,472 for 27600 were spent. That leaves nearly $2.4 million unaccounted for on the federal Web site.

Ed Pound, spokesman for the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, told Watchdog.org, a transparency Web site from the Franklin Center, that the bogus ZIP Codes are “nonsense” and “much ado about nothing.”

“This is simply human error,” he said to Watchdog.org. “Just because recipients inverted ZIP Codes (at the place of performance) does not mean that the money is going to some phantom place.”

For North Carolina’s projects, that explanation does not add up. The U.S. Postal Service’s ZIP Code Lookup site does not recognize ZIP codes 28458, 26700, 28354, and 28839 — ZIP codes that result by transposing the second and third digits on the bogus ZIP codes reported on Recovery.gov.

Gilio said the recovery board’s goal is to make the Web site “better each time we update it and to correct mistakes whenever we see them.”

The site was last updated in October 2009. To date, the faulty ZIP codes have not been corrected.

Stunner: Scared Mass. Dems Plot to Delay GOP Victory In Teddy Seat Until ObamaCare Passes

By Tim Graham


As Republican Scott Brown’s campaign warms up to take Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in Massachusetts, Frank Quaratiello of the Boston Herald is reporting something shocking: if Brown wins, Massachusetts Democrats may drag out his certification as the victor to enable appointed Sen. Paul Kirk (the former DNC chairman) to put ObamaCare over the top.

"We want to get this resolved before President Obama’s State of the Union address in early to mid-February," Kirk told reporters at a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce breakfast...

"Absolutely," Kirk said, when asked if he’d vote for the bill, even if Brown captures the seat. "It would be my responsibility as United States senator, representing the people and understanding Senator Kennedy’s agenda. . . . I think you’re asking me a hypothetical question but I’d be pleased to vote for the bill."

After all the rule-bending shenanigans of the Massachusetts Democrats, leaving a dying Kennedy in office, and then ramrodding Kirk's appointment to the Senate to help ObamaCare, now they're desperate enough to ignore the people's vote?

It's one thing to immediately swear in Democrats, claiming a public mandate, as House Speaker Pelosi did in the Scozzafava and Garamendi special elections last year. It's another scandal entirely to delay a swearing-in -- telling the people that their elected choice shall not be allowed to represent their most current wishes. Will the national media notice? It certainly has national ramifications. The Herald story elaborated:

Few have considered the Jan. 19 election as key to the fate of national health-care reform because both Kirk and front-runner state Attorney General Martha Coakley, the Democratic nominee, have vowed to uphold Kennedy’s legacy and support health-care reform.

But if Brown wins, the entire national health-care reform debate may hinge of when he takes over as senator. Brown has vowed to be the crucial 41st vote in the Senate that would block the bill.

The U.S. Senate ultimately will schedule the swearing-in of Kirk’s successor, but not until the state certifies the election.

Today, a spokesman for Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin William Galvin, who is overseeing the election but did not respond to a call seeking comment, said certification of the Jan. 19 election by the Governor’s Council would take a while.

"Because it’s a federal election," spokesman Brian McNiff said. "We’d have to wait 10 days for absentee and military ballots to come in."

Another source told the Herald that Galvin’s office has said the election won’t be certified until Feb. 20 - well after the president’s address.

Since the U.S. Senate doesn’t meet again in formal session until Jan. 20, Bay State voters will have made their decision before a vote on health-care reform could be held. But Kirk and Galvin’s office said today a victorious Brown would be left in limbo.

In contrast, Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Lowell) was sworn in at the U.S. House of Representatives on Oct. 18, 2007, just two days after winning a special election to replace Martin Meehan. In that case, Tsongas made it to Capitol Hill in time to override a presidential veto of the expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

If we had a national media that was truly nonpartisan and cared about fair play, this would be a big story. Instead, we often see a Democrat-favoring, Kennedy-adoring media that cares about liberal results first, and the rest is all poli-sci "process."

For his part, Scott Brown certainly had something to say:

"This is a stunning admission by Paul Kirk and the Beacon Hill political machine," said Brown in a statement. "Paul Kirk appears to be suggesting that he, Deval Patrick, and (Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid intend to stall the election certification until the health care bill is rammed through Congress, even if that means defying the will of the people of Massachusetts.

"As we’ve already seen from the backroom deals and kickbacks cut by the Democrats in Washington, they intend to do anything and everything to pass their controversial health care plan. But threatening to ignore the results of a free election and steal this Senate vote from the people of Massachusetts takes their schemes to a whole new level. Martha Coakley should immediately disavow this threat from one of her campaign’s leading supporters."

Coakley offered the Herald reporter no comment.

President Ostrich – Get Your Head Out Of The Sand

by Rich Szabo


No quotes foundNo quotes found

The United States of America has now been attacked by terrorists twice in two months. Barry Soetero aka Barrack Obama has not only minimized these attacks, he has stuck his head in the sand. The latest attack was on Christmas Day by a guy who is now known as the “pants bomber“.

Janet Incompitano comes out to say “the system worked” Achmed Hotpants should’ve never been allowed in the Amsterdam airport let alone on the plane: he paid cash for a ONE-WAY ticket, he was on the ‘no-fly list’, his father had warned the US about his son’s religious zealousness…THEY BLEW IT! And the result is we’re really going to search gramma and everyone else EXCEPT the people we should be PROFILING!!!!!

Let’s say we all lived in a village on the Serengeti Plain. Everyday animals like giraffes, water buffalo, gazelles and lions would pass by the village. Unfortunately, a pair of rogue lions (it does happen) starts mauling villagers. Now, when the animals pass by each day which ones will you pay attention to? Would you say to yourself that maybe the giraffes will maul our villagers? Or would you be focusing your attention on the lions? If you focused your attention on the lions, would that mean that you hate ALL lions? Maybe. It’s really irrelevant, isn’t it? The point is to stop the rogue lions, which means extra scrutiny on all lions passing by. Does that make me an intolerable animal hater or a vigilant person looking out for the welfare of my people? You be the judge! We should be learning from Israeli security.

Lets get the facts straight. The first thing this administration did when they took office was disban the FBI anti-terrorist division, disrupted the CIA’s intelligence gathering mechanism, stopped using the word terrorist and the phrase “war on terror”. All this had to stop . God forbid we should insult someone who is trying to kill us!

What you got in Detroit was the end result of Obamas’ political correctness and there is more and bigger things brewing if this administration doesn’t wake up and quit trying to make nice with the worlds terrorists.

TSA has nothing to do with it. The idiot Obama put in charge couldn’t protect a dog from fleas. Janet Incompitano is the best tool any terrorist has. And by the way, Barry gives the terrorists the protection of our Constitution which means nothing to this administration, except they don’t abide by it unless it is to protect TERRORISTS.

The evidence against Obama is piling up and even the far left is beginning to notice.

They should begin to use full body scanners But I’m sure the male liberals, would object because it would prove once and for all that they have no balls.

It is this Americans Against America attitude among the Left. Need we go into PCness and the inability to profile?

We need to call things as they are. If it looks, acts, sounds like a duck ….

The lefties of the world immediately go into Bush bashing. NEWS FLASH: HE’S GONE!!! It doesn’t matter. What does matter is what this guy is doing. I could care less what Bush did, Clinton or Grover Cleveland for that matter. What I care about is how this bozo is running around the planet “playing” president and not being one.

Barry has been pulling a Ferris Bueller since he got into office. What he should do is turn the entire Middle East to glass! End of discussion. Profile ANYONE from the Middle East, Africa or an Arabic sounding name and STOP reading Miranda Rights and giving these pieces of excrement Constitutional Rights and a lawyer. It’s a very simple solution.

What Barry and da Boyz are doing is putting everything he has into “looking good” and not taking care of business. He was too busy ramming porkulus bills, healthcare and the auto industry bailouts down out throats than protecting the country. He’s beginning to make Jimmy Carter look like the best president we ever had. Now that’s sad.

Obama has shown an utter inability to focus, to set priorities and to consider long-term consequences to his actions. Lack of focus on priorities is fatal as a CEO; (but, maybe less so for a political leader?)

Obama clearly does not see his primary job as one of overseeing the security and well-being of America during his tenure as its chief executive. He’s not only unwilling to stand up for America , but he also regularly seems to go out of his way to apologize for her history. This makes it apparent that he believes his most important job is to change America into what he thinks it should have been had we not suffered the Founders flawed vision.

Obamas’ aims seem truly radical (if stealth); his methods pure Alinsky; and his success derivative of obfuscating the truth, creating crises, and rushing changes into law that no one can possibly absorb under artificial deadlines all aimed at limiting private property rights, changing the Constitution and forever altering our free market system.

For those who consider Obamas’ training and background irrelevant, they can now evaluate him as a Commander-in-Chief and CEO from what he’s done over his first year.

Among many other things, these evidences have come in the form of:

1. A $787B stimulus package (sold as preventing a crisis from becoming catastrophe)

2. The failure to focus on addressing the banking crisis as Job One

3. The migration of TARP funds to non-banking concerns, including the auto industry

4. Announcing tax increases in the middle of a recession

5. Failure to identify projects to fund job creation

6. Announcing that there would be no pork or earmarks in the stimulus package in order to get it passed without review when there were nearly 10,000 buried in the unread bill (including a $9B high-speed rail line to Las Vegas for Harry Reid ) Watch the video:

Obama vs. Obama on Earmarks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9E5BvaA9KU&feature=player_embedded

7. Bailouts of the banking and auto industries

8. The appointment of a 31-year-old to manage the revitalization on of the auto companies

9. The exalting of union claims above those of bondholders (violating a 200+ year history of contract law/property rights)

10. The appointment of 38 unvetted czars – creating more than in the House of Romanov between 1762 and 1917!

11. The failure to appoint a Cabinet of tax-paying, competent Americans (Reason for the move to the Czar system of administration?)

12. The appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court despite some questions about her lack of qualifications and judicial temperament.

13. The dark-of-night passage of Cap and Trade legislation (300-page-long addendum inserted at 3 am the morning of the vote in the House)

14. The high pressure tactics to rush through a budget-busting $1.6 Trillion takeover of our National Healthcare System.

15. Phony town hall meetings with a fake cross-section of Americans selling Obamacare on ABC.

16. Lying about budget deficits projecting 4% GDP growth by year-end.

17. Lying about job losses projecting that if Congress would just ram through the stimulus that job losses could be halted at 8% (currently unemployment is at 10%. That does not include the 7-8% of people who are either self employed and out of work or who have stopped collecting unemployemnt. So the real unemployment rate is in the neighborhood of 17%).

18. Lying about the costs of nationalized healthcare – (just as when politicians projected Medicare’s cost in 1990 to be $3 billion, its actual cost turned out in 1990 to $98 billion, 30 times as much)

19. Pretending that new entitlement programs will provide lower costs, better care, no significant tax increases, more competition (as government joins the fray!) and keeping current private options. Claiming free healthcare will make America more competitive is baffling. Everyone knows the above are lies; but no one seems ready to call him out.

20. Forcing the stimulus package on states to impinge on States Rights.

21. Failing to support the freedom-loving citizens in Honduras and Iran (and instead, giving comfort to their dictators) to say nothing of his ineffectiveness with North Korea and his anti-Israeli pronouncements.

22. Allocating $4 Billion of stimulus funds to ACORN, the the people who brought you voter fraud.

23. Seeking to push through Union Card Check, the so-called Fairness Doctrine, and threats to take away 2nd Amendment rights.

24. Moving the heretofore non-partisan 2010 National Census into the White house under the direction of Rahm Emanuel.

25. Lying about having a transparent government. From the whitehouse website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/

“My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government”

They have done everything in their power not to be transparent. He’s as transparent as his brown shirt.

26. Deciding to try terrorists in New York City. It will cost NYC a minimum of 75 million dollars just for added security. Not to mention the ridiculous circus this will create.

Whatever one thinks of the results, the process of getting to them should bother all Americans. In the Obama (Mayor Daley) style of governing, its not clear that Congress, who can’t possibly process thoughtfully the blizzard of legislation, really serves any useful purpose other than to provide Politburo-style cover. Not only does Congress no longer debate legislation, but Obama has effectively circumvented its oversight of the executive branch by his appointment of czars.

Obama has confused leadership with salesmanship. Leaders aren’t salesmen because leaders aren’t sellers: they’re buyers. They buy into shared interests instead of selling out to conflicting interests. In a way, that was the point of Arthur Miller’s play Death of a Salesman: Willy Loman ended up broke, alone, and defeated because he couldn’t lead anyone, anywhere, to anything — because he was too busy selling. Instead of buying in, Willy was selling out. Sound familiar? It should: striking deals that are riddled with pervasive conflicts of interest has become a hallmark of the Obama Presidency.

Overall, 47% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. Fifty-two percent (52%) disapprove. What does that tell you?

This guy isn’t even voting “present

The NoBull Newsletter

Who's Really Running the Show?


The No Bull Newsletter is written by a group of attorneys in Australia. You may learn more about them by googling the name "No Bull Newsletter". This article gives you a great deal to think about!

I have been having a nagging intuition lately that something is not quite right about Barack Obama. I am not suggesting there is something wrong with the man, per se. Nor am I talking about the crazy, even dangerous, policies coming out of the White House.

No, lately, I have been wondering if Barack Obama is, in fact, the person who is actually functioning as President of the United States [POTUS] ..

I mean, there's no doubt that he fills the position of POTUS but is he really the one in command? The man actually seems lost at times. He seems to be reacting to ideas about which he does not really have a clue. He has left the writing of this health care bill to Nancy Pelosi's House of Representatives and she, in turn, has farmed the writing out to several fairly radical community action groups.

When questioned about health care, he seems not to know or understand the details and even with his silver-tongue seems unable to demonstrate any leadership on the issue.

With respect to Afghanistan and the rest of our foreign policy, he seems equally lost. Especially when it comes to dealing with other world leaders. He makes beautiful speeches but seems to be unable to cut deals which benefit our nation. He seems to be acting as a pawn of much more clever world leaders.

The more I watch the man, the more I see a person who appears to be the "face" of some other entity or group. He seems like a "front man". And it is becoming clear that his strings are being pulled by someone else. He does not appear to be the man in command of the ship of state. At least, he is not in the driver's seat.

You might recall that people said about Bush that he was a front man for the neo-cons and that it was really Dick Cheney that was running the show. It turns out that Dick Cheney was not as influential in Bush's second term as many thought but, perhaps it is true that the neo-cons, whoever they may be, were pulling some of Bush's strings.

On the other hand, with Obama, it does not appear that there is anyone who is visible to we the people, or the media, who is pulling the strings. If they are there, they are not in elected positions as Cheney was. They are better hidden than that.

We know that Obama has been, and remains, surrounded by life-long radicals, professed communists and anti-capitalists, some of whom he has even appointed as czars in his administration. Thirty six czars, to date.

But is it Obama who is picking the czars, or is it the czars who are running the show and propping up Obama as their front man?

I know all this may sound crazy but, really, when you look at the man without the idolatry and media worship, does he really look like he knows what he is doing? Does he seem to have a direction? Firm convictions? Something he deeply believes in? The more he talks now, the more his words seem empty of content. Platitudes about America and the American people which, when he says them, simply do not ring true. They are words being mouthed but not believed by him..

Okay, so maybe he is really clever, is firmly moving the ship to the left while mouthing the words of a centrist. But I don't think so.

What I used to think was that he was a really slick conman who was making us watch his left hand while he was manipulating us with his right. But, now I don't think that so much. I think the man is more plastic than real. Now I begin to see him as the "Great and Powerful Oz": a fearsome presence who is being manipulated by men behind the curtain. And while Obama does not have strong convictions, the men behind the curtain do. And they are moving this country down a dangerous path. All the while, we are being distracted by Obama and what he says and does.

Okay, maybe I am simply a mildly paranoid conspiracy theorist. Why, you might ask, have Obama up there? Why not have one of the actual people behind the curtain run for President. Well, being a paranoid conspiracy theorist, I can come up with an answer to that question.
Those other people behind the curtain have backgrounds that are so radical that they would never have made it past the first few days of a campaign. Additionally, they are life-long community organizers and they know what kind of face can be effective if you wish to radically change the nation.

First, you need a black man to gain the support of the vast black minority. Second, you need a pale skinned black man so as not to be too much of a threat to white Americans. For the same reasons, you need a mixed race man who allies himself with the poor and down-trodden.

And you need someone who speaks well enough to co-opt the language of the right and appear to be a uniter, not a divider. Someone who sees, or at least can articulate, both sides of an issue.. This is the kind of man you would pick to be your front man so that while you move things drastically and dramatically left, the vast majority of Americans will not believe that was the intention of the moderate appearing front man.

Yes, Obama was a community organizer. Yes, he could be clever enough to have all this be his idea. But he really wasn't a community organizer for that long. And when he was, he didn't do anything truly radical.

It was more a time during which he was being trained than a time when he was driven by a personal sense of commitment to anything in particular.

There are people who are now in his government who have been community organizers and radical left wing activists for 20-30 years. These people have deeply ingrained commitments to changing the system and have been actively trying to do so for all that time. Obama is not one of them.

In my view, Obama has been trained and used as a puppet by others for a long time. His successes seem to have come too easily, as if they have been orchestrated. His life appears to have been pre-planned.

I mean, Harvard Law Review without publishing a single paper of note.

That is unusual.

A community organizer for a short time.
A State legislator for a short time.
A freshman US Senator. (143 days)
A convention key-note speaker.
And then POTUS. How does that happen? A person with zero governmental administrative experience is running the entire government of the United States ....

How do 1100 page documents get developed and put out in such short order?
Who is writing all these proposals?
Does it not seem that something is just not quite right here?
Forget about the specifics of the policies for the moment. Have you ever seen this level of activity in the first few months of any other administration in your lifetime?

Does Obama seem like the kind of person that could manage this level of activity in so short a time?
Too much does not make sense here.

So, slowly but surely, I am becoming convinced that it is not Barack Obama who is running the show. The White House has been captured by a group of people who are using Barack Obama as their front man. He is nothing but an articulate but empty suit. We have to start looking behind the curtains to find out who is really controlling the "great and powerful Obama".

Something to think about..............

‘Hillary Was Right’ About Obama and Terror


During the 2008 presidential race Hillary Clinton’s campaign warned that if a national security crisis arose with Barack Obama in the White House and the “red phone” alerting him rang at 3 a.m., he could not be trusted to adequately respond.

“Turns out Hillary Rodham Clinton was right all along,” declared Charles Hurt, Washington, D.C. bureau chief for the New York Post.

Hillary’s warning in a campaign ad suggested that an Obama White House would so downplay the threat posed by terrorism that “the government’s focus would shift away from the harsh and determined tactics used to protect the homeland,” Hurt wrote on Friday, adding, “Instead, Obama would turn his attention to becoming more popular in the world and stress negotiations over hardball tactics.”

vThat attitude has trickled down to all levels of the government responsible for national security, according to Hurt.

On Thursday, President Obama sought to calm Americans’ fears about the terror threat following the attempted bombing of a plane on Christmas Day. But “there wasn’t much to see in the White House other than bungling of previous bungling,” according to Hurt, as the administration rescheduled Obama’s address to the country several times.

At 8 a.m., the White House said the president would speak at 1 p.m. Then at 1 p.m., the announcement came that he would deliver his address at 3 p.m. At 3 p.m., the White House said Obama would speak at 4:30 p.m. He took the podium at 4:34 p.m.

Hurt cited Obama’s trip to Cairo last year to address the Muslim world, when he said it is “part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear,” and opined, “If you have time for such nonsense, then you are not spending enough time thinking about how to thwart this enemy.

“But it is not like we weren’t warned by Hillary Clinton.”

Another 2008 presidential candidate, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, declared Friday morning that the Fort Hood shootings and the Christmas Day bombing incident show Obama and his advisers have been “fundamentally wrong” in their approach to the war on terror.

Giuliani, who was New York's mayor when terrorists struck on Sept. 11, 2001, told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” viewers that the president has tried to let “political correctness trump reality.”

Giuliani said the Obama administration came into power with the belief that President George W. Bush’s response to the 9/11 attacks was unnecessarily severe, and had alienated America’s potential allies abroad.

“They’d gone too far, Bush had overreacted, we make the war on terror worse if we emphasize it too much — this is what they truly believed,” Giuliani said. “But they were fundamentally wrong.”

"The e-mail Bag"

A Texan farmer goes to Australia for a vacation.

There he meets an Aussie farmer and gets talking. The Aussie shows off his big wheat field and the Texan says, "Oh! We have wheat fields that are at least twice as large."

Then they walk around the ranch a little, and the Aussie shows off his herd of cattle. The Texan immediately says, "We have longhorns that are at least twice as large as your cows."

The conversation has, meanwhile, almost died when the Texan sees a herd of kangaroos hopping through the field in the distance. Amazed, he asks, "What the hell are those?!"

The Aussie replies with an incredulous look, "Don't you have any grasshoppers in Texas?"

Submitted by Dick, Williamsport, MD.

No comments: